Citations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) can cause radiation-induced changes (RIC), but its interactions with AVM embolization are not well established. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of previous embolization on RIC in SRS-treated AVM patients. METHODS: Data of AVM patients treated with single-session SRS from 1987 to 2018 were retrieved from the International Radiosurgery Research Foundation. Univariable and stepwise backward logistic regression models were used to identify RIC predictors. Patients were stratified into those who received pre-SRS embolization (E + SRS) vs those who did not (SRS-only). Radiologic RIC (rRIC) was the primary end point. Secondary outcomes included symptomatic RIC (sRIC) and permanent symptomatic RIC (pRIC). RESULTS: Among 1187 AVM patients, the mean age was 36.4 years (SD 16.8), with 50.4% female patients. AVMs had a mean untreated AVM volume of 5.2 cm 3 . A total of 130 patients (11%) underwent neoadjuvant embolization (E + SRS). The overall rRIC and sRIC rates were 32.8% and 12.1%, respectively, with time to rRIC and sRIC being significantly longer in the E + SRS vs SRS-only cohorts (103.6 ± 339.4 vs 11.3 ± 12.5 and 60.4 ± 262.9 vs 9.5 ± 9.0 months, respectively). Seizures at presentation and ≥3-cm untreated AVM volume significantly correlated with a higher likelihood of rRIC (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.32 [1.25-4.30] and aOR 2.77 [1.24-6.16], respectively). Age and pre-SRS embolization were associated with a significantly lower risk of rRIC (aOR 0.97 [0.96-0.99] and aOR 0.32 [0.13-0.74], respectively). The E + SRS cohort had significantly reduced odds of rRIC (aOR = 0.37 [0.15-0.89]) and pRIC (aOR = 0.04 [0.00-0.30]) after adjusting for significant covariates. CONCLUSION: Seizures at presentation and larger untreated AVM volume were independently associated with an increased risk of rRIC, whereas older age and pre-SRS embolization were protective. Notably, patients who underwent embolization before SRS had lower odds of rRIC and pRIC, with delayed onset of complications compared with SRS-only.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) with neoadjuvant embolization is a treatment strategy for brain arteriovenous malformations (AVMs), especially for those with large nidal volume or concomitant aneurysms. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of pre-SRS embolization in AVMs with an associated intracranial aneurysm (IA). METHODS: The International Radiosurgery Research Foundation AVM database from 1987 to 2018 was retrospectively reviewed. SRS-treated AVMs with IAs were included. Patients were categorized into those treated with upfront embolization (E + SRS) vs stand-alone SRS (SRS). Primary end point was a favorable outcome (AVM obliteration + no permanent radiation-induced changes or post-SRS hemorrhage). Secondary outcomes included AVM obliteration, mortality, follow-up modified Rankin Scale, post-SRS hemorrhage, and radiation-induced changes. RESULTS: Forty four AVM patients with associated IAs were included, of which 23 (52.3%) underwent pre-SRS embolization and 21 (47.7%) SRS only. Significant differences between the E + SRS vs SRS groups were found for AVM maximum diameter (1.5 ± 0.5 vs 1.1 ± 0.4 cm 3 , P = .019) and SRS treatment volume (9.3 ± 8.3 vs 4.3 ± 3.3 cm 3 , P = .025). A favorable outcome was achieved in 45.4% of patients in the E + SRS group and 38.1% in the SRS group ( P = .625). Obliteration rates were comparable (56.5% for E + SRS vs 47.6% for SRS, P = .555), whereas a higher mortality rate was found in the SRS group (19.1% vs 0%, P = .048). After adjusting for AVM maximum diameter, SRS treatment volume, and maximum radiation dose, the likelihood of achieving favorable outcome and AVM obliteration did not differ between groups ( P = .475 and P = .820, respectively). CONCLUSION: The likelihood of a favorable outcome and AVM obliteration after SRS with neoadjuvant embolization in AVMs with concomitant IA seems to be comparable with stand-alone SRS, even after adjusting for AVM volume and SRS maximum dose. However, the increased mortality among the stand-alone SRS group and relatively low risk of embolization-related complications suggest that these patients may benefit from a combined treatment approach.

