Citations

There are multiple conditions that can make children prone to having a sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) or sudden cardiac death (SCD). Efforts have been made by multiple organizations to screen children for cardiac conditions, but the emphasis has been on screening before athletic competition. This article is an update of the previous American Academy of Pediatrics policy statement of 2012 that addresses prevention of SCA and SCD. This update includes a comprehensive review of conditions that should prompt more attention and cardiology evaluation. The role of the primary care provider is of paramount importance in the evaluation of children, particularly as they enter middle school or junior high. There is discussion about whether screening should find any cardiac condition or just those that are associated with SCA and SCD. This update reviews the 4 main screening questions that are recommended, not just for athletes, but for all children. There is also discussion about how to handle post-SCA and SCD situations as well as discussion about genetic testing. It is the goal of this policy statement update to provide the primary care provider more assistance in how to screen for life-threatening conditions, regardless of athletic status.

SPOP mutation disables 53BP1 ubiquitination and exclusion from DNA double-strand break sites and causes genome instability.

Background There is heterogeneity in the names and anatomical descriptions of regional anesthetic techniques. This may have adverse consequences on education, research, and implementation into clinical practice. We aimed to produce standardized nomenclature for abdominal wall, paraspinal, and chest wall regional anesthetic techniques. Methods We conducted an international consensus study involving experts using a three-round Delphi method to produce a list of names and corresponding descriptions of anatomical targets. After long-list formulation by a Steering Committee, the first and second rounds involved anonymous electronic voting and commenting, with the third round involving a virtual round table discussion aiming to achieve consensus on items that had yet to achieve it. Novel names were presented where required for anatomical clarity and harmonization. Strong consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and weak consensus as 50% to 74% agreement. Results Sixty expert Collaborators participated in this study. After three rounds and clarification, harmonization, and introduction of novel nomenclature, strong consensus was achieved for the names of 16 block names and weak consensus for four names. For anatomical descriptions, strong consensus was achieved for 19 blocks and weak consensus was achieved for one approach. Several areas requiring further research were identified. Conclusions Harmonization and standardization of nomenclature may improve education, research, and ultimately patient care. We present the first international consensus on nomenclature and anatomical descriptions of blocks of the abdominal wall, chest wall, and paraspinal blocks. We recommend using the consensus results in academic and clinical practice.

Abstract Purpose: Mutations in KRAS/NRAS (RAS) predict lack of anti-EGFR efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, it is unclear if all RAS mutations have similar impact, and atypical mutations beyond those in standard guidelines exist. Experimental Design: We reviewed 7 tissue and 1 cell-free DNA cohorts of 9,485 patients to characterize atypical RAS variants. Using an in vitro cell-based assay (functional annotation for cancer treatment), Ba/F3 transformation, and in vivo xenograft models of transduced isogenic clones, we assessed signaling changes across mutations. Results: KRAS exon 2, extended RAS, and atypical RAS mutations were noted in 37.8%, 9.5%, and 1.2% of patients, respectively. Among atypical variants, KRAS L19F, Q22K, and D33E occurred at prevalence ≥0.1%, whereas no NRAS codon 117/146 and only one NRAS codon 59 mutation was noted. Atypical RAS mutations had worse overall survival than RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC (HR, 2.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.24–6.80; P = 0.014). We functionally characterized 114 variants with the FACT assay. All KRAS exon 2 and extended RAS mutations appeared activating. Of 57 atypical RAS variants characterized, 18 (31.6%) had signaling below wild-type, 23 (40.4%) had signaling between wild-type and activating control, and 16 (28.1%) were hyperactive beyond the activating control. Ba/F3 transformation (17/18 variants) and xenograft model (7/8 variants) validation was highly concordant with FACT results, and activating atypical variants were those that occurred at highest prevalence in clinical cohorts. Conclusions: We provide best available evidence to guide treatment when atypical RAS variants are identified. KRAS L19F, Q22K, D33E, and T50I are more prevalent than many guideline-included RAS variants and functionally relevant.

Abstract Lineage-ambiguous leukemias are high-risk malignancies of poorly understood genetic basis. Here, we describe a distinct subgroup of acute leukemia with expression of myeloid, T lymphoid, and stem cell markers driven by aberrant allele-specific deregulation of BCL11B, a master transcription factor responsible for thymic T-lineage commitment and specification. Mechanistically, this deregulation was driven by chromosomal rearrangements that juxtapose BCL11B to superenhancers active in hematopoietic progenitors, or focal amplifications that generate a superenhancer from a noncoding element distal to BCL11B. Chromatin conformation analyses demonstrated long-range interactions of rearranged enhancers with the expressed BCL11B allele and association of BCL11B with activated hematopoietic progenitor cell cis-regulatory elements, suggesting BCL11B is aberrantly co-opted into a gene regulatory network that drives transformation by maintaining a progenitor state. These data support a role for ectopic BCL11B expression in primitive hematopoietic cells mediated by enhancer hijacking as an oncogenic driver of human lineage-ambiguous leukemia. Significance: Lineage-ambiguous leukemias pose significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenges due to a poorly understood molecular and cellular basis. We identify oncogenic deregulation of BCL11B driven by diverse structural alterations, including de novo superenhancer generation, as the driving feature of a subset of lineage-ambiguous leukemias that transcend current diagnostic boundaries. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 2659

