Citations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: It remains unclear whether decompressive craniectomy (DC) is beneficial in patients who suffer symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) after acute ischemic stroke (AIS). We sought to study the effect of DC on functional outcomes in patients with sICH after AIS who underwent mechanical thrombectomy (MT). METHODS: Patients with AIS from anterior circulation large vessel occlusion who underwent MT and subsequently developed sICH were identified from the Stroke Thrombectomy and Aneurysm Registry database. The primary outcome was acceptable 90-day functional neurological outcome, defined as modified Rankin scale (mRS) 0-3. Multivariable logistic regression and propensity-score matching were used to identify and quantify risk factors. RESULTS: Of 464 patients identified with sICH after AIS after MT, 97 patients (20.9%) underwent DC. Patients who underwent DC were more likely to be female ( P < .001), younger ( P < .001), have a measured medical comorbidity, have higher baseline mRS ( P = .02), and have higher-grade hemorrhages ( P = .01). At 90 days, 14% of patients had the primary outcome of mRS 0-3 and 56% had died. The primary outcome was observed in 11 patients who underwent DC (11%) and 55 (15%) of those without DC (odds ratio [OR] 0.7, 95% CI 0.4-1.4, P = .40). DC did not affect mRS shift at 90 days ( P = .10) but was associated with lower mortality (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3-0.8, P = .01). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that DC decreased the odds of primary outcome (adjusted OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.02-0.9, P = .045), but did not affect mortality ( P = .94), mRS shift ( P = .50), or length of stay ( P = .90). Propensity-matched analysis similarly demonstrated that non-DC patients were more likely to achieve the primary outcome (24% vs 8%, P = .045). CONCLUSION: In patients with sICH after AIS after MT, those selected for DC had less favorable outcomes and similar rates of mortality at 90 days.

LBA1551 Background: Traditional cancer therapy is primarily delivered in clinical settings, imposing logistical, emotional, and financial burdens, particularly on rural and underserved patients. While international studies have demonstrated the safety of home-based chemotherapy, no randomized U.S. trials have evaluated this approach. Mayo Clinic’s CCBW program aims to expand access to high-quality cancer care by providing in-home cancer treatment, lab testing, telemedicine, remote patient monitoring, command center and paramedic support. This pragmatic randomized controlled trial evaluates feasibility and impact of home-based versus in-clinic cancer directed therapy on patient preference, acceptability, safety, and patient-reported outcomes. Methods: Adult patients (ECOG 0-2) receiving chemotherapy or hormonal therapy at Mayo Clinic Florida were randomized 1:1 after confirmation of treatment tolerance in clinic to receive (1) home-based care for 24 weeks or (2) in-clinic care for 8 weeks followed by home-based care for 16 weeks. Target accrual is 200 patients. A planned interim analysis after 50 enrollments assessed accrual, data completeness, technical challenges, safety, and study outcomes. The primary endpoint is patient ratings of their overall cancer care experience (0–10 scale, CAHPS Cancer Care Survey) at 8 weeks. 200 patients provide 80% power to detect a 0.45 standard deviation difference in mean ratings between arms with a 2-sided 2-sample t-test (α=0.05) and 20% missing data rate. Secondary endpoints are patient preference, comfort with home infusions, treatment worthwhileness, functional/symptom assessments (EORTC QLQ-F17, PRO-CTCAE, GP5), grade ≥3 AEs, hospitalizations, and overall survival. Cost is a tertiary endpoint. The trial is IRB-approved (#23001719) and registered (NCT05969860). Results: Enrollment began 8/23/23. As of 2/21/25, 52 patients (26 per arm) were enrolled and 36 started protocol treatment. Common cancers were breast (38%), colorectal (21%), prostate (19%), and multiple myeloma (14%). 64% (28/44) of patients were female; 84% identified as White, 14% as Black, and 2% as multiple races. Median distance to clinic was 20 miles (range 2-66). After 8 weeks, patients in both arms rated their overall cancer care experience highly (mean [SD]=9.69 [0.85] versus 9.54 [0.66] for home-based vs. in-clinic care, n=26). After 24 weeks, 73% preferred home-based care, 18% had no preference, and 9% preferred in-clinic care; 100% felt comfortable with home infusions. No grade ≥3 AEs related to location of care have occurred. Conclusions: Early findings support the feasibility, safety, and high patient acceptability of home-based cancer therapy. No safety concerns related to care location were observed and most patients preferred home-based treatment. Ongoing accrual and analysis will assess clinical outcomes and cost implications. Clinical trial information: NCT05969860 .

