| 1. |
- Ercan, Ayse Bahar, et al.
(author)
-
Clinical and biological landscape of constitutional mismatch-repair deficiency syndrome: an International Replication Repair Deficiency Consortium cohort study.
- 2024
-
In: The Lancet. Oncology. - 1474-5488. ; 25:5, s. 668-682
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Constitutional mismatch repair deficiency (CMMRD) syndrome is a rare and aggressive cancer predisposition syndrome. Because a scarcity of data on this condition contributes to management challenges and poor outcomes, we aimed to describe the clinical spectrum, cancer biology, and impact of genetics on patient survival in CMMRD.In this cohort study, we collected cross-sectional and longitudinal data on all patients with CMMRD, with no age limits, registered with the International Replication Repair Deficiency Consortium (IRRDC) across more than 50 countries. Clinical data were extracted from the IRRDC database, medical records, and physician-completed case record forms. The primary objective was to describe the clinical features, cancer spectrum, and biology of the condition. Secondary objectives included estimations of cancer incidence and of the impact of the specific mismatch-repair gene and genotype on cancer onset and survival, including after cancer surveillance and immunotherapy interventions.We analysed data from 201 patients (103 males, 98 females) enrolled between June 5, 2007 and Sept 9, 2022. Median age at diagnosis of CMMRD or a related cancer was 8·9 years (IQR 5·9-12·6), and median follow-up from diagnosis was 7·2 years (3·6-14·8). Endogamy among minorities and closed communities contributed to high homozygosity within countries with low consanguinity. Frequent dermatological manifestations (117 [93%] of 126 patients with complete data) led to a clinical overlap with neurofibromatosis type 1 (35 [28%] of 126). 339 cancers were reported in 194 (97%) of 201 patients. The cumulative cancer incidence by age 18 years was 90% (95% CI 80-99). Median time between cancer diagnoses for patients with more than one cancer was 1·9 years (IQR 0·8-3·9). Neoplasms developed in 15 organs and included early-onset adult cancers. CNS tumours were the most frequent (173 [51%] cancers), followed by gastrointestinal (75 [22%]), haematological (61 [18%]), and other cancer types (30 [9%]). Patients with CNS tumours had the poorest overall survival rates (39% [95% CI 30-52] at 10 years from diagnosis; log-rank p<0·0001 across four cancer types), followed by those with haematological cancers (67% [55-82]), gastrointestinal cancers (89% [81-97]), and other solid tumours (96% [88-100]). All cancers showed high mutation and microsatellite indel burdens, and pathognomonic mutational signatures. MLH1 or MSH2 variants caused earlier cancer onset than PMS2 or MSH6 variants, and inferior survival (overall survival at age 15 years 63% [95% CI 55-73] for PMS2, 49% [35-68] for MSH6, 19% [6-66] for MLH1, and 0% for MSH2; p<0·0001). Frameshift or truncating variants within the same gene caused earlier cancers and inferior outcomes compared with missense variants (p<0·0001). The greater deleterious effects of MLH1 and MSH2 variants as compared with PMS2 and MSH6 variants persisted despite overall improvements in survival after surveillance or immune checkpoint inhibitor interventions.The very high cancer burden and unique genomic landscape of CMMRD highlight the benefit of comprehensive assays in timely diagnosis and precision approaches toward surveillance and immunotherapy. These data will guide the clinical management of children and patients who survive into adulthood with CMMRD.The Canadian Institutes for Health Research, Stand Up to Cancer, Children's Oncology Group National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program, Canadian Cancer Society, Brain Canada, The V Foundation for Cancer Research, BioCanRx, Harry and Agnieszka Hall, Meagan's Walk, BRAINchild Canada, The LivWise Foundation, St Baldrick Foundation, Hold'em for Life, and Garron Family Cancer Center.
|
|
| 2. |
- Krag, Mette, et al.
(author)
-
Prevalence and outcome of gastrointestinal bleeding and use of acid suppressants in acutely ill adult intensive care patients
- 2015
-
In: Intensive Care Medicine. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0342-4642 .- 1432-1238. ; 41:5, s. 833-845
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- To describe the prevalence of, risk factors for, and prognostic importance of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and use of acid suppressants in acutely ill adult intensive care patients. We included adults without GI bleeding who were acutely admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) during a 7-day period. The primary outcome was clinically important GI bleeding in ICU, and the analyses included estimations of baseline risk factors and potential associations with 90-day mortality. A total of 1,034 patients in 97 ICUs in 11 countries were included. Clinically important GI bleeding occurred in 2.6 % (95 % confidence interval 1.6-3.6 %) of patients. The following variables at ICU admission were independently associated with clinically important GI bleeding: three or more co-existing diseases (odds ratio 8.9, 2.7-28.8), co-existing liver disease (7.6, 3.3-17.6), use of renal replacement therapy (6.9, 2.7-17.5), co-existing coagulopathy (5.2, 2.3-11.8), acute coagulopathy (4.2, 1.7-10.2), use of acid suppressants (3.6, 1.3-10.2) and higher organ failure score (1.4, 1.2-1.5). In ICU, 73 % (71-76 %) of patients received acid suppressants; most received proton pump inhibitors. In patients with clinically important GI bleeding, crude and adjusted odds for mortality were 3.7 (1.7-8.0) and 1.7 (0.7-4.3), respectively. In ICU patients clinically important GI bleeding is rare, and acid suppressants are frequently used. Co-existing diseases, liver failure, coagulopathy and organ failures are the main risk factors for GI bleeding. Clinically important GI bleeding was not associated with increased adjusted 90-day mortality, which largely can be explained by severity of comorbidity, other organ failures and age.
