Citations

OBJECTIVE Spinal stereotactic radiosurgery (SSRS) is an established treatment modality for spinal metastatic disease. A common complication of SSRS is postradiation pathologic fracture. The authors evaluated the risk of pathologic fracture in sacral SSRS. METHODS All patients receiving SSRS in 1 to 5 fractions to 1 or more sacral levels between 2011 and 2020 at participating institutions were included. Demographic, histological, anatomical, and outcome data were obtained from electronic medical records. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 28. RESULTS Of 67 total patients, 50 (74.6%) were men and 17 (25.4%) were women. The most common tumor histologies were prostate adenocarcinoma (n = 16 [23.9%]) and renal cell carcinoma (n = 12 [17.9%]). Median (range) age at treatment was 63 (8–87) years. The mean ± SD (range) number of levels treated was 1.5 ± 0.7 (1–4) levels. Mean ± SD (range) bone density at S1 was 208.0 ± 74.4 (−3.0 to 443.3) Hounsfield units (HUs). Median (range) follow-up was 16.6 (1.5–132) months, median ± SD (range) overall survival was 24 ± 21.0 (1.7–83.3) months, and the 1-year local control rate was 83.6%. Fourteen patients (20.9%) experienced fracture within the radiation field. There was no association between fracture and patient sex (p = 0.32), age (p = 0.40), S1 HU (p = 0.28), tumor location according to Denis classification (p = 0.87), presence of pain (p = 0.66), single versus multifraction radiation (p = 0.44), or number of levels treated (p = 0.52). Patients experiencing in-field progression were more likely to experience fracture (61.5% vs 10.2%, p < 0.001), and patients experiencing fracture had a higher average Spine Instability Neoplastic Score than patients without fracture (5.7 vs 4.3, p = 0.049). Only local control remained as a factor associated with sacral fracture in the multivariate analysis. Of the patients experiencing fracture, 10 (71.4%) were symptomatic and 3 of those (30.0%) underwent post-SSRS surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS Pathologic fracture may occur after sacral SSRS in a significant number of patients and is significantly associated with failure of local control.

Numerous factors including social determinants of health, knowledge gaps, economic challenges, workforce limitations, and health system deficiencies are associated with significant disparities in access to health care services and health outcomes for people with epilepsy (PWE). The American Epilepsy Society (AES) and the International League Against Epilepsy—North America (ILAE-NA) established a joint task force to explore and develop recommendations to address health care disparities experienced by PWE. The task force gathered foundational knowledge through meetings, public and patient organization comments and discussions to develop consensus recommendations. We enumerate the recommendations and discuss the rationale behind them to reduce disparities in epilepsy care through comprehensive research, inclusive clinical practices, robust advocacy, and targeted educational initiatives. While our recommendations are focused on the United States, we acknowledge that similar barriers and limitations exist for PWE globally and that these also need to be addressed within their local domains and with attention to unique factors therewithin.

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to identify risk factors for mechanical complications following complex spinal reconstruction for spondylectomy of primary spinal column tumors. METHODS A retrospective chart review identified patients treated with spondylectomy for primary spinal column tumors in the thoracic or lumbar spine followed by posterior instrumentation and anterior column reconstruction. Variables collected included basic demographics, smoking status, chronic steroid use, frailty (Charlson Comorbidity Index), extent of resection, Weinstein-Boriani-Biagini classification, tumor volume, Spine Instability Neoplastic Score, anterior column reconstruction and fixation techniques, rod characteristics, Hounsfield units (HUs), and neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemoradiation. RESULTS Twenty-five patients were included (14 men, 11 women) with an average (± SD) age of 45 ± 18 years, BMI of 28 ± 5.7, and follow-up of 6.0 ± 6.2 years. Primary spinal column tumor pathology included chordoma (40%), chondrosarcoma (16%), giant cell tumor (16%), osteosarcoma (16%), osteoblastoma (8%), and aneurysmal bone cyst (4%). Six patients (24%) experienced mechanical complications, including rod fractures (n = 5) and distal junctional failure (n = 1). Of the 6 patients with mechanical complications, 4 (67%) underwent reoperation. The length of follow-up was the only statistically significant risk factor for patients with mechanical complications (average 11 years) compared to those without complications (average 4.4 years, p = 0.047). Average HUs were 144 for mechanical complication patients versus 180 for those without (p = 0.08). Anterior column reconstruction materials included a titanium cage (13 patients, 3 failures), structural allograft (6 patients, 2 failures), vascularized fibular strut autograft (6 patients, no failures), nonvascularized structural autograft (5 patients, 1 failure), vascularized rib autograft (5 patients, 2 failures), and a polyetheretherketone cage (2 patients, no failures). The vascularized fibular strut autograft had a 0% mechanical failure rate, but this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.28). Twelve patients (48%) had anterior fixation placed, with a 17% rate of mechanical complications (p = 0.65). Five patients (20%) had > 2-rod constructs, with a 20% mechanical complication rate (p = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS Reconstruction following primary spinal column tumor resection is a significant challenge, as evident by a high rate of mechanical complications and instrumentation failure. Future studies are needed with larger sample sizes to identify techniques that may mitigate the risk of failure.

