Citations

Brain metastases are a devastating sequela of common primary cancers (e.g., lung, breast, and skin) and have limited effective therapeutic options. Previously, systemic chemotherapy failed to demonstrate significant benefit in patients with brain metastases, but in recent decades, targeted therapies and more recently immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have yielded promising results in preclinical and clinical studies. Furthermore, there is significant interest in harnessing the immunomodulatory effects of radiotherapy (RT) to synergize with ICIs. Herein, we discuss studies evaluating the impact of RT dose and fractionation on the immune response, early studies supporting the synergistic interaction between RT and ICIs, and ongoing clinical trials assessing the benefit of combination therapy in patients with brain metastases.

AbstractIntroductionAvailable evidence is mixed concerning associations between smoking status and COVID-19 clinical outcomes. Effects of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and vaccination status on COVID-19 outcomes in smokers are unknown.MethodsElectronic health record data from 104 590 COVID-19 patients hospitalized February 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021 in 21 U.S. health systems were analyzed to assess associations of smoking status, in-hospital NRT prescription, and vaccination status with in-hospital death and ICU admission.ResultsCurrent (n = 7764) and never smokers (n = 57 454) did not differ on outcomes after adjustment for age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance, body mass index, and comorbidities. Former (vs never) smokers (n = 33 101) had higher adjusted odds of death (aOR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06–1.17) and ICU admission (aOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04–1.11). Among current smokers, NRT prescription was associated with reduced mortality (aOR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50–0.82). Vaccination effects were significantly moderated by smoking status; vaccination was more strongly associated with reduced mortality among current (aOR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.16–0.66) and former smokers (aOR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.39–0.57) than for never smokers (aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57, 0.79). Vaccination was associated with reduced ICU admission more strongly among former (aOR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.66–0.83) than never smokers (aOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79–0.97).ConclusionsFormer but not current smokers hospitalized with COVID-19 are at higher risk for severe outcomes. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is associated with better hospital outcomes in COVID-19 patients, especially current and former smokers. NRT during COVID-19 hospitalization may reduce mortality for current smokers.ImplicationsPrior findings regarding associations between smoking and severe COVID-19 disease outcomes have been inconsistent. This large cohort study suggests potential beneficial effects of nicotine replacement therapy on COVID-19 outcomes in current smokers and outsized benefits of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in current and former smokers. Such findings may influence clinical practice and prevention efforts and motivate additional research that explores mechanisms for these effects.

AbstractObjectiveThe objective was to qualitatively synthesize all reported cases of complications, adverse effects, side effects, or harms arising from the use of scrambler therapy (ST).Methods and DesignA systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. The PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, United States National Library of Medicine clinical trials registry, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched from database inception to December 10, 2021. Case reports/series, abstracts, retrospective studies, and prospective studies (e.g., open-label trials, randomized controlled trials) pertaining to ST and any description of a complication, adverse effect, side effect, or harm were screened. The search protocol was developed a priori and registered via the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO ID: CRD42021291838).ResultsA total of six RCTs, 19 prospective open-label trials, and 11 case series / case reports met the inclusion criteria, comprising 1,152 total patients. Two patients experienced contact dermatitis, and one patient reported minor ecchymosis that resolved without intervention. This yielded a composite complication rate of 0.26% (3/1,152). There were zero reported serious adverse events.ConclusionsWhen used in accordance with the treatment protocols described by the United States Food and Drug Administration and device manual, ST is associated with a reported composite complication rate that is orders of magnitude lower than those of invasive neuromodulation devices. ST neuromodulation is a safe alternative for patients who cannot undergo invasive neuromodulation device implantation because of either risk or preference.

Even though it has been more than a decade since renal denervation (RDN) was first used to treat hypertension and an intense effort on researching this therapy has been made, it is still not clear how RDN fits into the antihypertensive arsenal. There is no question that RDN lowers blood pressure (BP), it does so to an extent at best corresponding to one antihypertensive drug. The procedure has an excellent safety record. However, it remains clinically impossible to predict whose BP responds to RDN and whose does not. Long-term efficacy data on BP reduction are still unconvincing despite the recent results in the SPYRAL HTN-ON MED trial; experimental studies indicate that reinnervation is occurring after RDN. Although BP is an acceptable surrogate endpoint, there is complete lack of outcome data with RDN. Clear indications for RDN are lacking although patients with resistant hypertension, those with documented increase in activity of the sympathetic system and perhaps those who desire to take fewest medication may be considered.