TPS11582 Background: Letetresgene autoleucel (lete-cel; GSK3377794) is an autologous T-cell product using a genetically modified T-cell receptor to target cancer cells expressing the cancer testis antigen New-York esophageal squamous cell carcinoma 1 (NY-ESO-1). Lete-cel is currently being investigated alone and in combination in multiple tumor types [1,2]. NY-ESO-1 is expressed in 70‒80% of synovial sarcoma (SS) and 80‒90% of myxoid/round cell liposarcoma (MRCLS) tumors [3,4], suggesting these tumors may be prime lete-cel targets. This master protocol design (IGNYTE-ESO; NCT03967223) enables evaluation of multiple cell therapies in multiple tumor types and treatment stages in separate substudies, beginning with lete-cel in Substudies 1 and 2 for SS and MRCLS. Methods: Substudy 1 is a single-arm study assessing lete-cel in treatment-naïve patients (pts; ie, anthracycline therapy-naïve for metastatic disease) with advanced (metastatic/unresectable) NY-ESO-1+ SS or MRCLS as a first line of therapy (n=10 planned). Substudy 2 is a pivotal, single-arm study assessing lete-cel in pts with NY-ESO-1+ SS or MRCLS who progressed after anthracycline therapy (n=70 planned). Key eligibility criteria are age ≥10 y and NY-ESO-1 and HLA-A*02 positivity. Exclusion criteria include prior NY-ESO-1–specific/gene therapy, allogeneic stem cell transplant, and central nervous system metastases. Screened pts undergo leukapheresis for lete-cel manufacture, lymphodepletion, lete-cel infusion, and follow-up (FU). Long-term FU (15 y) may be done under a separate protocol. The Substudy 2 primary endpoint is overall response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1 assessed by central independent review. Substudy 1 is not testing any formal hypotheses; statistical analysis will be descriptive. Substudy 2 is comparing ORR with the historical control assuming at least 90% power with 0.025 one-sided type I error. Secondary endpoints include efficacy (time to/duration of response, disease control rate, progression-free survival), safety (adverse event [AE] frequency/severity, serious AEs, AEs of special interest), and pharmacokinetic (maximum transgene expansion [Cmax], time to Cmax, area under the time curve from zero to time t as data permit). Enrollment began in December 2019. References: 1. Reckamp KL, et al. Ann Oncol 2019;30(Suppl_5):v602–v660. 2. Rapoport A, et al. J Clin Oncol 2020 38:15_suppl, TPS8555. 3. D’Angelo SP, et al. Cancer Discov 2018;8(8):944–957. 4. D’Angelo SP, et al. J Clin Oncol 2018 36:15_suppl, 3005. Funding: GSK. Editorial support was provided by Eithne Maguire, PhD, of Fishawack Indicia, part of Fishawack Health, and funded by GSK. Previously presented at BSG 2021 (P914542). Clinical trial information: NCT03967223.

