Citations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: En bloc spondylectomies are essential for controlling malignant spinal tumors, but existing classification systems are often complex and impractical. This study introduces the Column, Line-of-Sight, Margins, Ring (CLiMR) framework, a novel system simplifying and standardizing en bloc spondylectomy planning and classification. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent single- or multistage en bloc spinal tumor resections was conducted at a single academic center (October 2019-December 2024). The CLiMR framework assigns scores to 4 components: Column (osteotomies/diskectomies for tumor release), Line-of-Sight (approach for circumferential access), Margin (adjacent structures sacrificed), and Ring (size of the vertebral ring window for safe delivery of neural tissue). Scores were applied using operative notes and imaging. RESULTS: Column scores ranged from 0.5 to 4.5. Of the patients included, 40.9% underwent sagittal split osteotomies, 22.7% radical diskectomies, 18.2% horizontal osteotomies, and the remaining 18.2% combinations of previous osteotomies . A posterior-only approach (Line-of-Sight score = 1) was used in 45.4% of cases, whereas 45.4% required a multistage approach (score = 2). Margin scores reflected increasing morbidity: 31.8% (n = 7) involving chest wall/pleura resection (grade 3), 40.9% (n = 9) requiring eloquent nerve sacrifice (grade 6), and 9.1% (n = 2) necessitating limb sacrifice (grade 7). The majority (86.4%, n = 19) of ring scores were grade 1, requiring laminectomies/facetectomies. The mean CLiMR score was 9.36 ± 2.43, with higher scores correlating with longer hospital stays (R = 0.64, P = .0012), longer case durations (R = 0.61, P = .0023), and increased blood loss (R = 0.40, P = .067). Patients with local recurrence, positive margins, or complications trended toward greater CLiMR scores. CONCLUSION: The CLiMR framework provides a novel, user-friendly method for planning and communicating en bloc spondylectomies. By addressing technical complexities and morbidity, CLiMR enables standardized assessment, facilitates surgical decision-making, and supports future research. This study demonstrates feasibility and lays the foundation for future validation studies.

Abstract The phase 1/2 Intergroup study E4412 investigated checkpoint blockade with nivolumab (Nivo) and ipilimumab (Ipi) combined with the CD30 targeting antibody-drug conjugate brentuximab vedotin (BV) in relapsed/refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma. A total of 147 patients aged ≥12 years were randomized between BV/Nivo and BV/Ipi/Nivo; 132 patients were included in the primary efficacy analysis. The complete response (CR) rate, was 64.7% (52.2, 75.9) for BV/Nivo and 70.3% (57.6, 81.1) for BV/Ipi/Nivo (1-sided P = .29). The median survival follow-up was 38.0 months (interquartile range, 32.6-48.1). Progression-free survival (PFS) did not significantly differ between the 2 arms (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78, confidence interval [CI], 0.39-1.57; 1-sided P = .24). Treatment-related grade 3+ toxicities in the adult cohort, excluding rash, were similar between both arms (38.5% BV/Nivo and 39.3% BV/Ipi/Nivo); there was a higher frequency of grade 3 rash with BV/Ipi/Nivo (24.6%) compared with BV/Nivo (9.2%). We compared PFS by stem cell transplantation (SCT) status in a planned before hoc comparison; 58 patients received SCT, and 36-month PFS (from SCT) was >90% for both arms. Sixty-six patients were progression free after the first scan and did not undergo SCT. The 36-month PFS was 73.0% (54.5, 85.0) for BV/Ipi/Nivo compared with 45.8% (26.3, 63.4) for BV/Nivo (HR, 0.45; CI, 0.19-1.08; 1-sided P = .03). The study did not meet its primary end point of superior CR rate for the triplet, but it supports the use of checkpoint antibody-drug conjugate induction prior to auto SCT, and there is an intriguing signal of disease control for patients wishing to defer or avoid SCT with the triplet of BV/Ipi/Nivo. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01896999.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Hodgkin lymphoma provide expert, multidisciplinary recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of Hodgkin lymphoma. The panel convenes annually to update recommendations based on a review of recently published clinical trials. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Hodgkin Lymphoma focuses on the management of newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma in adults aged 18 to 60 years.