Importance In patients with severe aortic valve stenosis at intermediate surgical risk, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with a self-expanding supra-annular valve was noninferior to surgery for all-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 2 years. Comparisons of longer-term clinical and hemodynamic outcomes in these patients are limited. Objective To report prespecified secondary 5-year outcomes from the Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis in Intermediate Risk Subjects Who Need Aortic Valve Replacement (SURTAVI) randomized clinical trial. Design, Setting, and Participants SURTAVI is a prospective randomized, unblinded clinical trial. Randomization was stratified by investigational site and need for revascularization determined by the local heart teams. Patients with severe aortic valve stenosis deemed to be at intermediate risk of 30-day surgical mortality were enrolled at 87 centers from June 19, 2012, to June 30, 2016, in Europe and North America. Analysis took place between August and October 2021. Intervention Patients were randomized to TAVR with a self-expanding, supra-annular transcatheter or a surgical bioprosthesis. Main Outcomes and Measures The prespecified secondary end points of death or disabling stroke and other adverse events and hemodynamic findings at 5 years. An independent clinical event committee adjudicated all serious adverse events and an independent echocardiographic core laboratory evaluated all echocardiograms at 5 years. Results A total of 1660 individuals underwent an attempted TAVR (n = 864) or surgical (n = 796) procedure. The mean (SD) age was 79.8 (6.2) years, 724 (43.6%) were female, and the mean (SD) Society of Thoracic Surgery Predicted Risk of Mortality score was 4.5% (1.6%). At 5 years, the rates of death or disabling stroke were similar (TAVR, 31.3% vs surgery, 30.8%; hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.85-1.22]; P = .85). Transprosthetic gradients remained lower (mean [SD], 8.6 [5.5] mm Hg vs 11.2 [6.0] mm Hg; P < .001) and aortic valve areas were higher (mean [SD], 2.2 [0.7] cm 2 vs 1.8 [0.6] cm 2 ; P < .001) with TAVR vs surgery. More patients had moderate/severe paravalvular leak with TAVR than surgery (11 [3.0%] vs 2 [0.7%]; risk difference, 2.37% [95% CI, 0.17%- 4.85%]; P = .05). New pacemaker implantation rates were higher for TAVR than surgery at 5 years (289 [39.1%] vs 94 [15.1%]; hazard ratio, 3.30 [95% CI, 2.61-4.17]; log-rank P < .001), as were valve reintervention rates (27 [3.5%] vs 11 [1.9%]; hazard ratio, 2.21 [95% CI, 1.10-4.45]; log-rank P = .02), although between 2 and 5 years only 6 patients who underwent TAVR and 7 who underwent surgery required a reintervention. Conclusions and Relevance Among intermediate-risk patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis, major clinical outcomes at 5 years were similar for TAVR and surgery. TAVR was associated with superior hemodynamic valve performance but also with more paravalvular leak and valve reinterventions.

Abstract Background: There is mixed evidence about the relations of current versus past cancer with severe COVID-19 outcomes and how they vary by patient and cancer characteristics. Methods: Electronic health record data of 104,590 adult hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were obtained from 21 United States health systems from February 2020 through September 2021. In-hospital mortality and ICU admission were predicted from current and past cancer diagnoses. Moderation by patient characteristics, vaccination status, cancer type, and year of the pandemic was examined. Results: 6.8% of the patients had current (n = 7,141) and 6.5% had past (n = 6,749) cancer diagnoses. Current cancer predicted both severe outcomes but past cancer did not; adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for mortality were 1.58 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.46–1.70] and 1.04 (95% CI, 0.96–1.13), respectively. Mortality rates decreased over the pandemic but the incremental risk of current cancer persisted, with the increment being larger among younger vs. older patients. Prior COVID-19 vaccination reduced mortality generally and among those with current cancer (aOR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53–0.90). Conclusions: Current cancer, especially among younger patients, posed a substantially increased risk for death and ICU admission among patients with COVID-19; prior COVID-19 vaccination mitigated the risk associated with current cancer. Past history of cancer was not associated with higher risks for severe COVID-19 outcomes for most cancer types. Impact: This study clarifies the characteristics that modify the risk associated with cancer on severe COVID-19 outcomes across the first 20 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. See related commentary by Egan et al., p. 3