TPS1657 Background: Cancer treatments are traditionally administered in clinical settings, which can isolate patients from their familiar environments and exacerbate physical, psychosocial, and financial burdens. Travel requirements further amplify these challenges, particularly for underserved populations. Studies indicate that patients prefer receiving care at home, and international models have demonstrated the safety of home-delivered chemotherapy since the 1990s; however, no U.S. clinical trial data exists. In response, Mayo Clinic has developed the Cancer CARE (Connected Access and Remote Expertise) Beyond Walls (CCBW) program, a distributed cancer care delivery model that expands access to quality cancer care by bringing it to the home environment, providing in-home cancer treatment, lab testing, telemedicine, and community paramedic support. This trial evaluates the safety, acceptability, and impact of home-based subcutaneous (SC) nivolumab (Nivo) administration compared to in-clinic treatment within the CCBW initiative. Methods: This open-label, single-arm trial evaluates the impact of SC Nivo administration location—home versus infusion center—on patient reported cancer care experience, patient-preferred treatment location, acceptability, safety, and patient-reported outcomes. Eligible adult patients (ECOG 0-1) receiving IV Nivo for an FDA-approved indication and residing within 75 miles of Mayo Clinic Florida will transition to SC Nivo, receiving two initial in-clinic cycles. If tolerated without injection reactions, four cycles will be administered at home before resuming in-clinic treatment. Exclusion criteria include concurrent investigational/standard treatments or contraindications to immunotherapy. Fifty patients will be enrolled, with an estimated 75% (n=38) providing cancer care ratings after 8 weeks in-clinic and 8 weeks at-home, offering 85% power to detect a mean difference in ratings of 0.50 standard deviations. The primary endpoint is within-patient change in cancer care rating (0–10 scale, CAHPS Cancer Care Survey) comparing 8 weeks of in-clinic vs. at-home care. Secondary endpoints include patient-preferred treatment location, comfort with home injections, safety (grade 3+ adverse events), function (EORTC QLQ-F17), symptoms (PRO-CTCAE), side effect impact (GP5), and healthcare utilization (ER visits, hospitalizations). Cost will be assessed as a tertiary endpoint. The trial has FDA approval (IND #170079), Mayo Clinic IRB approval (#23009663), and ClinicalTrials.gov registration (NCT06265285). Enrollment began in April 2024, with an expected accrual period of 24 months. To date, 10 patients have been enrolled, and final analysis is expected 2.5 years after trial activation. Clinical trial information: NCT06265285 .

9029 Background: Addressing guideline concordant FP and TPP with cancer is challenging, especially for OT. SIM, a well-known education tool, has not been traditionally used to teach these topics. As part of the hematology/oncology fellowship curriculum, we designed a SIM applying LSP to bridge this educational gap. Methods: Applying LSP of contrasting cases, elaboration, feedback, generation and just-in-time telling, chief OTs and faculty designed a SIM with 3 clinical scenarios (CS) and 3 standardized pts (SP): FP for a female pt hospitalized for acute lymphoblastic leukemia tx, FP for a male pt in clinic for germ cell tumor tx, and breast cancer tx for a pregnant pt in 2 nd trimester. OT received written educational materials (WEM) and attended a lecture 1 week and 1 day pre SIM, respectively. OT were split into 2 groups; 1 started in the FP CS and 1 in the TPP CS, and then they switched. To reduce cognitive overload, each OT participated in 1 of 2 FP CS: half in the female FP CS and half in the male. Faculty and chiefs led debriefing sessions after all CS. The FP debrief ended with a special “learner as a teacher” part, where OT who attended the female CS taught those from the male CS about their topic and vice versa. The SIM concluded with "take-home" points. Pre (after having WEM) and post SIM anonymous surveys and verbal feedback assessed OT comfort, perceptions, and knowledge. Results: A 3 hour SIM with 14 OT and 5 faculty was completed successfully. SIM ended with all OT verbally sharing a learning point and positive feedback. All OT filled pre and post SIM surveys. Pre SIM, 17% reported having prior FP education, and 42% had prior TPP education. However, only 8% and 25% felt adequately prepared for FP and TPP discussions, respectively. Post SIM survey showed major improvement in comfort and knowledge about FP and TPP (see table 1). 75% of OT favored a combination of SIM and learning by teaching over other SIM formats. 83% supported having a TPP lecture before SIM. 100% reported satisfaction with FP and TPP SIM’s quality and wanted similar activities in the future. 92% were satisfied with the learner as a teacher tool. 100% felt education about FP and TPP with cancer should be part of fellowship training. Moral/cultural concerns were discussed as possible challenges in FP education. Conclusions: The application of LSP through SIM significantly increased OTs’ comfort discussing FP and TPP with cancer, and objectively enhanced their knowledge on these topics compared to after reading WEM. The SIM was largely perceived as a successful activity to educate about challenging topics and should become part of fellowship curriculum. Pre SIM % Post SIM % Comfortable addressing FP 17 92 Comfortable addressing TPP 8 100 Correct answers about female FP 63 83 Correct answers about male FP 67 94 Correct answers about TPP with cancer 68 98

