Citations

AbstractBackgroundDiabetes mellitus (DM) in children and adolescents is typically caused by type 1 DM, followed by type 2 DM and maturity‐onset diabetes of the young (MODY). We report an unusual Asian Indian family in which three members presented with DM at ages 15, 20, and 30, but not fitting the typical clinical picture of type 1 DM, type 2 DM, or MODY. The primary objective was to elucidate the molecular genetic basis of DM in this family.MethodsThe proband, a 22‐year‐old man, had short stature, gray hair, osteoporosis, and markedly reduced subcutaneous fat on the body, especially on the extremities along with acanthosis nigricans, and developed myxoid malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor. Detailed family history revealed multiple loops of consanguinity. The proband underwent whole‐genome sequencing, and seven relatives underwent whole‐exome sequencing.ResultsThe proband and three additional family members were found to have the homozygous c.561A>G nucleotide variant of WRN RecQ‐like helicase (WRN) gene consistent with the diagnosis of Werner's syndrome. The c.561A>G variant induces a new splicing site on exon 6 resulting in a truncated WRN protein, p.Lys187Trpfs*13.ConclusionOur report brings to attention the onset of DM during childhood or early adulthood in patients with Werner's syndrome who typically develop type 2 DM around the age of 30–40 years. Presence of consanguinity among parents, dysmorphic features, and malignancy should prompt consideration of diagnosis of Werner's syndrome.

Background: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) have gained popularity in recent years as biologic approaches to potentially augment healing after meniscus repair. There have been few studies comparing outcomes in patients undergoing meniscus repair with versus without biologic augmentation and, furthermore, little clarity on the role of biologic augmentation for meniscus repairs performed with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Purpose: To determine the association of BMAC or PRP augmentation with revision surgery after both isolated meniscus repair and meniscus repair performed concomitantly with ACLR. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The PearlDiver Mariner dataset was queried to identify all patients who underwent primary meniscus repair, both with and without concomitant ACLR, and who received ipsilateral BMAC or PRP at the time of surgery. Patients who underwent similar surgery but without BMAC or PRP augmentation were then identified and matched in a 5:1 ratio according to age, sex, body mass index, and various comorbidities to 3 separate BMAC/PRP augmentation groups: overall cohort (with and without ACLR), repair with concomitant ACLR, and isolated repair. The primary outcome was revision meniscus surgery (meniscectomy or revision meniscus repair). Results: Overall, 3420 patients (570 with BMAC/PRP augmentation; 2850 matched controls without augmentation) were included. There were no significant differences in the reported demographics or comorbidities between any of the BMAC/PRP groups and their respective matched controls ( P > .05 for all comparisons). There was no difference in revision rate between BMAC/PRP-augmented isolated meniscus repairs and matched controls ( P = .235). Patients who underwent BMAC/PRP-augmented meniscus repair with concomitant ACLR experienced a significantly lower incidence of revision surgery compared with matched controls without BMAC/PRP augmentation (5.2% vs 7.9% respectively; odds ratio, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.27-0.63; P < .001), but the number of revisions was relatively small. Conclusion: There was no association between BMAC or PRP augmentation and the incidence of revision surgery after isolated primary meniscus repair. There was a statistically significant decrease in the rate of revision meniscus surgery when BMAC or PRP was used to augment meniscus repairs in the setting of concurrent ACLR; however, the overall revision rates were small.

ImportanceSystematic data on the association between anticancer therapies and thromboembolic events (TEEs) in patients with COVID-19 are lacking.ObjectiveTo assess the association between anticancer therapy exposure within 3 months prior to COVID-19 and TEEs following COVID-19 diagnosis in patients with cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis registry-based retrospective cohort study included patients who were hospitalized and had active cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data were accrued from March 2020 to December 2021 and analyzed from December 2021 to October 2022.ExposureTreatments of interest (TOIs) (endocrine therapy, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors/tyrosine kinase inhibitors [VEGFis/TKIs], immunomodulators [IMiDs], immune checkpoint inhibitors [ICIs], chemotherapy) vs reference (no systemic therapy) in 3 months prior to COVID-19.Main Outcomes and MeasuresMain outcomes were (1) venous thromboembolism (VTE) and (2) arterial thromboembolism (ATE). Secondary outcome was severity of COVID-19 (rates of intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, 30-day all-cause mortality following TEEs in TOI vs reference group) at 30-day follow-up.ResultsOf 4988 hospitalized patients with cancer (median [IQR] age, 69 [59-78] years; 2608 [52%] male), 1869 had received 1 or more TOIs. Incidence of VTE was higher in all TOI groups: endocrine therapy, 7%; VEGFis/TKIs, 10%; IMiDs, 8%; ICIs, 12%; and chemotherapy, 10%, compared with patients not receiving systemic therapies (6%). In multivariable log-binomial regression analyses, relative risk of VTE (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.33; 95% CI, 1.04-1.69) but not ATE (aRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.56-1.16) was significantly higher in those exposed to all TOIs pooled together vs those with no exposure. Among individual drugs, ICIs were significantly associated with VTE (aRR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.01-2.07). Also noted were significant associations between VTE and active and progressing cancer (aRR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.01-2.03), history of VTE (aRR, 3.10; 95% CI, 2.38-4.04), and high-risk site of cancer (aRR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.14-1.75). Black patients had a higher risk of TEEs (aRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.03-1.50) than White patients. Patients with TEEs had high intensive care unit admission (46%) and mechanical ventilation (31%) rates. Relative risk of death in patients with TEEs was higher in those exposed to TOIs vs not (aRR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.91-1.38) and was significantly associated with poor performance status (aRR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.30-2.40) and active/progressing cancer (aRR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.13-2.13).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study, relative risk of developing VTE was high among patients receiving TOIs and varied by the type of therapy, underlying risk factors, and demographics, such as race and ethnicity. These findings highlight the need for close monitoring and perhaps personalized thromboprophylaxis to prevent morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19–related thromboembolism in patients with cancer.

