Feasibility of Total Endovascular Repair of the Aorta in Patients with Acute Type A Aortic Dissection: Morphological Analysis of 119 Patients.

(1) Background: This study aimed to morphologically analyze acute type A aortic dissection (aTAAD) patients for potential endovascular treatment candidates. The objective was to specify requirements for aTAAD endovascular devices. (2) Methods: A single-center retrospective analysis included aTAAD patients who underwent open surgical repair between November 2005 and December 2020. Preoperative CTA scans were used for morphological analysis, assessing endovascular repair eligibility. Statistical tests were performed. (3) Results: A total of 129 patients with aTAAD were studied, with 119 included. Entry tear (ET) locations were identified, mainly in the aortic root, 20 mm above the sinotubular junction (STJ) and within the ascending aorta (20 mm above STJ to -20 mm before the brachiocephalic trunk). Endovascular treatment was deemed feasible for 36 patients, with suggested solutions for the aortic arch and descending aorta. Significant differences were observed between eligible and noneligible groups for aortic diameter, false lumen diameter, distance between STJ and entry tear, and more. Dissection extension showed no significant difference. (4) Conclusions: Morphological analysis identified potential aTAAD candidates for endovascular treatment, highlighting differences between eligible and noneligible morphologies. This study offers insights for implementing endovascular approaches in aTAAD treatment and emphasizes the need for research and standardized protocols.

Matching-adjusted indirect comparison of isatuximab plus carfilzomib and dexamethasone with daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed multiple myeloma.

BACKGOUND: Lenalidomide-based regimens are commonly used for early relapse in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) receiving at least one prior line of therapy. In the absence of head-to-head comparison, matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was conducted to demonstrate efficacy and safety of isatuximab+carfilzomib+dexamethasone (Isa-Kd) versus daratumumab + lenalidomide + dexamethasone (Dara-Rd) in RRMM. METHODS: Patient-level data from IKEMA trial (Isa-Kd, n = 179) were matched to aggregate data from POLLUX (Dara-Rd, n = 286). Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were generated by weighted Cox proportional hazard models. Odds ratios (OR), 95% CI, and p-value were calculated for ≥very good partial response (≥VGPR) and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). RESULTS: After matching, no significant differences were observed between Isa-Kd and Dara-Rd in baseline characteristics except for patients with >3 prior lines (0.0% vs. 4.9%). Isa-Kd showed significantly better PFS (HR [95% CI]: 0.46 [0.24-0.86]; p = 0.0155), statistically non-significant improvement favoring Isa-Kd in OS (0.47 [0.20-1.09]; 0.0798), and ≥VGPR (OR [95% CI]: 1.53 [0.89-2.64]; p = 0.1252) than Dara-Rd. Odds of occurrence were significantly lower for some all-grade and grade 3/4 TEAEs with Isa-Kd than Dara-Rd. CONCLUSION: These results support Isa-Kd as an efficacious treatment for early relapse in non-lenalidomide refractory patients.

Histopathological regression after neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin versus epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil or capecitabine in patients with resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (FLOT4-AIO): results from the phase 2 part of a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2/3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Docetaxel-based chemotherapy is effective in metastatic gastric and gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, but has not yet been evaluated in the context of resectable patients. Here we report findings from the phase 2 part of the phase 2/3 FLOT4 trial, which compared histopathological regression in patients treated with a docetaxel-based triplet chemotherapy versus an anthracycline-based triplet chemotherapy before surgical resection. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, phase 2/3 study, eligible participants were recruited from 28 German oncology centres. Patients with resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer who had clinical stage cT2 or higher, nodal positive (cN+) disease, or both were randomly assigned (1:1) to either three preoperative and three postoperative 3-week cycles of intravenous epirubicin 50 mg/m2 on day 1, intravenous cisplatin 60 mg/m2 on day 1, and either fluorouracil 200 mg/m2 as continuous intravenous infusion or capecitabine 1250 mg/m2 orally (two doses of 625 mg/m2 per day) on days 1 to 21 (ECF/ECX group) or four preoperative and four postoperative 2-week cycles of docetaxel 50 mg/m2, intravenous oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, intravenous leucovorin 200 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 2600 mg/m2 as a 24 h infusion, all on day 1 (FLOT group). Randomisation was done centrally with an interactive web-response system based on a sequence generated with blocks (block size 2) stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, location of primary tumour, age, and nodal status. No masking was done. Central assessment of pathological regression was done according to the Becker criteria. The primary endpoint was pathological complete regression (tumour regression grade TRG1a) and was analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment excluding patients who had surgery but did not provide resection specimens for central evaluation. The study (including the phase 3 part) has completed enrolment, but follow-up is ongoing and this is an interim analysis. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01216644. FINDINGS: Between Aug 18, 2010, and Aug 10, 2012, 300 patients (152 patients in the ECF/ECX group; 148 patients in the FLOT group) were enrolled into the phase 2 part of the study, 265 of whom (137 in the ECF/ECX group; 128 in the FLOT group) were assessable on a modified intention-to-treat basis. 119 (93%) of 128 patients in the FLOT group and 126 (92%) of 137 patients in the ECF/ECX group were given all planned preoperative cycles of treatment. FLOT was associated with significantly higher proportions of patients achieving pathological complete regression than was ECF/ECX (20 [16%; 95% CI 10-23] of 128 patients vs eight [6%; 3-11] of 137 patients; p=0·02). 44 (40%) of 111 patients in the ECF/ECX group and 30 (25%) of 119 patients in the FLOT group had at least one serious adverse event involving a perioperative medical or surgical complication. The most common non-surgical grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (52 [38%] of 137 patients in the ECF/ECX group vs 67 [52%] of 128 patients in the FLOT group), leucopenia (28 [20%] vs 36 [28%]), nausea (23 [17%] vs 12 [9%]), infection (16 [12%] vs 15 [12%]), fatigue (19 [14%] vs 11 [9%]), and vomiting (13 [10%] vs four [3%]). INTERPRETATION: Perioperative FLOT was active and feasible to administer, and might represent an option for patients with locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastro-eosophageal junction adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: None.