Background: Losmapimod is an orally administered small molecule and selective p38α/β mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) inhibitor able to reduce aberrant expression of DUX4 in vitro and thereby potentially slowing disease progression in patients with facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD). Objective: This global, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 study in patients with FSHD1 and FSHD2 examined the efficacy and safety of losmapimod over a 48-week treatment period compared to placebo (NCT05397470, EUDRACT 2022-000389-16). Methods: The primary endpoint was change in quantification of reachable workspace (RWS) expressed as relative surface area (RSA). Other endpoints included measures of muscle composition (fat content and lean muscle) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), muscle strength using quantitative dynamometry, and quality of life measures. Results: 130 participants received losmapimod and 130 participants received placebo, with 252 participants completing the 48-week treatment period. There were no statistically significant differences between groups in change in RSA and all secondary efficacy endpoints from baseline to Week 48. Losmapimod treatment was well-tolerated, and most adverse events were mild. Conclusions: Losmapimod was generally well tolerated with a favorable safety profile at a dose of 15 mg twice daily. Although none of the efficacy endpoints were met, study design and data from the study may inform future studies of FSHD therapies.

Background: A critical component of conducting systematic reviews or meta-analyses is assessing the methodological quality and bias of included studies. Several methodological quality assessment tools have been developed; however, these tools may not be relevant to observational sports medicine research, which carries numerous unique nuances and biases. Purpose: To develop the Sport Publication Observational Research Tool (SPORT), which evaluates and scores the methodological quality of observational sports medicine research. Study Design: Consensus statement. Methods: SPORT was developed through a modified Delphi approach involving members from the Herodicus Society and The FORUM. All active members were invited to participate in the process aimed at building consensus on SPORT content and scoring. After finalizing SPORT, a power analysis led to the independent selection of 55 observational clinical sports medicine studies, which were scored twice by 4 reviewers of varying training levels. Interrater and intrarater reliability for SPORT was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). The distribution and percentiles for total SPORT score across the 55 studies were calculated. SPORT was also compared with the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS), a commonly utilized quality assessment tool. Results: A total of 51 members participated and achieved 100%, 100%, 98.0%, and 98.0% completion rates for rounds 1 through 4, respectively. The final SPORT included 19 subscores related to methodological quality and bias and achieved 94% consensus approval. Mean SPORT completion time was 6 minutes and 19 seconds per study, which varied significantly by reviewer training level. The subscore "peer review" demonstrated unacceptable reliability and was removed. The remaining 18 subscores exhibited ICC ranges of 0.599 to 0.955 for interrater reliability and 0.530 to 0.936 for intrarater reliability. Total SPORT score demonstrated excellent agreement, for interrater (ICC, 0.967) and intrarater reliability (ICC, 0.966). Median SPORT score across the 55 studies was 20.0 and skewed toward lower scores. There was a moderate significant correlation between SPORT and MINORS ( r [53] = 0.575; P < .001). Conclusion: An objective tool to assess the methodologic quality of observational sports medicine research (SPORT) was successfully developed through a modified Delphi approach with numerous content experts in the field. This tool may be useful in assessing the methodological quality of primary observational sports medicine studies included in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Abstract Isolated/idiopathic rapid-eye-movement (REM)-Sleep Behavior Disorder (iRBD) is characterized by dream enactment behaviors associated with loss of REM atonia. iRBD is in most cases a prodromal synucleinopathy, and emerging evidence suggests associations between RBD and other neurological and psychiatric conditions. In this study, we performed pathway-based polygenic risk score (PRS) and rare variant burden analyses to examine these potential associations. Pathway-specific PRS were constructed from genome-wide association study summary statistics of five neurodegenerative and seven psychiatric traits across 10 biologically relevant pathway categories, including a total of 279 pathways, in 1,573 iRBD cases and 16,022 controls from the International RBD Study Group and UK Biobank. Rare variant burden tests were performed in 1,264 iRBD cases and 2,581 controls. We identified multiple potential pathways indicating shared polygenic risk between RBD and both neurodegenerative and psychiatric disorders. Lewy body diseases and post-traumatic stress disorder had the most shared polygenic risk pathways in neurological and psychiatric disorders, respectively. Two pathways, the serotonin transport pathway and the chaperone-mediated autophagy pathway, showed the strongest association with iRBD, and gene-based rare variants analyses revealed five genes associated with iRBD: GBA1 , PLEKHM1 , LRP2 , P2RX1 , and HAP1. Subsequent analysis of these genes in Parkinson’s disease and dementia with Lewy bodies replicated several associations. Together, these findings provide novel insights into the shared genetic architecture underlying iRBD, neurodegenerative disorders, and psychiatric traits, with implications for early identification and mechanistic understanding.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Myelomeningocele is defined by the presence of a fluid-filled sac that contains the neural placode and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) at the level of the spinal defect. Alternatively, the term myeloschisis is used when the neural placode is not contained within a CSF-filled sac. While both are eligible for prenatal closure, few studies have characterized the impact of the type of lesion on postnatal outcomes. This study compares the outcomes of these 2 types of open spinal dysraphism using data from the Fetal Myelomeningocele Consortium registry sponsored by the North American Fetal Therapy Network. METHODS: The prospective observational Fetal Myelomeningocele Consortium registry was used to extract deidentified data corresponding to patients who underwent fetal closure of myelomeningocele vs myeloschisis. Demographics, operative characteristics, perioperative complications, and postnatal outcomes were collected. RESULTS: A total of 1327 patients were identified, including 991 (74.7%) with myelomeningocele and 336 (25.3%) with myeloschisis. Compared with myelomeningocele, myeloschisis was associated with lower rates of prenatal talipes (11% vs 24%, P < .001) and higher rates of favorable prenatal movement (94% vs 86%, P < .001). Postnatally, myeloschisis conferred higher rates of leg movement (97% vs 90%, P = .002) and an increased likelihood of ambulation in the household (10.4% vs 4.1%, P = .009) and outside (7.2% vs 1.9%, P = .004) at 1 year. However, myeloschisis was also linked to greater use of skin patches during closure (49% vs 27%, P < .001), higher CSF leak rates among those with wound dehiscence (26% vs 8%, P = .014), and more frequent CSF diversion and tethered cord surgeries at follow-up. CONCLUSION: Myeloschisis and myelomeningocele demonstrate distinct clinical profiles. Although patients with myeloschisis may have favorable motor outcomes, they are also characterized by higher rates of CSF leakage, CSF diversion, and tethered cord surgery. These findings highlight the need for lesion-specific prognostication and may inform surgical planning and parental counseling in the context of prenatal spina bifida closure.