Background The impact of changes in Doppler‐derived kidney venous flow in heart failure (HF) is not well studied. We aimed to investigate the association of Doppler‐derived kidney venous stasis index (KVSI) and intrakidney venous‐flow (IKVF) patterns with adverse cardiorenal outcomes in patients with HF. Methods and Results In this observational cohort study, consecutive inpatients with HF referred to a nephrologist because of a history of diuretic resistance and abnormal kidney function (n=216) underwent spectral kidney assessments after admission (Doppler 1) and 25 to 35 days later (Doppler 2) to identify IKVF patterns (continuous/pulsatile/biphasic/monophasic) and KVSI levels. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to evaluate the associations between KVSI/IKVF patterns at Doppler 1 as well as changes from Doppler 1 to Doppler 2 and risk of cardiorenal events up to 18 months after admission. Worsening HF or death occurred in 126 patients. Both baseline KVSI (hazard ratio [HR], 1.49 [95% CI, 1.37–1.61] per 0.1‐unit increase) and baseline IKVF pattern (HR, 2.47 [95% CI, 2.01–3.04] per 1 pattern severity increase) were significantly associated with worsening HF/death. Increases in both KVSI and IKVF pattern severity from Doppler 1 to 2 were also associated with an increased risk of worsening HF/death (HR, 3.00 [95% CI, 2.08–4.32] per 0.1‐unit increase change; and HR, 6.73 [95% CI, 3.27–13.86] per 1 pattern increase in severity change, respectively). Similar results were observed for kidney outcomes. Conclusions Baseline kidney venous flow predicted adverse cardiorenal events, and inclusion of serial kidney venous flow in cardiorenal risk stratification could facilitate clinical decision‐making for patients with HF. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03039959.

Availability of haploidentical donors has broadened utilization of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT). Peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) are being used with increased frequency in haploidentical allo-HCT. We evaluated extent of HLA disparity (2–3/8 versus 4/8 HLA antigen mismatches) on post-allograft outcomes when using T-cell replete PBSC from haploidentical donors for acute myeloid leukemia in first complete remission. Primary objectives entailed assessing cumulative incidence of grade 2–4 acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and chronic GVHD (any grade). A total of 645 patients received a haploidentical allo-HCT from a donor with either 2–3 of 8 HLA antigen mismatches (n = 180) or with 4 of 8 HLA antigen mismatches (n = 465). Presence of 2–3 of 8 versus 4 of 8 HLA mismatches did not affect the incidence of acute GVHD (grade 2–4) and chronic GVHD (any grade). Overall survival (OS), leukemia-free survival (LFS) relapse incidence (RI), nonrelapse mortality and the composite endpoint of GVHD-free relapse-free survival were also similar among the groups. Pertaining to HLA-B leader matching effect, our analysis did not discern any difference in aforementioned post-allograft outcomes for this variable. However, in univariate analysis, absence of an antigen mismatch in HLA-DPB1 showed a trend for better OS. Notwithstanding inherent limitations associated with registry data, our results did not show an advantage of selecting a haploidentical donor with 2–3 of 8 HLA antigen mismatches over one with 4 of 8 HLA antigen mismatches when using PBSC as the cell source. Adverse cytogenetics remains a major adverse determinant of inferior OS and LFS and a higher RI. Using reduced-intensity conditioning yielded worse OS and LFS.

In Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 90-05, the maximum tolerated dose of single-fraction radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases of 21–30 mm was 18 Gy (biologically effective dose (BED) 45 Gy12). Since the patients in this study received prior brain irradiation, tolerable BED may be >45 Gy12 for de novo lesions. We investigated SRS and fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) with a higher BED for radiotherapy-naive lesions. Patients receiving SRS (19–20 Gy) and patients treated with FSRT (30–48 Gy in 3–12 fractions) with BED > 49 Gy12 for up to 4 brain metastases were compared for grade ≥ 2 radiation necrosis (RN). In the entire cohort (169 patients with 218 lesions), 1-year and 2-year RN rates were 8% after SRS vs. 2% and 13% after FSRT (p = 0.73) in per-patient analyses, and 7% after SRS vs. 7% and 10% after FSRT (p = 0.59) in per-lesion analyses. For lesions ≤ 20 mm (137 patients with 185 lesions), the RN rates were 4% (SRS) vs. 0% and 15%, respectively, (FSRT) (p = 0.60) in per-patient analyses, and 3% (SRS) vs. 0% and 11%, respectively, (FSRT) (p = 0.80) in per-lesion analyses. For lesions > 20 mm (32 patients with 33 lesions), the RN rates were 50% (SRS) vs. 9% (FSRT) (p = 0.012) in both per-patient and per-lesion analyses. In the SRS group, a lesion size > 20 mm was significantly associated with RN; in the FSRT group, lesion size had no impact on RN. Given the limitations of this study, FSRT with BED > 49 Gy12 was associated with low RN risk and may be safer than SRS for brain metastases > 20 mm.