Citations

Abstract The landscape of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related dementias (ADRD) diagnosis is evolving rapidly, driven by advances in disease understanding, biomarker tools, and disease‐modifying therapies. Modern diagnostic approaches emphasize biological precision, early detection, and dynamic frameworks that adapt to treatment‐induced changes in disease biology. These frameworks enable opportunities for personalized interventions—encompassing pharmacological and non‐pharmacological strategies—and for enhanced clinical trial design. However, implementing these advancements globally is influenced by diverse cultural, infrastructural, and regulatory factors. The 2024 Alzheimer's Association International Conference Advancements: Modernizing Diagnosis, held in Japan, provided a unique platform to explore these global dynamics, particularly from an Asian perspective. This article highlights key discussions from the conference, exploring the role of biomarker‐based diagnostic frameworks in shaping the future of AD/ADRD research, diagnosis, and treatment. We highlight regional challenges and successes and emphasize ethical considerations and practical strategies needed to ensure equitable access to diagnostic and therapeutic innovations. Highlights Advances in biomarkers are reshaping Alzheimer's disease diagnosis and treatment. Modern diagnostic frameworks highlight biological precision, early detection, and dynamic frameworks. The 2024 Alzheimer's Association International Conference Advancements: Modernizing Diagnosis explored challenges and opportunities in global biomarker implementation. The conference explored geographic‐specific impacts, focusing on Asia.

Abstract Background Despite advances in diagnosis and management, the interstitial lung disease (ILD) lexicon is plagued by ambiguous and inconsistent terminology that complicates communication and impedes knowledge generation. The objective of this Fleischner Society Consensus Statement was to produce standardized terminology for ILD multidisciplinary diagnoses and major phenotypes. Methods Interviews with 10 experts were used to identify ILD clinical diagnoses and major phenotypes. The preferred terms for each entity and potential alternatives were identified, alongside the rationale for the preferred term. Entities with more than one potential term were the subject of an online modified Delphi survey posed to the 29 committee members, aiming to achieve consensus. Committee members rated their agreement with the initially preferred term—5 (strongly agree), 4 (agree), 3 (neutral/unsure), 2 (disagree), and 1 (strongly disagree)—with the option to provide additional comments. Median score ≥4 and interquartile range ≤1 were considered consensus agreement. Terms not reaching agreement were discussed by video conference, followed by an additional survey that incorporated feedback. Results From the 60 initial terms, there were two root terms that required upfront consensus before survey initiation (ILD and interstitial pneumonia) and another eight terms that had no alternative suggested by the committee or in the literature. Agreement was met by 47/50 terms (94%) in Round 1 of the survey. The three terms (6%) that did not reach agreement met agreement in Round 2. Conclusions This document provides standardized recommended terms for ILD multidisciplinary diagnoses and major phenotypes that will facilitate communication among clinicians, researchers, patients, and other stakeholders.

Abstract Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) and idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel), 2 B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)–directed chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies, have transformed outcomes for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma; however, the 6 to 8 weeks manufacturing time risks disease progression or death in up to 10% of patients. Talquetamab, a G-protein–coupled receptor, family C, group 5, member D (GPRC5D)–targeting bispecific antibody, represents a promising option. We performed a multi-institutional retrospective analysis across 20 centers (18 United States, 2 Germany) evaluating talquetamab as a bridging therapy prior to cilta-cel or ide-cel. Among 134 patients receiving talquetamab, 119 proceeded to CAR-T (n = 98 cilta-cel, n = 21 ide-cel). Reasons for not proceeding (n = 15) included progression (n = 7), manufacturing failure (n = 6), or patient decision (n = 2). Median age was 65 years and had median 5 prior lines of therapy. Notably, 85% would not have met CARTITUDE-1/KarMMa eligibility criteria. Talquetamab was administered for a median 23 days. Toxicity was manageable: no grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS), 2% grade 3 immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) and grade 1 to 2 talquetamab unique toxicities (70% oral, 38% skin, and 17% nail; 60% resolved). Talquetamab achieved 71% response rate. After CAR-T, 88% responded (54% complete response), with low-grade toxicities (2 grade ≥3 CRS, 1 grade 3 ICANS, and 5% grade ≥3 infections). Two cases of facial palsy and 1 acute myeloid leukemia occurred. Talquetamab correlated with sustained soluble BCMA decline and peak CAR-T expansion around day 14. Talquetamab bridging appears safe, enabling the majority of difficult-to-treat patients to successfully proceed to BCMA CAR-T therapy.

Abstract Background Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) treatment guidelines suggest varied approaches for patients with first (frCDI) or multiply recurrent CDI (mrCDI). Low microbial diversity, elevated primary bile acids (BA), and low secondary BA concentrations favor germination of C. difficile spores into toxin-producing bacteria and are believed to increase rCDI risk. Greater understanding of the gastrointestinal (GI) microbiome in rCDI may inform management of the disease. We describe a post hoc comparison of GI microbiome and bile acid profiles between patients with frCDI and mrCDI in a Phase 3 open-label trial, ECOSPOR IV, of fecal microbiota spores, live-brpk (VOWST®; VOS, formerly SER-109), an orally-administered live microbiome therapeutic. Methods Patients received VOS following symptom resolution after standard-of-care antibiotics. Pretreatment baseline (within 3 days following antibiotic completion) and Week 1 post-dosing stool samples were collected for whole metagenomic sequencing and metabolomics. Diversity was calculated from MetaPhlAn2 species profiles. Concentrations of primary and secondary BAs were measured via targeted LC-MS/MS. Results rCDI rates through Week 8 were similarly low in both frCDI and mrCDI patients (6.5% versus 9.7%, respectively). Baseline microbial diversity was similarly low between frCDI and mrCDI subgroups (P > .05). Diversity and secondary BA concentrations increased in both subgroups, whereas primary BA concentrations declined following VOS dosing, leading to few differences between subgroups at Week 1. Conclusions These data suggest commonalities in microbiome disruption in patients with frCDI and mrCDI that contribute to recurrence and suggest that antibiotics followed by a live microbiome therapy may be an optimal treatment strategy for rCDI, regardless of number of prior CDI recurrences.