Abstract Glioblastoma (GBM) remains the most common and lethal adult malignant primary brain cancer with few treatment options. A significant issue hindering GBM therapeutic development is intratumor heterogeneity. GBM tumors contain neoplastic cells within a spectrum of different transcriptional states. Identifying effective therapeutics requires a platform that predicts the differential sensitivity and resistance of these states to various treatments. Here, we developed a novel framework, ISOSCELES ( I nferred cell S ensitivity O perating on the integration of S ingle- C ell E xpression and L 1000 E xpression S ignatures), to quantify the cellular drug sensitivity and resistance landscape. Using single-cell RNA sequencing of newly diagnosed and recurrent GBM tumors, we identified compounds from the LINCS L1000 database with transcriptional response signatures selectively discordant with distinct GBM cell states. We validated the significance of these findings in vitro, ex vivo, and in vivo , and identified a novel combination of an OLIG2 inhibitor and Depatux-M for GBM. Our studies suggest that ISOSCELES identifies cell states sensitive and resistant to targeted therapies in GBM and that it can be applied to identify new synergistic combinations. Highlights Integration of GBM single-cell RNA sequencing data with L1000-derived drug response signatures facilitates clustering of tumor cells and small molecules on cell-drug connectivity. Cell-drug connectivity predicts the identities of drug-sensitive and resistant cell states. In silico perturbation analysis using cell-drug connectivity predicts drug-induced changes in the cell-drug connectivity landscape in vivo. In silico perturbation analysis to predict drug-induced changes in the tumor cell-drug connectivity landscape predicts drug combinations that synergize in vivo to extend survival.

Cardiac cachexia (CC) is a severe complication of advanced heart failure (HF), characterized by involuntary weight loss and muscle wasting, leading to poor outcomes and higher mortality. Despite its severity, CC remains under-recognized and undertreated, lacking targeted therapies specifically addressing its pathophysiology. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), though beneficial in reducing cardiovascular risk in patients with HF, may exacerbate muscle wasting in cachectic patients, necessitating further investigation. Non-pharmacological strategies, including tailored nutritional support and exercise programs, have shown positive effects on body composition and quality of life in patients with CC. However, there remains a gap in recommendations tailored to preventive strategies and pharmacologic therapies for patients with CC and concomitant GLP-1RA use. This review highlights the multifactorial mechanisms underlying CC and current and emerging therapeutic approaches for mitigating HF-related sarcopenia while on GLP-1RAs.

