Citations

Abstract Objective To measure the relative levels of signal and noise in expert diagnosis of epilepsy. Methods Twenty multinational epileptologists independently reviewed 50 vignettes of adult and pediatric patients presenting with suspected seizure(s) on two separate occasions with a ≥30‐day washout period. Experts provided a diagnosis of epilepsy or non‐epilepsy based on clinical information and, if requested, routine EEG and neuroimaging data. Cases had an established clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or non‐epilepsy based on capture of habitual paroxysmal events on video‐EEG or long‐term clinical follow‐up. Experts' judgments were analyzed to decompose variability into different sources: signal (objective differences between cases), level noise (experts' bias toward over/under‐diagnosis), pattern noise (experts' idiosyncratic reactions to specific case features), and occasion noise (inconsistency across occasions). Results The probability of an expert making a different diagnosis for a given case on two different occasions was 16%. The probability of two different experts making a different diagnosis for the same case was 26%. Signal (case “difficulty”) accounted for 66–69% of total variation, with 31–34% attributable to noise. Level noise was the largest contributor in the absence of EEG/neuroimaging results (23%), while pattern noise dominated when test results were available (24%). Occasion noise contributed relatively little (1%) but was still sufficient to cause diagnostic reversals in 16–22% between occasions. Significance The degree of noise in expert diagnosis of epilepsy is substantial, stemming primarily from physicians' idiosyncratic interpretations of case features and variable dispositions toward over‐ or under‐diagnosis. Strategies to improve reliability are needed, including standardized data collection protocols and structured decision algorithms. For “difficult cases,” where expert reliability and accuracy are lowest, our findings support current clinical practice which favors early referral for video‐EEG monitoring over reliance on diagnostic anchoring. This diagnostic pathway may become more accessible with advances in EEG technology (e.g., wearable devices) and artificial intelligence.

830 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are standard therapy for MSI-H GI cancers. Lynch syndrome, caused by germline mutations in mismatch repair (MMR) genes, leads to MSI-H tumors and robust ICI responses, but its effect on irAEs remains poorly defined. Clarifying this risk may inform treatment selection and toxicity monitoring. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed MSI-H or MMR-deficient (dMMR) GI cancer patients (pts) treated with ICIs across Mayo Clinic (AZ, MN, FL) from January 2017 to June 2025. Eligible pts were identified using Mayo Data Explorer. Demographics, treatment, and irAEs (graded per CTCAE v5.0) were collected. Lynch status was determined by germline testing when available. Logistic regression estimated odds ratios (ORs) for any grade and grade ≥3 irAEs, adjusting for age, cancer type, prior chemotherapy, and treatment regimen. Results: A total of 209 pts with dMMR/MSI-H GI cancer were included: 61 with Lynch syndrome and 148 without. Lynch pts were younger (median 58 vs 76 years, p < 0.001) and more likely to have received prior chemotherapy (62% vs 43%, p = 0.009). Colorectal cancer was the predominant cancer type (74%), but Lynch pts had proportionally more non-colorectal GI cancers (15% vs 2.7%, p = 0.007). Overall, 29% of pts experienced an irAE, with rates significantly higher in Lynch vs non-Lynch pts (43% vs 24%, p = 0.005). The most frequent irAEs were gastrointestinal, endocrine, and dermatologic, followed by hepatic and pulmonary events. Grade ≥3 irAEs occurred in 16% overall, with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.124). In adjusted models, Lynch syndrome was independently associated with a higher risk of any grade irAE (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.09 - 4.19, p = 0.026), while risk of severe irAEs was not increased (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.64 - 3.59, p = 0.316). Lynch syndrome pts were more likely to have combination therapy (17% vs 6.8%, p = 0.029). However, there were no differences observed in any grade irAE between monotherapy and combination immunotherapy (OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.49 - 3.54, p = 0.535). Conclusions: Lynch syndrome is associated with a higher prevalence of any-grade irAEs among dMMR/MSI-H GI cancer pts treated with ICIs, though severe events were not increased. Incorporating Lynch status into immunotherapy planning may improve risk stratification and guide regimen selection.

The success of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has bridged the growing gap between organ demand and availability in patients with liver failure or liver cancer. Safety of the living liver donor (LLD) is paramount, and astute intraoperative management plays a critical role in ensuring optimal outcomes for them. Given that intraoperative surgical and anesthesia practices vary widely across centers, the International Liver Transplantation Society (ILTS) and the International Living Donor Liver Transplantation Group (iLDLT Group) convened a global consensus conference in Toronto in March 2025 to develop guidelines for intraoperative management of the LLD. This manuscript details the recommendations on intraoperative considerations for the safety of LLD developed by Working Group II of the Consensus Scientific Committee, using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system for assessment of recommendations, and the Danish model of consensus. Working Group II focused on intraoperative monitoring, fluid and ventilation strategies, surgical techniques for vascular and biliary division, surgeon and center-specific experience, and intraoperative crises planning. These guidelines aim to support both established and emerging LDLT teams to ensure high-quality and safe intraoperative care for the LLD.