AbstractBackgroundImproved function is associated with reduced morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. Cancer rehabilitation medicine (CRM) is a subspecialty of physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) that focuses on improving function in patients with cancer. One of the barriers to patients accessing CRM services is the lack of referrals from oncology providers. Understanding the knowledge, attitudes and beliefs of oncology trainees regarding the importance of function and the role of CRM is essential to reducing educational gaps and improving patients' access to essential rehabilitation services.ObjectiveTo determine oncology trainees' knowledge, attitude and beliefs about the importance of function and the role of CRM in the care of patients with cancer.SettingThe study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center in the United States.InterventionDescriptive survey study was administered to postgraduate oncology trainees who spent at least 1 day a week providing patient care.Main outcomeParticipants' report of their knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs on the importance of function and CRM in the care of patients with cancer.ResultsThe survey was sent to 197 oncology trainees with a response rate of 67% (n = 132) and 126 were ultimately included. All participants believed that function is important in the care of patients with cancer. The majority believed that better function improves treatment tolerance (94%) and survival (84%). Most reported that having CRM physicians (80%) and an inpatient rehabilitation unit (88%) in the oncological setting is important; however, most participants reported that they refer fewer than 25% of their patients to CRM services. Participants with prior exposure to PM&R were significantly more likely to consult PM&R compared to those without exposure (p = .005). Most oncology trainees (81%) believed that education in CRM should be part of their oncology training.ConclusionThis study demonstrates that oncology trainees believe that function is important. They also believe that access to CRM would improve treatment tolerance and survival, but most report that they rarely refer patients to CRM services. Most trainees desire increased exposure to CRM during oncology training.

Abstract With aging, somatic mutations in hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPC) can give rise to clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP), a premalignant state associated with diverse age-related diseases. Here we report the largest multi-ancestry genome-wide analysis of CHIP to date (N = 1,018,305), including individuals of African (N = 85,978), Admixed American (N = 191,371), East Asian (N = 13,532), European (N = 694,015), and South Asian (N = 13,193) ancestry. Multi-ancestry meta-analyses identified 72 genome-wide significant loci, including 44 novel associations implicating genes such as AFF1 , ATF7IP , ATP8B4 , BCL2 , CEBPA , CYRIA , DNM2 , ELF1 , NKX2-3 , PIK3CB , PRDM16 , RPN1 , TERC , and TRIM4 . Notably, variants at MECOM and PHF20L1 showed opposite allelic effects between DNMT3A - and non- DNMT3A -driven CHIP, highlighting driver-specific germline influences. Implicated loci converge on pathways regulating telomere maintenance, cell-cycle control, hematopoietic transcription, DNA damage response and immune signaling. These findings support a model in which germline variation both expands the HSPC pool and biases clonal selection in a driver-dependent manner, providing a mechanistic basis for inter-individual heterogeneity in CHIP. Phenome-wide association analyses further linked CHIP to hematologic, neoplastic, and circulatory traits, with enrichment across hematopoietic and non-hematopoietic cell types. Together, this work expands the genomic and phenomic landscape of CHIP and reveals germline–somatic interactions that shape clonal evolution during aging.

