Cork University Hospital

Abida W., Patnaik A., Campbell D., Shapiro J., Bryce A.H., McDermott R., Sautois B., Vogelzang N.J., Bambury R.M., Voog E., Zhang J., Piulats J.M., Ryan C.J., Merseburger A.S., Daugaard G., et. al.

PURPOSE BRCA1 or BRCA2 ( BRCA) alterations are common in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and may confer sensitivity to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. We present results from patients with mCRPC associated with a BRCA alteration treated with rucaparib 600 mg twice daily in the phase II TRITON2 study. METHODS We enrolled patients who progressed after one to two lines of next-generation androgen receptor–directed therapy and one taxane-based chemotherapy for mCRPC. Efficacy and safety populations included patients with a deleterious BRCA alteration who received ≥ 1 dose of rucaparib. Key efficacy end points were objective response rate (ORR; per RECIST/Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 in patients with measurable disease as assessed by blinded, independent radiology review and by investigators) and locally assessed prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (≥ 50% decrease from baseline) rate. RESULTS Efficacy and safety populations included 115 patients with a BRCA alteration with or without measurable disease. Confirmed ORRs per independent radiology review and investigator assessment were 43.5% (95% CI, 31.0% to 56.7%; 27 of 62 patients) and 50.8% (95% CI, 38.1% to 63.4%; 33 of 65 patients), respectively. The confirmed PSA response rate was 54.8% (95% CI, 45.2% to 64.1%; 63 of 115 patients). ORRs were similar for patients with a germline or somatic BRCA alteration and for patients with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 alteration, while a higher PSA response rate was observed in patients with a BRCA2 alteration. The most frequent grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse event was anemia (25.2%; 29 of 115 patients). CONCLUSION Rucaparib has antitumor activity in patients with mCRPC and a deleterious BRCA alteration, but with a manageable safety profile consistent with that reported in other solid tumor types.

Fizazi K., Foulon S., Carles J., Roubaud G., McDermott R., Fléchon A., Tombal B., Supiot S., Berthold D., Ronchin P., Kacso G., Gravis G., Calabro F., Berdah J., Hasbini A., et. al.

SummaryBackground Current standard of care for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer supplements androgen deprivation therapy with either docetaxel, second-generation hormonal therapy, or radiotherapy. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of abiraterone plus prednisone, with or without radiotherapy, in addition to standard of care. Methods We conducted an open-label, randomised, phase 3 study with a 2 × 2 factorial design (PEACE-1) at 77 hospitals across Belgium, France, Ireland, Italy, Romania, Spain, and Switzerland. Eligible patients were male, aged 18 years or older, with histologically confirmed or cytologically confirmed de novo metastatic prostate adenocarcinoma, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–1 (or 2 due to bone pain). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to standard of care (androgen deprivation therapy alone or with intravenous docetaxel 75 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks), standard of care plus radiotherapy, standard of care plus abiraterone (oral 1000 mg abiraterone once daily plus oral 5 mg prednisone twice daily), or standard of care plus radiotherapy plus abiraterone. Neither the investigators nor the patients were masked to treatment allocation. The coprimary endpoints were radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival. Abiraterone efficacy was first assessed in the overall population and then in the population who received androgen deprivation therapy with docetaxel as standard of care (population of interest). This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01957436. Findings Between Nov 27, 2013, and Dec 20, 2018, 1173 patients were enrolled (one patient subsequently withdrew consent for analysis of his data) and assigned to receive standard of care (n=296), standard of care plus radiotherapy (n=293), standard of care plus abiraterone (n=292), or standard of care plus radiotherapy plus abiraterone (n=291). Median follow-up was 3·5 years (IQR 2·8–4·6) for radiographic progression-free survival and 4·4 years (3·5–5·4) for overall survival. Adjusted Cox regression modelling revealed no interaction between abiraterone and radiotherapy, enabling the pooled analysis of abiraterone efficacy. In the overall population, patients assigned to receive abiraterone (n=583) had longer radiographic progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0·54, 99·9% CI 0·41–0·71; p

Solovyev R., Wang W., Gabruseva T.