Abstract Date Presented 04/03/2025 The goal of this study is to identify current successes, limiting barriers, and overarching trends in knowledge translation, specifically as they relate to OT doctoral capstone students. Primary Author and Speaker: Christopher Taylor

Abstract Tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) is a CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy for relapsed/refractory precursor B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (R/R B-ALL). We report infectious complications for 100 days (D100) following tisa-cel therapy in 471 pediatric and young adults (median age 13.8 years) with R/R B-ALL reported from September 2017 to June 2022. By D100, 137 (29%) patients had an infectious event, with an infection density of 0.542 per 100 person-days at risk. D100 cumulative incidences of bacterial, viral, and fungal infections were 14.1%, 11.6%, and 1.3%, corresponding to infection density scores of 0.296, 0.213, and 0.033 per 100 person-days at risk, respectively. In a multivariable analysis, receipt of ≥3 lines of therapy before tisa-cel (hazard ratio [HR], 1.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-3.08; P = .015), any-grade cytokine release syndrome (HR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.17-2.71; P = .007), and lack of neutrophil recovery (HR, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.47-4.69; P = .001) were associated with an increased risk for any infection. Similar associations were observed for bacterial infections, with the addition of younger age as an adverse risk (<6 vs 6-15 years; HR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.23-4.61; P = .01). Risk factors for viral infections included increasing age (1-year increase; HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.09; P = .016), prior history of any infection (HR, 2.76, 95% CI, 1.40-5.46; P = .004), and prior hematopoietic cell transplant (HR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.18-3.71; P = .011). D100 infection-related mortality (IRM) rate was low at 0.2% (95% CI, 0.0-0.8). In this multicenter real-world study, we observed a high incidence of infectious complications but a low IRM following tisa-cel for R/R B-ALL.

ABSTRACT Background Chronic neurogastroduodenal disorders are challenging to manage, with therapy often initiated on a trial and error basis. Prokinetics play a significant role in management, but responses are variable and have been associated with adverse events, impacting widespread use. We investigated whether body surface gastric mapping (BSGM) biomarkers (using Gastric Alimetry) could inform patient selection for prokinetic therapy. Methods Patients with chronic gastroduodenal symptoms taking oral prokinetic agents, regardless of gastric emptying status, were prospectively recruited and underwent BSGM (30 m baseline, 482 kcal standardized meal, 4 h postprandial recording) while off‐prokinetic agents. Patients were followed up with daily symptom diaries. A subset was compared to matched patients not taking prokinetic agents. Prokinetic responders were defined based on symptom improvement greater than a minimum clinically important difference methodology. Key Results Forty‐two patients (88% female; median age 36; median BMI 26) taking prokinetics were analyzed. Prokinetic prescribing, compared to matched patients, was independent of BSGM metrics ( p > 0.15). In patients on existing prokinetics (withheld for BSGM), lower amplitudes predicted reduced symptom burden, whereas low rhythm stability predicted a worse symptom burden ( p < 0.05). In prokinetic‐naive patients (i.e., started on a prokinetic during the study), a lower postprandial amplitude predicted responders (mean 37.5 ± 10.6 uV in responders [ n = 5] vs. mean 54.8 ± 6.6 uV among nonresponders [ n = 3], p = 0.047). Conclusions Gastric Alimetry biomarkers may help in the prediction of prokinetic response in patients with chronic gastroduodenal symptoms. Lower postprandial amplitudes, indicating a reduced meal response, appear to predict benefit, while impaired rhythm stability predicted poorer therapeutic response.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE Patient- and family-centered rounds (PFCR) have become a pediatric standard of care. However, rounds experiences of families using languages other than English (LOE)—particularly languages other than English or Spanish (LOES; eg, Arabic)—receive less focus. We aimed to identify differences in PFCR communication and engagement by language. METHODS We analyzed postintervention data from a 21-center structured PFCR study, assessing communication practices, quality, and family and nurse engagement during PFCR. Logistic regression adjusted by site compared PFCR between families using (1) LOE vs English, (2) Spanish vs English, and (3) LOES vs English. RESULTS Among 3051 PFCR encounters, 348 (11.4%) involved LOE (Spanish = 260; LOES = 85). Interpretation was not used in 7.2%, 5.8%, and 9.4% of encounters using LOE, Spanish, and LOES, respectively. PFCR in the following groups had lower adjusted odds (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI]) for the following domains: (1) LOE vs English: including providing verbal patient summaries (0.66 [0.46–0.95]), explaining diagnoses and differentials (0.62 [0.44–0.88]), family engagement (0.34 [0.20–0.57]), nursing inclusion (0.75 [0.60–0.93]), and nursing engagement (0.69 [0.52–0.90]). (2) Spanish vs English: diagnoses/differentials being explained (0.56 [0.37–0.85]), family engagement (0.35 [0.18–0.67]), nursing inclusion (0.77 [0.59–1.00]), and nursing engagement (0.68 [0.52–0.89]). (3) LOES vs English: families sharing concerns (0.66 [0.47–0.93]), family engagement (0.30 [0.16–0.54]), and nursing inclusion (0.74 [0.55–0.99]). CONCLUSION Even after implementing a PFCR intervention, families using LOE—especially LOES—experienced significant disparities in communication and engagement. Future approaches to improving PFCR should emphasize language access and promote nurse and family engagement for families using LOE, particularly LOES.