|
|
| 3. |
- Lipcsey, Miklós, et al.
(author)
-
Abdominal Septic Shock - Endotoxin Adsorption Treatment (ASSET) - endotoxin removal in abdominal and urogenital septic shock with the Alteco (R) LPS Adsorber : study protocol for a double-blinded, randomized placebo-controlled trial
- 2016
-
In: Trials. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1745-6215. ; 17
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Severe sepsis and septic shock are common in intensive care and carry high mortality rates. In patients with Gram-negative infections, early and extensive removal of endotoxin may limit the inflammatory response that characterizes septic shock. The Alteco (R) LPS Adsorber (hereafter referred to cited as the lipopolysaccharide (LPS) Adsorber) can be used for endotoxin removal and attenuate the deleterious inflammatory and clinical responses seen in septic shock. Methods/design: The Abdominal Septic Shock - Endotoxin Adsorption Treatment (ASSET) trial is a pilot study investigating the feasibility and safety of LPS Adsorber therapy. This pilot, multicenter, stratified, parallel, double-blinded, randomized, phase IIa, feasibility clinical investigation will be performed in five Scandinavian intensive care units. Thirty-two subjects with early septic shock and organ failure, following adequate resuscitation, will be randomized to receive either: extracorporeal veno-venous hemoperfusion therapy with the LPS Adsorber or veno-venous hemoperfusion therapy with a placebo adsorber (without active LPS-binding peptide). Patients will be stratified by infection focus such that 20 subjects with an abdominal focus (stratum A) and 12 subjects with a urogenital focus (stratum B) will be included in a parallel design. Thereafter, an interim analysis will be performed and an additional 12 patients may be included in the study. The study is designed as adaptive a priori: the patients from this study can be included in a later phase IIb study. The aim of the study is to investigate the feasibility of LPS Adsorber therapy commenced early in the time-course of septic shock. The primary endpoint will be a characterization of all reported unanticipated serious adverse device effects and anticipated serious adverse device effects. Secondary outcomes are decrease in endotoxin plasma concentration, impact on clinical outcome measures and impact on inflammatory response by LPS Adsorber therapy, as well as detailed description of the relevant mediators bound to the LPS Adsorber. Recruitment of patients will start in September 2015. Discussion: The ASSET trial will give insight into the feasibility and safety of this LPS Adsorber therapy and preliminary data on its potential clinical effects in septic shock. Moreover, this pilot trial will provide with necessary data for designing future studies.
|
|
| 4. |
- Lipcsey, Miklós, et al.
(author)
-
Endotoxin removal in septic shock with the Alteco LPS adsorber was safe but showed no benefit compared to placebo in the double-blind randomized controlled trial-the asset study
- 2020
-
In: Shock. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 1073-2322 .- 1540-0514. ; 54:2, s. 224-231
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Purpose: Lipopolysaccharides (LPS) are presumed to contribute to the inflammatory response in sepsis. We investigated if extracorporeal Alteco LPS Adsorber for LPS removal in early gram-negative septic shock was feasible and safe. Also, effects on endotoxin level, inflammatory response, and organ function were assessed.Methods: A pilot, double-blinded, randomized, Phase IIa, feasibility clinical investigation was undertaken in six Scandinavian intensive care units aiming to allocate 32 septic shock patients with abdominal or urogenital focus on LPS Adsorber therapy or a Sham Adsorber, therapy without active LPS binding. The study treatment was initiated within 12 h of inclusion and given for 6 h daily on first 2 days. LPS was measured in all patients.Results: The investigation was terminated after 527 days with eight patients included in the LPS Adsorber group and seven in the Sham group. Twenty-one adverse effects, judged not to be related to the device, were reported in three patients in the LPS Adsorber group and two in the Sham group. Two patients in the Sham group and no patients in the LPS Adsorber group died within 28 days. Plasma LPS levels were low without groups differences during or after adsorber therapy. The changes in inflammatory markers and organ function were similar in the groups.Conclusions: In a small cohort of patients with presumed gram-negative septic shock, levels of circulating endotoxin were low and no adverse effects within 28 days after LPS adsorber-treatment were observed. No benefit compared with a sham device was seen when using a LPS adsorber in addition to standard care.
|
|