Background: Evaluation of the performance of Cobas ® Pulse (Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Mannheim, Germany), a new blood glucose (BG) monitoring system (BGMS; referred to here as BGMSA) intended for point-of-care testing using samples from patients in diverse clinical settings by intended point-of-care test operators. Methods: Arterial, capillary, venous, or heel stick whole blood (WB) samples from patients in non-critical and critical care settings were collected and analyzed using BGMSA and the Nova StatStrip ® BGMS (Nova Biomedical, Waltham, MA; referred to here as BGMSB), and a hexokinase comparator (Cobas 6000 Analyzer Series; Roche Diagnostics GmbH). The blood glucose measurement accuracy was assessed by the Food and Drug Administration guidance criteria. Results: Two studies are presented. In the first, 2678 samples (622 arterial, 706 capillary, 1203 venous, 147 heel stick) were collected from 1577 patients in 14 US and three European sites. All accuracy criteria were met for arterial and venous samples considering all data combined. BGMSA showed better accuracy than BGMSB for arterial, venous, and heel stick, and similar results to BGMSB for capillary WB vs venous comparator. No endogenous interference from pO 2 , hematocrit, and sodium was identified. BGMSA was also accurate when analyzing contrived samples used to show accuracy over a wide range of glucose concentrations, alone and when combined with extreme hematocrit. In the second study, 117 capillary fingerstick samples collected at one US site were measured on both BGMSA and the comparator, and all accuracy criteria were met. No clinically significant medical risks were observed via Diabetes Technology Society Error Grids. Conclusions: BGMSA was effective for determining blood glucose in venous, arterial, neonatal arterial, neonatal heel stick, and capillary WB samples.

Background: Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are living longer and, consequently, more of them require elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) to restore mobility and improve quality of life. Because these patients are chronically immunosuppressed and often burdened by multiple comorbidities, their peri-operative risk profile may differ substantially from that of the general THA population. This study aimed to evaluate risk factors associated with acute medical and surgical complications, implant survivorship, and overall mortality in patients with a history of SOT who underwent THA. Methods: A total of 173 THA procedures were reviewed in patients with previous SOT. Among them, 64 had undergone liver transplantation (LT), 83 had received renal transplants (RT), and 26 had experienced more than one type of organ transplant (MT). Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was employed to estimate median survival. Complications were examined using univariate analysis through mixed-effects logistic regression, while Cox regression was utilized to assess mortality risk. The median follow-up period extended to 99 months. Results: The proportion of patients experiencing at least one acute medical event was 27% in the LT group, 33% in the RT group, and 38% in the MT group, with no statistically significant difference between groups (p = 0.5). American Society of Anesthesiologists Class (ASA) 4 (Odds Ratio (OR) = 28; p = 0.006) and treatment with bisphosphonates (OR = 2.25; p = 0.03) were associated with higher risk of acute medical complications. Increased age at the time of SOT was linked to a reduced likelihood of surgical complications (OR = 0.94, p = 0.008), as was older age at the time of undergoing THA (OR = 0.92, p = 0.001). The observed rates of reoperation and implant revision were 3% and 1%, respectively. The estimated patient survivorship rates at 1, 5, and 10 years were 98.6, 82, and 58.4%, respectively. Older age at SOT (Hazard Ratio (HR) = 1.06, p < 0.001), at THA (HR = 1.08, p < 0.001), ASA 4 at THA (HR = 7.57, p = 0.02), and atrial fibrillation (AFib) (HR = 3.13, p = 0.02) were associated with higher mortality. Conclusions: ASA 4 and bisphosphonates were associated with a higher risk of acute medical complications, whereas older age was associated with lower surgical complications. Additionally, older age, ASA 4, and AFib were associated with higher mortality.