Abstract Caregivers for people with neurodegenerative disease (PWNDs) often experience mental and physical health problems, especially when caring for PWNDs who have deficits in emotional functioning. We studied 65 PWNDs and their caregivers both during active caregiving and after caregiving had ended to determine: (a) how caregiver health changes after caregiving ends; and (b) whether PWNDs’ emotional functioning predicts these changes. PWND emotional functioning was assessed in the laboratory by measuring their generation of preparatory physiological activity (e.g., increased heart rate) to an upcoming emotional event (i.e., emotion eliciting films). Caregiver mental and physical health were measured using the Short-Form Health Survey (SF36) during active caregiving and again after caregiving had ended. Results indicated that, overall, caregivers reported increases in mental health, (t(36) = 2.58, p = .014, 95% CI [1.31, 10.93]) but decreases in physical health (t(36) = -2.35, p = .025, 95% CI [-7.26, -0.53]) across the two measurement periods. Using latent change score models, PWNDs’ preparatory physiological response impairments were associated with better caregiver mental health trajectories (β = -0.37, SE = 0.04, p = .003) such that smaller PWND preparatory responses predicted greater improvements in caregiver mental health (β = 9.92, SE = 2.84, p &lt; .001). There was no association with changes in caregiver physical health. Smaller preparatory physiological responses in PWNDs may indicate diminished emotional responding, which is linked with lower caregiver mental health during active caregiving. Once caregiving ends, these caregivers may be most likely to “rebound” and show improvements in mental health.

Abstract As a group, family caregivers of people with dementia (PWDs) have substantially elevated levels of depression and anxiety, compared to same-aged non-caregiving adults. However, there is striking variation in mental health among individual caregivers. Previous research on predictors of the sources of these individual differences has focused on characteristics of individual caregivers and PWDs (rather than on the caregiver-PWD relationship), self-report measures (rather than behavioral measures), and negative emotion (rather than positive emotion). We examined 185 caregiver-PWD dyads who had an unrehearsed 10-minute conversation about an area of conflict in the laboratory. Video recordings were coded for Behavioral Indicators of Positivity Resonance (BIPR), which derives from Positivity Resonance Theory and assesses dyad-level behavioral expressions of positive affect, mutual warmth, and synchrony. Caregivers reported their level of depression, anxiety, and emotional well-being and PWDs underwent a comprehensive neurological and neuropsychological evaluation. Pearson’s correlations revealed that greater dyad-level BIPR was associated with caregivers’ higher emotional well-being (r(181) = .19, p = .008), lower depression (r(179) = -.17, p = .025), and lower anxiety (r(180) = -.15, p = .045). Regression analyses revealed that these associations were still obtained after controlling for caregiver age and sex and PWD dementia severity, cognitive impairment, and neuropsychiatric behavior (emotional well-being ß = .18, p = .012; depression ß = -.15, p = .039; anxiety ß = -.15, p = .044). Future studies should determine whether interventions that increase co-experienced positive emotions among caregiver-PWD dyads help buffer caregivers from adverse mental health consequences.

Abstract Background Red blood cell (RBC) transfusion may be lifesaving, however transfusion-transmitted infections (TTI) and transfusion-associated graft-versus-host disease (TA-GVHD) still pose a threat despite current donor selection and testing requirements. Amustaline (S-303)/glutathione (GSH) pathogen reduction (PR) is designed to inactivate infectious microbes and leukocytes in RBCs. The RedeS study evaluates the safety and efficacy of amustaline/GSH PR-RBCs compared to conventional RBCs in a broad spectrum of patients requiring acute and/or repeated RBC transfusion support. Methods RedeS is a Phase 3, prospective, multi-center, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, parallel-design study, with a 6-month extension option to evaluate patients requiring repeated transfusions including red cell exchange (RCE).Eligible subjects will be stratified according to site, baseline bleeding status and participation in the extension period. The study arms include a transfusion period of 28-days for anemia with any bleeding or non-bleeding patients or a 28-day+6-month extension for non-bleeding patients with chronic anemia requiring repeated simple transfusions, or for patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) expected to receive three RCE procedures. The study will seek to enroll 600-800 subjects in the overall safety analysis, including ~140 repeatedly-transfused subjects in the 6-month extension including up to 30 subjects receiving three RCE procedures. The primary safety endpoints are the proportion of patients with any treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) related to study RBC transfusion through 28 days after the last study transfusion, and the proportion of patients with treatment-emergent antibodies with confirmed specificity to PR-RBCs. The primary efficacy endpoint is the hemoglobin (Hb) increment in subjects who are non-bleeding at baseline, adjusted for the grams of Hb transfused and averaged over multiple transfusions. With 352 evaluable transfused non-bleeding subjects (176 per treatment group) from either arm, the study will have 80% power to demonstrate non-inferiority, defined as a Hb increment treatment difference of no more than 15% of the Control group mean, assuming a Control arm coefficient of variation of 50%. Discussion RedeS will characterize the safety of amustaline/GSH PR-RBCs and is designed to demonstrate the non-inferiority of PR-RBCs to conventional RBCs with respect to Hb increment, a common pragmatic clinical assessment of RBC transfusion effectiveness.