Object detection is a crucial task in computer vision systems with a wide range of applications in autonomous driving, medical imaging, retail, security, face recognition, robotics, and others. Nowadays, neural networks-based models are used to localize and classify instances of objects of particular classes. When real-time inference is not required, ensembles of models help to achieve better results. In this work, we present a novel method for fusing predictions from different object detection models: weighted boxes fusion. Our algorithm utilizes confidence scores of all proposed bounding boxes to construct averaged boxes. We tested the method on several datasets and evaluated it in the context of Open Images and COCO Object Detection challenges, achieving top results in these challenges. The 3D version of boxes fusion was successfully applied by the winning teams of Waymo Open Dataset and Lyft 3D Object Detection for Autonomous Vehicles challenges. The source code is publicly available at GitHub (Solovyev, 2019 [31] ). We present a novel method for combining predictions in ensembles of different object detection models: weighted boxes fusion. This method significantly improves the quality of the fused predicted rectangles for an ensemble. We tested the method on several datasets and evaluated it in the context of the Open Images and COCO Object Detection challenges. It helped to achieve top results in these challenges. The source code is publicly available at GitHub. • Novel method was proposed for combining predictions in ensembles of different object detection models. • Method significantly improves the quality of the fused predicted rectangles for an ensemble. The code is available at GitHub. • Method was tested on several datasets and evaluated in the context of the Open Images and COCO Object Detection challenges.

Ryan P.M., Caplice N.M.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the worst pandemic in more than a century, has claimed >125,000 lives worldwide to date. Emerging predictors for poor outcomes include advanced age, male sex, preexisting cardiovascular disease, and risk factors including hypertension, diabetes, and, more recently, obesity. This article posits new obesity-driven predictors of poor COVID-19 outcomes, over and above the more obvious extant risks associated with obesity, including cardiometabolic disease and hypoventilation syndrome in intensive care patients. This article also outlines a theoretical mechanistic framework whereby adipose tissue in individuals with obesity may act as a reservoir for more extensive viral spread, with increased shedding, immune activation, and cytokine amplification. This paper proposes studies to test this reservoir concept with a focus on specific cytokine pathways that might be amplified in individuals with obesity and COVID-19. Finally, this paper underscores emerging therapeutic strategies that might benefit subsets of patients in which cytokine amplification is excessive and potentially fatal.

Monk B.J., Parkinson C., Lim M.C., O'Malley D.M., Oaknin A., Wilson M.K., Coleman R.L., Lorusso D., Bessette P., Ghamande S., Christopoulou A., Provencher D., Prendergast E., Demirkiran F., Mikheeva O., et. al.

PURPOSE ATHENA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03522246 ) was designed to evaluate rucaparib first-line maintenance treatment in a broad patient population, including those without BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) mutations or other evidence of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), or high-risk clinical characteristics such as residual disease. We report the results from the ATHENA–MONO comparison of rucaparib versus placebo. METHODS Patients with stage III-IV high-grade ovarian cancer undergoing surgical cytoreduction (R0/complete resection permitted) and responding to first-line platinum-doublet chemotherapy were randomly assigned 4:1 to oral rucaparib 600 mg twice a day or placebo. Stratification factors were HRD test status, residual disease after chemotherapy, and timing of surgery. The primary end point of investigator-assessed progression-free survival was assessed in a step-down procedure, first in the HRD population (BRCA-mutant or BRCA wild-type/loss of heterozygosity high tumor), and then in the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS As of March 23, 2022 (data cutoff), 427 and 111 patients were randomly assigned to rucaparib or placebo, respectively (HRD population: 185 v 49). Median progression-free survival (95% CI) was 28.7 months (23.0 to not reached) with rucaparib versus 11.3 months (9.1 to 22.1) with placebo in the HRD population (log-rank P = .0004; hazard ratio [HR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.72); 20.2 months (15.2 to 24.7) versus 9.2 months (8.3 to 12.2) in the intent-to-treat population (log-rank P < .0001; HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.68); and 12.1 months (11.1 to 17.7) versus 9.1 months (4.0 to 12.2) in the HRD-negative population (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.95). The most common grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events were anemia (rucaparib, 28.7% v placebo, 0%) and neutropenia (14.6% v 0.9%). CONCLUSION Rucaparib monotherapy is effective as first-line maintenance, conferring significant benefit versus placebo in patients with advanced ovarian cancer with and without HRD.