7502 Background: The BCL-2i venetoclax is active in certain HMs but can increase the risk of tumor lysis syndrome (TLS), requiring a 5-week dose ramp-up for CLL patients. Cases of severe neutropenia with venetoclax treatment have also been reported. Lisaftoclax is a novel, potent, selective BCL-2i that is active against HMs and is under clinical development. Methods: This first-in-human global phase I dose study assessed the safety, PK, PD, efficacy, and MTD/RP2D of lisaftoclax in patients with R/R CLL and other HMs. Lisaftoclax was orally administered daily in a 28-day cycle. Patients with CLL or intermediate-high TLS risk were initiated on a daily ramp-up schedule until the assigned dose before the study cycles. Results: On January 7, 2021, 35 pts had been enrolled and treated with lisaftoclax at doses ranging from 20 to 1,200 mg, with a median (range) of 2 (1-13) prior lines of treatment, and had diagnoses of R/R CLL or SLL (n = 15), MM (n = 6), FL (n = 5), WM (n = 4), and either AML, MCL, DLBCL, MDS, or HCL (n = 1 each). No DLT has been observed, even though 1,200 mg was considered as the highest dose treated. The MTD has not been reached, and no laboratory or clinical TLS has been reported. Any grade TRAEs in > 10% of pts included neutropenia (22.9%) and anemia (17.1%; hematologic), and fatigue (28.6%), diarrhea (17.1%), and nausea (11.4%; nonhematologic). Grade >3 TRAEs were neutropenia (14.3%) and thrombocytopenia, leukopenia, lymphopenia, fatigue, and nausea (2.9% of pts each). In CLL/SLL pts, grade 3-4 TRAEs included neutropenia (13.3%) and thrombocytopenia (6.7%), which did not cause treatment-related discontinuation. In all, 12 of 35 pts (34.3%) had non-treatment-related SAEs, and only two pts experienced > 1 SAE. With a median (range) treatment of 7 (3-20) cycles, 12 of 14 evaluable R/R CLL/SLL pts achieved PR, for an ORR of 85.7% and a median (range) time to response of 3 (2-7) cycles. Absolute lymphocyte counts (ALCs) were reduced at lisaftoclax doses as low as 20 mg/day. The preliminary PK profile showed that exposures increased with lisaftoclax doses from 20 to 1,200 mg (average half-life: 4-5 hours). On BH3 profiling, lisaftoclax rapidly triggered changes in BCL-2 complex in CLL/SLL pt samples, which were consistent with rapid clinical reductions in ALCs. Conclusions: Lisaftoclax was well tolerated up to 1,200 mg/day. No TLS was observed, even with the daily ramp-up schedule. There were no significant new or unmanageable safety findings, and the ORR in R/R CLL/SLL pts was 85.7%. Grade 3-4 TRAEs were infrequent, even at dose levels of 800 mg and above. BCL-2i lisaftoclax offers a treatment alternative for patients with R/R CLL/SLL and other HMs, with a daily ramp-up schedule that may be more pt “user friendly” and a favorable preliminary safety profile. Internal study identifier APG2575-001. Clinical trial information: NCT03537482.

TPS595 Background: Patients (pts) with HER2+ early breast cancer (EBC) and invasive residual disease (RD) after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) have a higher risk of relapse than pts with a pathologic complete response (pCR). Post neoadjuvant T-DM1 has improved invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), but pts with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative or nodal RD have suboptimal outcomes and recurrences in the central nervous system are a problem. More effective treatment strategies are needed. The CompassHER2 trials, EA1181 and A011801, leverage pCR to tailor post neoadjuvant therapy in HER2+ EBC. EA1181 is a NAT de-escalation trial of a taxane, trastuzumab and pertuzumab (THP) in clinical stage II-III HER2+ EBC; pts with a pCR complete HP +/- adjuvant radiation (RT) +/- endocrine therapy (ET). A011801 is an escalation trial for pts with high risk HER2+ RD after NAT, examining addition of the HER2 selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) tucatinib to adjuvant T-DM1. Methods: Eligibility and Intervention: Pts. with high-risk HER2+ RD (e.g. ER-,node-positive, or both) after a predefined course of neoadjuvant HER2-directed treatment are randomized 1:1 to adjuvant T-DM1+ placebo (pb), vs. T-DM1 and tucatinib with adjuvant RT +/- ET. Eligibility criteria include completion of ≥ 6 cycles of NAT, including ≥ 9 weeks of T and H +/- P. All chemotherapy (CT) must be completed preoperatively unless participating in EA1181 (̃15-30% enrollees); these pts must receive postoperative CT to complete ≥ 6 cycles prior to enrollment on A011801. Pts who received prior HER2-targeted TKIs or antibody-drug conjugates are ineligible. Objectives: The primary objective is to determine if iDFS is higher with addition of T-DM1 to tucatinib in pts with HER2+ EBC with RD after NAT; secondary endpoints include overall survival, breast cancer free survival, distant recurrence-free survival, brain metastases-free survival and disease-free survival. Correlative objectives include the association of i) tumor infiltrating lymphocyte (TILs) levels in the primary tumor and RD with iDFS, ii) TILs with tucatinib benefit, iii) iDFS and circulating tumor cells (CTC) at serial timepoints and iv) the magnitude of benefit of tucatinib (iDFS) in pts with/without detectable pretreatment CTCs. Quality of life and pharmacokinetic endpoints will also be evaluated. Statistics: A011801 is a prospective, double-blind, randomized, phase III superiority trial; stratified by i) receipt of postoperative CT (Y/N), ii) hormone receptor-status (+/-),and iii) pathologic lymph node status (+/-). The study targets an absolute difference of 5% in iDFS (control vs. experimental arm 82% & 87%, HR = 0.7), with a two-sided alpha of 0.05 and power of 80%. The sample size is 981; target accrual = 1031 pts; activation and completion dates are 01/6/21 and ̃ 01/2028. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; Seagen Inc; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04457596 Clinical trial information: NCT04457596.