Abstract RATIONALE: Albuterol-budesonide 180/160 µg is indicated in the US for as-needed treatment or prevention of bronchoconstriction and to reduce risk of exacerbations in patients ≥18 years old with asthma. The objective of the ALbuterol-budesonide Treatment in Acute airway obstruction (ALTA) study (NCT05555290) is to assess comparative efficacy, safety, and mechanisms of action of albuterol-budesonide 180/160 µg versus albuterol 180 µg in treating and preventing bronchoconstriction. This report describes the clinical profiles of patients meeting criteria for randomization into the trial. METHODS: ALTA is a phase 3b, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, 2-period, cross-over study evaluating the effects of repetitive dosing of albuterol-budesonide 180/160 µg versus albuterol 180 µg for treating adults treated as intermittent asthma and experiencing acute airway obstruction induced by repeated mannitol challenges. Inclusion criteria evaluated during screening include asthma diagnosis ≥6 months, prescribed and utilizing albuterol as the only asthma treatment for ≥4 weeks, pre-bronchodilator FEV1 ≥1.50 L and FEV1 ≥60% to &lt;90% predicted, and positive response to a mannitol challenge (decrease in FEV1≥15% at ≤635 mg cumulative mannitol dose). Exclusion criteria include clinically significant lung disease other than asthma; any smoking in the prior 6 months or ≥10 pack-year smoking history; or a clinical encounter for asthma worsening within the past 4 weeks. RESULTS: Thus far, 84 patients have met the criteria for randomization into ALTA. Mean(SD) age=44.9(13.7) years, 56.0% female, 40.5% African American, 9.5% Hispanic/Latino. Clinical characteristics include 10.7% with 1 prior-year severe exacerbation; mean(SD) fractional exhaled nitric oxide=37.0(37.4) ppb; mean(SD) baseline pre-bronchodilator FEV1=2.464(0.538) L; mean(SD) baseline percent predicted FEV1=76.7(7.9)%; mean(SD) % fall in FEV1 with mannitol challenge=22.1(7.3)% at a mean(SD) cumulative mannitol dose of 146.4(176.3) mg. Despite being treated for intermittent asthma, based upon symptoms, lung function, and exacerbation history, no patients met NAEPP 2007 criteria for intermittent disease, and 13.1% fell into the mild, 78.6% moderate, and 8.3% severe persistent asthma categories (Figure). With respect to asthma control, as measured by Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire scores, 60.7% had well-controlled, 20.2% not well-controlled, and 19.1% very poorly controlled disease. CONCLUSION: The baseline characteristics of patients in the ALTA study reveal that patients treated as intermittent asthma exhibit heterogeneity in clinical characteristics, airway hyper-reactivity, T2 inflammation, and disease severity and control. Additional genomic and biomarker data are forthcoming and altogether will provide an opportunity to address the mechanism of albuterol and budesonide interactions in a broad spectrum of asthma phenotypes.

OBJECTIVE Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) offers both indirect decompression and segmental correction through restoration of disc height. However, stresses exerted on the vertebral endplates by the interbody device can result in implant subsidence and loss of correction. The present time-to-event analysis aimed to identify predictors of interbody subsidence. METHODS Patients who underwent 1- or 2-level TLIF were identified. Data on demographics, surgical details, preoperative bone quality using CT-based Hounsfield units (HU), and pre- and postoperative lumbopelvic parameters were collected. Univariable analyses were conducted to identify predictors of subsidence (≥ 2-mm intrusion of interbody into cranial or caudal vertebrae) and significant subsidence (≥ 4-mm intrusion). Multivariable Cox regression was performed to identify independent predictors of subsidence, expressed as hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS A total of 198 patients treated at 241 levels were included (median age 66.6 years, IQR 59.5, 73.7 years; 56.6% were women). In 92 levels (38.2%) there was some subsidence and in 25 (10.4%) there was significant subsidence. Implanted levels demonstrating subsidence (≥ 2 mm) were associated with lower HU in cranial and caudal vertebrae; had interbodies positioned farther from the anterior apophyseal ring; were implanted with taller, more lordotic interbodies; and underwent greater disc height restoration. Those showing significant subsidence (≥ 4 mm) were similarly associated with lower HU in the cranial and caudal vertebrae; had interbodies positioned farther from the anterior apophyseal ring of the caudal vertebrae; and underwent greater disc height restoration. Multivariable Cox regression showed that time to subsidence was predicted by greater implant height (HR 1.20/mm, 95% CI 1.05–1.38; p = 0.009), greater postoperative disc height (HR 1.21/mm, 95% CI 1.09–1.34; p < 0.001), and greater disc height restoration (HR 1.11/mm, 95% CI 1.04–1.19; p = 0.002). The time-to-subsidence analysis for significant (≥ 4 mm) subsidence showed that it was predicted by lower HU in the cranial vertebrae (HR 0.98/unit, 95% CI 0.97–0.99; p = 0.001); increasing number of levels instrumented (HR 1.26, 95% CI 1.04–1.52; p = 0.016); and greater disc height restoration (HR 1.33/mm, 95% CI 1.18–1.51; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS This time-to-event analysis suggests that interbody subsidence following TLIF is best predicted by implantation of a taller interbody and aggressive disc height restoration. Significant subsidence is similarly predicted by aggressive disc height restoration along with poor baseline bone quality. The results suggest the need to balance aggressive correction at the time of surgery against the increased risk of subsequent interbody subsidence.