O’Mahony D., Cherubini A., Guiteras A.R., Denkinger M., Beuscart J., Onder G., Gudmundsson A., Cruz-Jentoft A.J., Knol W., Bahat G., van der Velde N., Petrovic M., Curtin D.

Abstract Purpose STOPP/START is a physiological systems-based explicit set of criteria that attempts to define the clinically important prescribing problems relating to potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs–STOPP criteria) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs–START criteria). The previous two versions of STOPP/START criteria were published in 2008 and 2015. The present study describes the revised and updated third version of the criteria. Methods A detailed system-by-system review of the published literature from April 2014 to March 2022 was undertaken with the aim of including clinically important new explicit PIM and PPO criteria and removing any criteria considered to be no longer correct or outdated. A panel of 11 academic physicians with recognized expertise in geriatric pharmacotherapy from 8 European countries participated in a Delphi panel with the task of validating the draft criteria. The panel was presented with the draft new criteria using the SurveyMonkey® on-line platform in which panelists were asked to indicate their level of agreement on a five-point Likert scale. Results Two hundred and four evidence-based draft criteria (one hundred and forty-five STOPP criteria, fifty-nine START criteria) were presented to panelists for assessment using the Delphi validation method. Over the course of four rounds of Delphi validation, the panel achieved consensus on 133 STOPP criteria and 57 START criteria, i.e., 190 STOPP/START criteria in total representing a 66.7% increase in the number of criteria compared to STOPP/START version 2 published in 2015. Conclusion A fully revised and updated version of STOPP/START criteria has been validated by a European expert panel using the Delphi consensus process.

Drake T.M., Docherty A.B., Harrison E.M., Quint J.K., Adamali H., Agnew S., Babu S., Barber C.M., Barratt S., Bendstrup E., Bianchi S., Villegas D.C., Chaudhuri N., Chua F., Coker R., et. al.

Rationale: The impact of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) has not been established.Objectives: To assess outcomes in patients with ILD hospitalized for COVID-19 versus those without ILD in a contemporaneous age-, sex-, and comorbidity-matched population.Methods: An international multicenter audit of patients with a prior diagnosis of ILD admitted to the hospital with COVID-19 between March 1 and May 1, 2020, was undertaken and compared with patients without ILD, obtained from the ISARIC4C (International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium) cohort, admitted with COVID-19 over the same period. The primary outcome was survival. Secondary analysis distinguished idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis from non-idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis ILD and used lung function to determine the greatest risks of death.Measurements and Main Results: Data from 349 patients with ILD across Europe were included, of whom 161 were admitted to the hospital with laboratory or clinical evidence of COVID-19 and eligible for propensity score matching. Overall mortality was 49% (79/161) in patients with ILD with COVID-19. After matching, patients with ILD with COVID-19 had significantly poorer survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.60; confidence interval, 1.17-2.18; P = 0.003) than age-, sex-, and comorbidity-matched controls without ILD. Patients with an FVC of

Valgimigli M., Gragnano F., Branca M., Franzone A., Baber U., Jang Y., Kimura T., Hahn J., Zhao Q., Windecker S., Gibson C.M., Kim B., Watanabe H., Song Y.B., Zhu Y., et. al.