Abstract Objectives To compare clinical characteristics, including the frequency of cutaneous, extramuscular manifestations and malignancy, between adults with anti-synthetase syndrome (ASyS) and DM. Methods Using data regarding adults from the MYONET registry, a cohort of DM patients with anti-Mi2/-TIF1γ/-NXP2/-SAE/-MDA5 autoantibodies, and a cohort of ASyS patients with anti-tRNA synthetase autoantibodies (anti-Jo1/-PL7/-PL12/-OJ/-EJ/-Zo/-KS) were identified. Patients with DM sine dermatitis or with discordant dual autoantibody specificities were excluded. Sub-cohorts of patients with ASyS with or without skin involvement were defined based on presence of DM-type rashes (heliotrope rash, Gottron’s papules/sign, violaceous rash, shawl sign, V-sign, erythroderma, and/or periorbital rash). Results In total 1054 patients were included (DM, n = 405; ASyS, n = 649). In the ASyS cohort, 31% (n = 203) had DM-type skin involvement (ASyS-DMskin). A higher frequency of extramuscular manifestations, including Mechanic’s hands, Raynaud’s phenomenon, arthritis, interstitial lung disease and cardiac involvement differentiated ASyS-DMskin from DM (all P < 0.001), whereas higher frequency of any of four DM-type rashes—heliotrope rash (n = 248, 61% vs n = 90, 44%), violaceous rash (n = 166, 41% vs n = 57, 9%), V-sign (n = 124, 31% vs n = 28, 4%), and shawl sign (n = 133, 33% vs n = 18, 3%)—differentiated DM from ASyS-DMskin (all P < 0.005). Cancer-associated myositis (CAM) was more frequent in DM (n = 67, 17%) compared with ASyS (n = 21, 3%) and ASyS-DMskin (n = 7, 3%) cohorts (both P < 0.001). Conclusion DM-type rashes are frequent in patients with ASyS; however, distinct clinical manifestations differentiate these patients from classical DM. Skin involvement in ASyS does not necessitate increased malignancy surveillance. These findings will inform future ASyS classification criteria and patient management.

Abstract Treatment options for glioblastoma remain limited, particularly for those who are not eligible for traditional resection, whether due to lesion location or inability to tolerate open craniotomy. Maximal-safe resection followed by radiation with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide offers the best outcomes for patients. Unfortunately, not all tumors are amenable to conventional surgical resection at the time of diagnosis with only about 1/3 of patients able to receive a gross-total resection and 15-25% of patients receiving biopsy only, thus reducing their projected overall survival to 9 months. Laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) is a minimally invasive, cytoreductive tool, that has demonstrated safety as a surgical approach to treat primary brain tumors. METHODS Data from LAANTERN prospective multicenter registry (NCT02392078) was analyzed to determine clinical outcomes for patients with new and recurrent IDH wild-type glioblastoma (N=89). Demographics, intraprocedural data, adverse events, KPS, health-economics, and survival data were prospectively collected then analyzed separately for newly diagnosed GBM (N=29) and recurrent GBM (N=60). RESULTS Median overall-survival was 9.73 months (95% CI: 5.16, 15.91) for newly diagnosed patients and median post-procedure survival was 8.97 (6.94, 12.36) months for recurrent patients. Median overall-survival for newly diagnosed patients receiving post-LITT chemoradiotherapy was 16.14 months (6.11, not reached). The median length of hospital stay was 50 hours and 80% of patients were discharged to home. CONCLUSIONS LITT offers an effective cytoreductive approach for patients with newly diagnosed and recurrent IDH wild-type glioblastoma. Importantly, its use in newly diagnosed patients who receive post-LITT chemoradiotherapy leads to a median OS similar to that of patients treated with conventional surgical resection. LITT remains an important alternative for patients with inoperable tumors or those not amenable to resection. Enrollment in LAANTERN is ongoing and these cohorts will be revisited as data continues to mature. Benefits beyond cytoreduction are also being actively explored.