Importance Molecular analyses of biospecimens collected from study participants are essential for identifying biomarkers that can tailor treatments to specific subsets of patients who are most likely to benefit. Sharing of data and biospecimens from clinical trials enables personalized, patient-centric use of cancer therapies and accelerates the development of new treatments. Objective To describe obstacles to sharing data and biospecimens and to propose strategies to enhance access and collaboration. Evidence Review This is a Special Communication authored by 53 academic investigators and patient representatives from the breast cancer community with extensive experience in conducting clinical and translational research. The article also evaluates the impact of biomarker research on specifying responsive subpopulations in the 29 registrational clinical trials that have led to approval of a new drug for treatment of breast cancer between 2017 and 2024. Findings Clinical trial participants are increasingly asked to provide tissue and/or body fluid biospecimens for biomarker research that is typically controlled by the sponsoring pharmaceutical company, but published biomarker studies are rare. Among 29 breast cancer registrational studies reported in the past 8 years, none resulted in biomarker research that restricted a drug’s approved indication. Herein, strategies to maximize the value of clinical data and biospecimens contributed by participants are proposed, thereby supporting the shared goals of the pharmaceutical industry and academia to improve patient care. These strategies include (1) establishing coleadership structures involving academia and patients in clinical trial design and conduct, (2) ensuring that informed consent forms state that data and biospecimens will be shared with academia for future research, (3) requiring the sharing of clinical data as a condition for regulatory approval, and (4) enabling access to biospecimens and translational research data for independent studies on biomarkers that may indicate drug efficacy and toxicity. Conclusions and Relevance Data and biospecimen sharing from registrational trials has been suboptimal. Improving clinical data, biospecimens, and biospecimens’ related data sharing requires concrete actions and a multidimensional stakeholder approach to accelerate the impact of clinical cancer research on the quality of patient care.

Abstract Objectives There are striking differences among caregivers of people with dementia in their health and well-being during active caregiving and after caregiving has ended. A key factor influencing caregiver health is the emotional quality of the caregiver–care recipient relationship, which may be reflected in the emotional language caregivers use when describing this relationship. The present study assessed whether caregivers’ positive and negative language is associated with their current and future depression trajectories. Methods Active caregivers responded to an open-ended question about a recent time they felt connected to the care recipient. We summed the number of positive and negative emotion words and divided them by the total words in the response. We evaluated whether caregivers’ emotional language (a proxy for the emotional quality of the caregiver–care recipient relationship) was associated with their depression assessed both concurrently (N = 347 active caregivers) and longitudinally (N = 224 former caregivers). Results Neither positive nor negative emotional language significantly correlated with caregiver depression during active caregiving. Structural equation modeling revealed caregivers’ greater positive emotional language (accounting for baseline depression) was associated with less steep increases in depression after the care recipient’s death. Results were robust when accounting for negative emotional language and covariates. Negative emotional language was not significantly associated with changes in caregiver depression. Discussion Caregivers who use more positive words when describing their connection with the care recipient may be more resilient, underscoring the potential role of positive emotional qualities of the caregiving relationship in preserving caregivers’ mental health after caregiving ends.

Background Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of death in cancer survivors. Predicting CVD risk in this population remains challenging. Risk prediction models that use machine learning algorithms could provide an objective method for accurate risk prediction to facilitate the prevention and management of CVD in cancer survivors. We evaluated previously tested machine learning algorithms and logistic regression (regularized by machine learning methods), in addition to testing and validating newer, more complex machine learning algorithms, for CVD prediction in cancer survivors. Methods This multicenter study used a database of 3835 multiracial cancer survivors with 89 clinical, laboratory, and echocardiographic features over 20 years. Models were trained using repeated random and time‐split samples and tested on a separate cohort of 329 patients. Model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Results Regularized logistic regression achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.845 (heart failure), 0.783 (atrial fibrillation), 0.792 (coronary artery disease), and 0.806 (composite CVD). These are comparable to 0.837 and 0.848 for heart failure, using Bayesian additive regression tree and random forest as more advanced machine learning models, respectively. De novo composite CVD (post‐cancer diagnosis) was also predicted with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.826 using regularized logistic regression, compared with 0.735 and 0.802 using decision tree and random forest, respectively. Conclusions Regularized logistic regression and advanced machine learning models demonstrated similar predictive performance, with institutional transferability. These tools may support risk stratification and prevention strategies in cardio‐oncology using longitudinal data. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT05377320.