Abstract Objective To assess the risks and benefits of P2Y 12 inhibitor monotherapy compared with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and whether these associations are modified by patients’ characteristics. Design Individual patient level meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources Searches were conducted in Ovid Medline, Embase, and three websites ( www.tctmd.com , www.escardio.org , www.acc.org/cardiosourceplus ) from inception to 16 July 2020. The primary authors provided individual participant data. Eligibility criteria Randomised controlled trials comparing effects of oral P2Y 12 monotherapy and DAPT on centrally adjudicated endpoints after coronary revascularisation in patients without an indication for oral anticoagulation. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was a composite of all cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke, tested for non-inferiority against a margin of 1.15 for the hazard ratio. The key safety endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 or type 5 bleeding. Results The meta-analysis included data from six trials, including 24 096 patients. The primary outcome occurred in 283 (2.95%) patients with P2Y 12 inhibitor monotherapy and 315 (3.27%) with DAPT in the per protocol population (hazard ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 1.09; P=0.005 for non-inferiority; P=0.38 for superiority; τ 2 =0.00) and in 303 (2.94%) with P2Y 12 inhibitor monotherapy and 338 (3.36%) with DAPT in the intention to treat population (0.90, 0.77 to 1.05; P=0.18 for superiority; τ 2 =0.00). The treatment effect was consistent across all subgroups, except for sex (P for interaction=0.02), suggesting that P2Y 12 inhibitor monotherapy lowers the risk of the primary ischaemic endpoint in women (hazard ratio 0.64, 0.46 to 0.89) but not in men (1.00, 0.83 to 1.19). The risk of bleeding was lower with P2Y 12 inhibitor monotherapy than with DAPT (97 (0.89%) v 197 (1.83%); hazard ratio 0.49, 0.39 to 0.63; P<0.001; τ 2 =0.03), which was consistent across subgroups, except for type of P2Y 12 inhibitor (P for interaction=0.02), suggesting greater benefit when a newer P2Y 12 inhibitor rather than clopidogrel was part of the DAPT regimen. Conclusions P2Y 12 inhibitor monotherapy was associated with a similar risk of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, with evidence that this association may be modified by sex, and a lower bleeding risk compared with DAPT. Registration PROSPERO CRD42020176853.

El-Boghdadly K., Wolmarans M., Stengel A.D., Albrecht E., Chin K.J., Elsharkawy H., Kopp S., Mariano E.R., Xu J.L., Adhikary S., Altıparmak B., Barrington M.J., Bloc S., Blanco R., Boretsky K., et. al.

BackgroundThere 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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsSixty 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.ConclusionsHarmonization 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.

Jeffery I.B., Das A., O’Herlihy E., Coughlan S., Cisek K., Moore M., Bradley F., Carty T., Pradhan M., Dwibedi C., Shanahan F., O’Toole P.W.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a heterogeneous disorder, but diagnoses and determination of subtypes are made based on symptoms. We profiled the fecal microbiomes of patients with and without IBS to identify biomarkers of this disorder.We collected fecal and urine samples from 80 patients with IBS (Rome IV criteria; 16-70 years old) and 65 matched individuals without IBS (control individuals), along with anthropometric, medical, and dietary information. Shotgun and 16S ribosomal RNA amplicon sequencing were performed on feces, whereas urine and fecal metabolites were analyzed by gas chromatography and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Co-occurrence networks were generated based on significant Spearman correlations between data. Bile acid malabsorption (BAM) was identified in patients with diarrhea by retention of radiolabeled selenium-75 homocholic acid taurine.Patients with IBS had significant differences in network connections between diet and fecal microbiomes compared with control individuals; these were accompanied by differences in fecal metabolomes. We did not find significant differences in fecal microbiota composition among patients with different IBS symptom subtypes. Fecal metabolome profiles could discriminate patients with IBS from control individuals. Urine metabolomes also differed significantly between patients with IBS and control individuals, but most discriminatory metabolites were related to diet or medications. Fecal metabolomes, but not microbiomes, could distinguish patients with IBS with vs those without BAM.Despite the heterogeneity of IBS, patients have significant differences in urine and fecal metabolomes and fecal microbiome vs control individuals, independent of symptom-based subtypes of IBS. Fecal metabolome analysis can be used to distinguish patients with IBS with vs those without BAM. These findings might be used for developing microbe-based treatments for these disorders.