ObjectiveWe examined the cost‐effectiveness of treatment strategies for concomitant meniscal tear and knee osteoarthritis (OA) involving arthroscopic partial meniscectomy surgery and physical therapy (PT).MethodsWe used the Osteoarthritis Policy Model, a validated Monte Carlo microsimulation, to compare three strategies, 1) PT‐only, 2) immediate surgery, and 3) PT + optional surgery, for participants whose pain persists following initial PT. We modeled a cohort with baseline meniscal tear, OA, and demographics from the Meniscal Tear in Osteoarthritis Research (MeTeOR) trial of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus PT. We estimated risks and costs of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy complications and accounted for heightened OA progression post surgery using published data. We estimated surgery use rates and treatment efficacies using MeTeOR data. We considered a 5‐year time horizon, discounted costs, and quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALYs) 3% per year and conducted sensitivity analyses. We report incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios.ResultsRelative to PT‐only, PT + optional surgery added 0.0651 QALY and $2,010 over 5 years (incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio = $30,900 per QALY). Relative to PT + optional surgery, immediate surgery added 0.0065 QALY and $3080 (incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio = $473,800 per QALY). Incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios were sensitive to optional surgery efficacy in the PT + optional surgery strategy. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, PT + optional surgery was cost‐effective in 51% of simulations at willingness‐to‐pay thresholds of both $50,000 per QALY and $100,000 per QALY.ConclusionFirst‐line arthroscopic partial meniscectomy has a prohibitively high incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio. Under base case assumptions, second‐line arthroscopic partial meniscectomy offered to participants with persistent pain following initial PT is cost‐effective at willingness‐to‐pay thresholds between $31,000 and $473,000 per QALY. Our analyses suggest that arthroscopic partial meniscectomy can be a high‐value treatment option for patients with meniscal tear and OA when performed following an initial PT course and should remain a covered treatment option.

Importance National guidelines endorse treatment with neoadjuvant therapy for borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), but the optimal strategy remains unclear. Objective To compare treatment with neoadjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX) with or without hypofractionated radiation therapy with historical data and establish standards for therapy in borderline resectable PDAC. Design, Setting, and Participants This prospective, multicenter, randomized phase 2 clinical trial conducted from February 2017 to January 2019 among member institutions of National Clinical Trials Network cooperative groups used standardized quality control measures and included 126 patients, of whom 70 (55.6%) were registered to arm 1 (systemic therapy; 54 randomized, 16 following closure of arm 2 at interim analysis) and 56 (44.4%) to arm 2 (systemic therapy and sequential hypofractionated radiotherapy; all randomized before closure). Data were analyzed by the Alliance Statistics and Data Management Center during September 2021. Interventions Arm 1: 8 treatment cycles of mFOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin, 85 mg/m 2 ; irinotecan, 180 mg/m 2 ; leucovorin, 400 mg/m 2 ; and infusional fluorouracil, 2400 mg/m 2 ) over 46 hours, administered every 2 weeks. Arm 2: 7 treatment cycles of mFOLFIRINOX followed by stereotactic body radiotherapy (33-40 Gy in 5 fractions) or hypofractionated image-guided radiotherapy (25 Gy in 5 fractions). Patients without disease progression underwent pancreatectomy, which was followed by 4 cycles of treatment with postoperative FOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin, 85 mg/m 2 ; leucovorin, 400 mg/m 2 ; bolus fluorouracil, 400 mg/m 2 ; and infusional fluorouracil, 2400 mg/m 2 over 46 hours). Main Outcomes and Measures Each treatment arm’s 18-month overall survival (OS) rate was compared with a historical control rate of 50%. A planned interim analysis mandated closure of either arm for which 11 or fewer of the first 30 accrued patients underwent margin-negative (R0) resection. Results Of 126 patients, 62 (49%) were women, and the median (range) age was 64 (37-83) years. Among the first 30 evaluable patients enrolled to each arm, 17 patients in arm 1 (57%) and 10 patients in arm 2 (33%) had undergone R0 resection, leading to closure of arm 2 but continuation to full enrollment in arm 1. The 18-month OS rate of evaluable patients was 66.7% (95% CI, 56.1%-79.4%) in arm 1 and 47.3% (95% CI 35.8%-62.5%) in arm 2. The median OS of evaluable patients in arm 1 and arm 2 was 29.8 (95% CI, 21.1-36.6) months and 17.1 (95% CI, 12.8-24.4) months, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance This randomized clinical trial found that treatment with neoadjuvant mFOLFIRINOX alone was associated with favorable OS in patients with borderline resectable PDAC compared with mFOLFIRINOX treatment plus hypofractionated radiotherapy; thus, mFOLFIRINOX represents a reference regimen in this setting. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02839343