Background Studies suggest that plasma Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers may aid in the overall diagnosis of AD, but their utility among patients with atypical clinical presentations of AD are unknown. Objective The main objective of this study was to determine the relationship between amyloid-β (Aβ) and tau plasma biomarkers and PET measures of both Aβ and tau in atypical AD. The secondary objective was to determine if plasma biomarkers could differentiate patients with different atypical AD phenotypes and whether they were related to measures of disease severity. Methods We assessed whether plasma p-tau 181 and Aβ 42/40 were associated with Aβ and tau PET uptake, clinical phenotype and severity in 77 patients with PET biomarker-confirmed atypical AD. Results Plasma Aβ 42/40 ratio showed positive associations with tau PET uptake, with higher (more normal) Aβ 42/40 ratio associated with higher tau uptake; the ratio was not associated with Aβ PET. No associations were noted with plasma p-tau 181. Plasma Aβ 42/40 ratio and p-tau 181 concentrations were not associated with AD phenotype or cognitive severity. Conclusion Plasma Aβ 42/40 ratio and p-tau 181 concentrations are not associated with amyloid or tau PET or with clinical severity among individuals presenting with atypical AD.

Abstract Background In 2021, the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation established the Multi‐Disciplinary Post‐Acute Sequelae of SARS‐CoV‐2 Infection Collaborative to provide guidance from established Long COVID clinics for the evaluation and management of Long COVID. The collaborative previously published eight Long COVID consensus guidance statements using a primarily symptom‐based approach. However, Long COVID symptoms most often do not occur in isolation. Aims This compendium aims to equip clinicians with an efficient, up‐to‐date clinical resource for evaluating and managing adults experiencing Long COVID symptoms. The primary intended audience includes physiatrists, primary care physicians, and other clinicians who provide first‐line assessment and management of Long COVID symptoms, especially in settings where subspecialty care is not readily available. This compendium provides a holistic framework for assessment and management, symptom‐specific considerations, and updates on prevalence, health equity, disability considerations, pathophysiology, and emerging evidence regarding treatments under investigation. Because Long COVID closely resembles other infection‐associated chronic conditions (IACCs) such as myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome, the guidance in this compendium may also be helpful for clinicians managing these related conditions. Methods Guidance in this compendium was developed by the collaborative's established modified Delphi approach. The collaborative is a multidisciplinary group whose members include physiatrists, primary care physicians, pulmonologists, cardiologists, psychiatrists, neuropsychologists, neurologists, occupational therapists, physical therapists, speech and language pathologists, patients, and government representatives. Over 40 Long COVID centers are represented in the collaborative. Results Long COVID is defined by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine as “an IACC that occurs after SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and is present for at least 3 months as a continuous, relapsing and remitting, or progressive disease state that affects one or more organ systems.” The current global prevalence of Long COVID is estimated to be 6%. Higher prevalence has been identified among female gender, certain racial and ethnic groups, and individuals who live in nonurban areas. However, anyone can develop Long COVID after being infected with the SARS‐CoV‐2 virus. Long COVID can present as a wide variety of symptom clusters. The most common symptoms include exaggerated fatigue and diminished energy windows, postexertional malaise (PEM)/postexertional symptom exacerbation (PESE), cognitive impairment (brain fog), dysautonomia, pain/myalgias, and smell and taste alterations. Holistic assessment should include a traditional history, physical examination, and additional diagnostic testing, as indicated. A positive COVID‐19 test during acute SARS‐CoV‐2 infection is not required to diagnose Long COVID, and currently, there is no single laboratory finding that is definitively diagnostic for confirming or ruling out the diagnosis of Long COVID. A basic laboratory assessment is recommended for all patients with possible Long COVID, and consideration for additional labs and diagnostic procedures is guided by the patient's specific symptoms. Current management strategies focus on symptom‐based supportive care. Critical considerations include energy conservation strategies and addressing comorbidities and modifiable risk factors. Additionally, (1) it is essential to validate the patient's experience and provide reassurance that their symptoms are being taken seriously because many patients have had their symptoms dismissed by loved ones and clinicians; (2) physical activity recommendations must be carefully tailored to the patient's current activity tolerance because overly intense activity can trigger PEM/PESE and worsened muscle damage; and (3) treatment recommendations should be delivered with humility because there are many persistent unknowns related to Long COVID. To date, there are limited data to guide medication management specifically in the context of Long COVID. As such, medication use generally follows standard practice regarding indications and dosing, with extra attention to prioritize (1) patient preference via shared decision‐making and (2) cautious use of medications that may improve some symptoms (eg, cognitive/attention impairment) but may worsen other symptoms (eg, PEM/PESE). Numerous clinical trials are investigating additional treatments. The return‐to‐work process for individuals with Long COVID can be challenging because symptoms can fluctuate, vary in nature, affect multiple functional areas (eg, physical and cognitive), and often manifest as an “invisible disability” that may not be readily acknowledged by employers or coworkers. Clinicians can help patients return to work by identifying suitable workplace accommodations and resources, providing necessary documentation, and recommending occupational or vocational therapy when needed. If these efforts are unsuccessful and work significantly worsens Long COVID symptoms or impedes recovery, applying for disability may be warranted. Long COVID is recognized as a potential disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Conclusion To contribute to the overall health and well‐being for all patients, Long COVID care should be delivered in a holistic manner that acknowledges challenges faced by the patient and uncertainties in the field. For more detailed information on assessment and management of specific Long COVID symptoms, readers can reference the collaborative's symptom‐specific consensus guidance statements.