AbstractIntroductionAvailable evidence is mixed concerning associations between smoking status and COVID-19 clinical outcomes. Effects of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and vaccination status on COVID-19 outcomes in smokers are unknown.MethodsElectronic health record data from 104 590 COVID-19 patients hospitalized February 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021 in 21 U.S. health systems were analyzed to assess associations of smoking status, in-hospital NRT prescription, and vaccination status with in-hospital death and ICU admission.ResultsCurrent (n = 7764) and never smokers (n = 57 454) did not differ on outcomes after adjustment for age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance, body mass index, and comorbidities. Former (vs never) smokers (n = 33 101) had higher adjusted odds of death (aOR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06–1.17) and ICU admission (aOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04–1.11). Among current smokers, NRT prescription was associated with reduced mortality (aOR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50–0.82). Vaccination effects were significantly moderated by smoking status; vaccination was more strongly associated with reduced mortality among current (aOR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.16–0.66) and former smokers (aOR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.39–0.57) than for never smokers (aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57, 0.79). Vaccination was associated with reduced ICU admission more strongly among former (aOR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.66–0.83) than never smokers (aOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79–0.97).ConclusionsFormer but not current smokers hospitalized with COVID-19 are at higher risk for severe outcomes. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is associated with better hospital outcomes in COVID-19 patients, especially current and former smokers. NRT during COVID-19 hospitalization may reduce mortality for current smokers.ImplicationsPrior findings regarding associations between smoking and severe COVID-19 disease outcomes have been inconsistent. This large cohort study suggests potential beneficial effects of nicotine replacement therapy on COVID-19 outcomes in current smokers and outsized benefits of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in current and former smokers. Such findings may influence clinical practice and prevention efforts and motivate additional research that explores mechanisms for these effects.

Abstract Background: There is mixed evidence about the relations of current versus past cancer with severe COVID-19 outcomes and how they vary by patient and cancer characteristics. Methods: Electronic health record data of 104,590 adult hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were obtained from 21 United States health systems from February 2020 through September 2021. In-hospital mortality and ICU admission were predicted from current and past cancer diagnoses. Moderation by patient characteristics, vaccination status, cancer type, and year of the pandemic was examined. Results: 6.8% of the patients had current (n = 7,141) and 6.5% had past (n = 6,749) cancer diagnoses. Current cancer predicted both severe outcomes but past cancer did not; adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for mortality were 1.58 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.46–1.70] and 1.04 (95% CI, 0.96–1.13), respectively. Mortality rates decreased over the pandemic but the incremental risk of current cancer persisted, with the increment being larger among younger vs. older patients. Prior COVID-19 vaccination reduced mortality generally and among those with current cancer (aOR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53–0.90). Conclusions: Current cancer, especially among younger patients, posed a substantially increased risk for death and ICU admission among patients with COVID-19; prior COVID-19 vaccination mitigated the risk associated with current cancer. Past history of cancer was not associated with higher risks for severe COVID-19 outcomes for most cancer types. Impact: This study clarifies the characteristics that modify the risk associated with cancer on severe COVID-19 outcomes across the first 20 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. See related commentary by Egan et al., p. 3

Abstract Background Treatment options for unresectable new and recurrent glioblastoma remain limited. Laser ablation has demonstrated safety as a surgical approach to treating primary brain tumors. The LAANTERN prospective multicenter registry (NCT02392078) data were analyzed to determine clinical outcomes for patients with new and recurrent IDH wild-type glioblastoma. Methods Demographics, intraprocedural data, adverse events, KPS, health economics, and survival data were prospectively collected and then analyzed on IDH wild-type newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastoma patients who were treated with laser ablation at 14 US centers between January 2016 and May 2019. Data were monitored for accuracy. Statistical analysis included individual variable summaries, multivariable differences in survival, and median survival numbers. Results A total of 29 new and 60 recurrent IDH wild-type WHO grade 4 glioblastoma patients were treated. Positive MGMT promoter methylation status was present in 5/29 of new and 23/60 of recurrent patients. Median physician-estimated extent of ablation was 91%-99%. Median overall survival (OS) was 9.73 months (95% confidence interval: 5.16, 15.91) for newly diagnosed patients and median post-procedure survival was 8.97 months (6.94, 12.36) for recurrent patients. Median OS for newly diagnosed patients receiving post-LITT chemo/radiation was 16.14 months (6.11, not reached). Factors associated with improved survival were MGMT promoter methylation, adjuvant chemotherapy within 12 weeks, and tumor volume <3 cc. Conclusions Laser ablation is a viable option for patients with new and recurrent glioblastoma. Median OS for IDH wild-type newly diagnosed glioblastoma is comparable to outcomes observed in other tumor resection studies when those patients undergo radiation and chemotherapy following LITT.