ASCO Guidelines provide recommendations with comprehensive review and analyses of the relevant literature for each recommendation, following the guideline development process as outlined in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Clinical Practice Guidelines and other guidance (“Guidance”) provided by ASCO is not a comprehensive or definitive guide to treatment options. It is intended for voluntary use by clinicians and should be used in conjunction with independent professional judgment. Guidance may not be applicable to all patients, interventions, diseases or stages of diseases. Guidance is based on review and analysis of relevant literature and is not intended as a statement of the standard of care. ASCO does not endorse third-party drugs, devices, services, or therapies and assumes no responsibility for any harm arising from or related to the use of this information. See complete disclaimer in Appendix 1 and 2 (online only) for more. PURPOSE To develop a clinical practice guideline and recommendations for symptom management of patients with well-differentiated grade 1 to grade 3 metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. METHODS ASCO convened an Expert Panel to develop a clinical practice guideline by reviewing the literature for relevant guidelines, systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and observational studies to develop recommendations for clinical practice. RESULTS The literature review identified eight guidelines, 19 systematic reviews, and three RCTs that informed the development of guideline recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendations are included for carcinoid syndrome, carcinoid heart disease and carcinoid crisis, and functional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor syndromes. Recommendations are provided for surgical management, liver-directed therapy, and systemic therapy options, as well as palliative care. Limited guidance is provided for sequencing of interventions. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines .

Introduction: Bone health optimization is a key component of the preoperative management of spine surgery patients, as poor bone quality increases the odds of mechanical complications. The present study aimed to achieve the following: (1) compare the relative efficacy of current osteoporosis medications in improving bone quality; (2) identify factors influencing treatment response in preoperative spine surgery patients. Methods: Patients treated at a single, multisite institution who received osteoporosis treatment were identified. Data were gathered on pre- and post-treatment lumbar spine Hounsfield Unit (HU) measurements, patient demographics, frailty scores (modified Frailty Index/mFI, risk analysis index/RAI), and pharmacologic treatment details. The primary outcome was a ≥7 point improvement in lumbar HU, and baseline and logistic regression models were utilized to identify factors associated with this improvement. Medications were grouped as anabolic (teriparatide, romosozumab) and antiresorptive (denosumab, alendronate) therapies. Results: A total of 267 patients were included (median age: 74 years; IQR [66–81]; 67.3% female), with 127 (47.6%) improving by ≥7 HU. The treatment agents used were alendronate (95), denosumab (113), romosozumab (31), and teriparatide (28). Univariable comparisons revealed significant differences across medication groups in age (p < 0.001), sex (p < 0.001), mFI (p < 0.001), RAI (p = 0.004), BMI (p < 0.001), pre-treatment HU (p = 0.022), and treatment duration (p < 0.001). The highest HU improvement rates (ΔHU ≥ 7) were observed in patients receiving the anabolic medications romosozumab (67.7%) and teriparatide (60.7%). Univariable logistic regression identified male sex (OR 0.54, p = 0.019), higher pre-treatment HU (OR 0.99, p = 0.006), and longer treatment duration (OR 0.97, p = 0.003) as factors associated with lower odds of HU improvement. Only romosozumab was associated with significantly higher odds of HU improvement relative to alendronate (OR 3.02, p = 0.012). In our multivariable analysis, male sex (OR 0.53, p = 0.028) and higher pre-treatment HU (OR 0.99, p = 0.002) remained significant predictors of HU improvement. However, medication type was not significant in the multivariable analysis. Conclusions: Our study highlights that male sex and higher pre-treatment HU were independently associated with lower odds of HU improvement, while medication type was not a significant predictor. Additionally, anabolic agents offered superior improvement relative to antiresorptive therapies.