Abstract Background: Second generation androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs), such as abiraterone, have demonstrated improved survival in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients, however, acquired resistance to these agents often arises. Novel and alternative therapies are needed to combat the ARSI resistant tumor. In the last two decades patient-derived xenograft (PDX) and PDX organoids have become pivotal models in anticancer drug development and biomarker discovery due to their ability to faithfully recapitulate the complex and heterogeneous tumor biology. Methods: We analyzed RNAseq data from mCRPC patients and corresponding PDX models (PROMOTE study, NCT #01953640) and employed L1000 Chem Perturbation down/up signatures database to find candidate drugs to overcome abiraterone resistance by reverse signature search. We then performed proliferation assay using 49 compounds in three PROMOTE-PDX organoid models (2 abiraterone-resistant and 1 abiraterone-sensitive) using our semi high-throughput drug screening platform. Results: Overall, we identified a total of 32 compounds with IC50&lt;10µM in at least one of the models, among which, 5 agents are active in all three models and 5 in at least two of the models. (Table 1). Within active compounds we find selective kinase inhibitors (BRAF, JAK2, AKT, FLT3) and histone deacetylase inhibitors (belinostat and pracinostat). Particularly interesting are two drugs that are only active in the abiraterone resistant setting but not the sensitive PDX. Conclusions: In summary, we leveraged RNAseq data from mCRPC patients and PDX models and performed a high-throughput drug screen in PDX-derived organoid models to identify potential drugs that could overcome abiraterone-resistance in lethal advanced prostate cancer. These data highlight potential drug combinations or subsequent therapeutic strategies for these patients. Citation Format: Irene Marín-Goñi, Huanyao Gao, Joachim L. Petit, Shreya Indulkar, Adam M. Kase, Cassandra N. Moore, Krishna R. Kalari, Michael T. Barrett, Richard Weinshilboum, Winston Tan, John A. Copland, Liewei Wang. Overcoming resistance in mCRPC: drug discovery using PDX models and high-throughput drug screening [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_1):Abstract nr 5658.

Background Severe alcohol-associated hepatitis (sAH) is a life-threatening condition with high mortality, where corticosteroid use is the only treatment that has shown short-term benefits. Pentoxifylline, an anti-tumour necrosis factor-alpha agent, has been proposed for its potential to improve outcomes, especially in patients with acute kidney injury (AKI). We aimed to evaluate the impact of pentoxifylline on mortality in patients with sAH and AKI in a well-characterised global cohort. Methods We conducted a retrospective, registry-based study including patients meeting the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism clinical criteria for sAH and AKI. Mortality was the primary endpoint, with liver transplantation as a competing risk. Statistical analysis included Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier survival estimates. Results We included 525 patients from 20 centres across eight countries. The median age was 48 years, with 26.1% females, and 76.9% had a history of cirrhosis. Multivariable Cox regression models showed that pentoxifylline use was not associated with survival (HR 1.20, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.69, p=0.291). Factors associated with mortality included age (HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.36, p<0.001), Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score at admission (HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.08, p<0.001) and renal replacement therapy use (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.84, p=0.019). The main causes of death were multiple organ failure (42%), infections (10%), oesophageal varices bleeding (7%) and renal failure (6%). Conclusion Pentoxifylline showed no significant benefit on mortality in patients with sAH and AKI. Further studies are needed to refine treatment strategies for this high-risk group.