Abstract Background Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death globally for both men and women, yet women remain historically underrepresented in cardiovascular clinical trials (CV trials), despite facing a disproportionately high burden of morbidity and mortality in many forms of CVD. Purpose We aim to determine the representation of women across a broad range of CV trials. Methods The participation of women in CV trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov from 2017 to 2023 was systematically determined through the extraction of publicly available information. Data was extracted to identify the country of study, disease type, trial size, clinical intervention and age of the participants. We calculated the proportion of women and the ratio of number of females to male participants (F:M ratio) for each trial. The female participation to prevalence ratio (PPR) was estimated for each trial based on the relative prevalence of the disease by sex in the specified region. Results We identified 1,079 registered CV trials, which included 1,396,104 participants, of whom 571,641 (41.0%) were women. The median F:M ratio was significantly lower for studies on arrhythmia (0.5), coronary heart disease (CHD) (0.39), acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (0.32) and heart failure (HF) (0.51), but was higher for obesity (1.44) and pulmonary hypertension (PH) (2.86) CV trials. F:M ratio was higher for trials on lifestyle intervention (1.51) than for drug trials. PPRs were low for clinical trials on CHD (0.66), ACS (0.79), and stroke (0.74). There was a trend to increasing PPR from 2017 to 2023, p=0.056. Conclusion Representation of women in CV trials varies by disease state, region, intervention, and sponsor type. Better understanding of reasons for these differences may enable more tailored interventions to improve representation of women globally and across therapeutic areas.Figure 1 Figure 2

Abstract Purpose Clinician educators are essential to the academic medicine workforce, yet understanding how they assess their own teaching competencies is limited. The Clinical Educator Milestones (CEMs) guide growth across key educator domains, but their use and perceived relevance remain underexplored. This study aims to (1) evaluate clinician educators’ self-reported performance on the CEMs; (2) examine differences by career level, specialty, and experience; and (3) inform faculty development efforts through a clearer understanding of educators’ perceived strengths and gaps. Method Clinician educators from 9 US academic institutions completed a self-assessment rating their performance across 4 universal pillars and 11 educational theory and practice competencies on a 1- (novice) to 5- (expert) point scale in 0.5-point increments from August to November 2024. Descriptive statistics and mean difference tests were used to analyze variation across demographic and professional characteristics. Results A total of 484 responses to at least 1 CEM were received. Respondents rated themselves highest in commitment to professional responsibilities (mean [SD], 4.30 [0.68]), teaching and facilitating learning (mean [SD], 3.96 [0.74]), and professionalism (mean [SD], 3.93 [0.73]) and lowest in medical education scholarship (mean [SD], 3.11 [1.15]), program evaluation (mean [SD], 3.33 [1.03]), and the science of learning (mean [SD], 3.43 [1.10]). Statistically significant group differences were found by years of posttraining clinical experience (F2,413 = 16.87, P &lt; .001, η2 = .076), years of teaching experience (F2,433 = 20.87, P &lt; .001, η2 = .088), and academic rank (F2,403 = 13.96, P &lt; .001, η2 = .065). Conclusions This study identifies key trends in self-perceived strengths and needs among clinician educators and highlights the limited awareness of the CEM framework. As institutions aim to build effective educator development systems, the CEMs can serve as a useful structure for tailoring support to individuals and identifying institutional needs.