Abstract Introduction: Multiple myeloma (MM) predominantly affects older adults who vary widely in physiological status and treatment outcomes. Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) is considered the gold standard for frailty assessment in older cancer patients (pts), but clinical useis limited. Current frailty tools for MM include only select GCA domains, rely on trial datasets, and do not incorporate pt-reported outcomes (PROs). Since their development, treatment strategies have evolved with the use of anti-CD38 MAbs and quadruplets in older pts. The impact of geriatric impairments on treatment tolerance in the era of modern therapy remains unclear and changes in geriatric domains during treatment are not well characterized. Aim: This prospective study evaluates the association between pt-reported CGA and treatment outcomes in older MM pts.Methods: We included MM pts ≥60 years initiating a new treatment at Mayo Clinic from March 2023-June 2024. Pts completed the CARG GCA (Hurria et al 2005) electronically prior to and after 4 treatment cycles. We collected data on toxicity using CTCAE and PRO-CTCAE and quality of life using the PROMIS10-GH SF.Results: Ninety pts were enrolled. Median age was 72 (range: 63-86), 42% female, and &gt;90% non-Hispanic white. Over half (59%) were newly diagnosed with 41% and 56% receiving quadruplets and triplets, respectively. Among newly diagnosed pts, 34% had early stem cell transplant. Baseline median self- and physician- reported KPS were 80% and 90%, respectively, with high correlation (r=0.657). The median number of meds per pt was 9 (range:0-30), 39% had ≥3 comorbidities, 21% reported ≥1 fall in the past 6 months, and 40% reported ≥1 IADL limitation. On the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, 3% and 7% had anxiety and depression, respectively. On the Blessed Orientation-Memory-Concentration test, 19% had mild cognitive impairment, and 1% had severe cognitive impairment. While only 19% had grade (G) ≥3 non-hematologic toxicity by CTCAE, 71% had ≥1 treatment delay, dose reduction, or discontinuation, and 39% had ≥1 ED visit or unplanned hospitalization within the first 4 cycles. This suggests physician grading of non-hem toxicities may inadequately capture toxicity burden from MM therapy. Notably, the rate of G≥3 toxicity by PRO-CTCAE was 49%, highlighting the discrepancy between physician- and pt-reported symptom burden. CGA domains significantly associated with G≥3 non-hem toxicity were: age (74 v 71.5, p=0.032), ≥3 comorbidities (65% v 33%, p=0.015), anxiety (18% v 0%, p=0.006), ≥1 IADL limitation (65% v 33%, p=0.018), physician KPS ≤80 (53% v 27%, p=0.042), limitations in vigorous activities (100% v 78%, p=0.023) and limitations in climbing several flights of stairs (88% v 56%, p&lt;0.001). Predictors of PRO-CTCAE G≥3 toxicity were ≥1 falls (30% v 11%, p=0.030), ≥3 comorbidities (52% v 26%, p=0.011), polypharmacy (≥9 meds) (67% v 43%, p=0.023), and physician KPS ≤80 (43% v 22%, p=0.030). CGA domains associated with ≥1 treatment adjustments were polypharmacy (62% v 33%, p=0.017) and unintentional weight loss (35% v 12%, p=0.028). Polypharmacy was the only domain associated with healthcare utilization (68% v 45%, p = 0.040), which may reflect underlying multimorbidity and greater pain burden. On multivariable logistic regression, any level of limitation in climbing several flights of stairs (OR: 6.0, 95% CI 1.2-30.3; p= 0.030) and older age (OR: 1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.1; p=0.032) were independently associated with G≥3 non-hem toxicity, reflecting impaired functional status and reduced physiologic reserve, while ≥3 comorbidities only trended toward significance (OR:1.9, 95% CI 1.1-3.9, p=0.051).Compared to baseline, there were no significant changes in CGA domains or PROMIS10 scores after 4 cycles. While there was no significant difference in the proportion of pts reporting limitations in IADLs or physical function, we observed heterogeneity among individual pts, with changes in all 3 directions (improvement, stability, and decline). Conclusions: Geriatric impairments are prevalent in older pts with MM; pt-reported impairments are significantly associated with G≥3 non-hem toxicities, need for treatment modifications, and increased healthcare utilization, even in the era of novel therapies. Physical functional trajectories during treatment are variable among individual pts, underscoring the need for personalized treatment strategies and reassessment of geriatric domains throughout treatment.