A Predictive Noninvasive Single-Nucleotide Variation-Based Biomarker Signature for Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: Protocol for a Prospective Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: Single-nucleotide variations (SNVs; formerly SNPs) are inherited genetic variants that can be easily determined in routine clinical practice using a simple blood or saliva test. SNVs have potential to serve as noninvasive biomarkers for predicting cancer-specific patient outcomes after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Two recent analyses led to the identification and validation of three SNVs in the CD44 and CHI3L2 genes (rs187115, rs353630, and rs684559), which can be used as predictive biomarkers to help select patients most likely to benefit from pancreatic resection. These variants were associated with an over 2-fold increased risk for tumor-related death in three independent PDAC study cohorts from Europe and the United States, including The Cancer Genome Atlas cohorts (reaching a P value of 1×10-8). However, these analyses were limited by the inherent biases of a retrospective study design, such as selection and publication biases, thereby limiting the clinical use of these promising biomarkers in guiding PDAC therapy. OBJECTIVE: To overcome the limitations of previous retrospectively designed studies and translate the findings into clinical practice, we aim to validate the association of the identified SNVs with survival in a controlled setting using a prospective cohort of patients with PDAC following pancreatic resection. METHODS: All patients with PDAC who will undergo pancreatic resection at three participating hospitals in Switzerland and fulfill the inclusion criteria will be included in the study consecutively. The SNV genotypes will be determined using standard genotyping techniques from patient blood samples. For each genotyped locus, log-rank and Cox multivariate regression tests will be performed, accounting for the relevant covariates American Joint Committee on Cancer stage and resection status. Clinical follow-up data will be collected for at least 3 years. Sample size calculation resulted in a required sample of 150 patients to sufficiently power the analysis. RESULTS: The follow-up data collection started in August 2019 and the estimated end of data collection will be in May 2027. The study is still recruiting participants and 142 patients have been recruited as of November 2023. The DNA extraction and genotyping of the SNVs will be performed after inclusion of the last patient. Since no SNV genotypes have been determined, no data analysis has been performed to date. The results are expected to be published in 2027. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first prospective study of the CD44 and CHI3L2 SNV-based biomarker signature in PDAC. A prospective validation of this signature would enable its clinical use as a noninvasive predictive biomarker of survival after pancreatic resection that is readily available at the time of diagnosis and can assist in guiding PDAC therapy. The results of this study may help to individualize treatment decisions and potentially improve patient outcomes. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/54042.

Clinical outcomes of patients with severe aortic stenosis at increased surgical risk according to treatment modality.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the role of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) compared with medical treatment (MT) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) at increased surgical risk. BACKGROUND: Elderly patients with comorbidities are at considerable risk for SAVR. METHODS: Since July 2007, 442 patients with severe AS (age: 81.7 ± 6.0 years, mean logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation: 22.3 ± 14.6%) underwent treatment allocation to MT (n = 78), SAVR (n = 107), or TAVI (n = 257) on the basis of a comprehensive evaluation protocol as part of a prospective registry. RESULTS: Baseline clinical characteristics were similar among patients allocated to MT and TAVI, whereas patients allocated to SAVR were younger (p < 0.001) and had a lower predicted peri-operative risk (p < 0.001). Unadjusted rates of all-cause mortality at 30 months were lower for SAVR (22.4%) and TAVI (22.6%) compared with MT (61.5%, p < 0.001). Adjusted hazard ratios for death were 0.51 (95% confidence interval: 0.30 to 0.87) for SAVR compared with MT and 0.38 (95% confidence interval: 0.25 to 0.58) for TAVI compared with MT. Medical treatment (<0.001), older age (>80 years, p = 0.01), peripheral vascular disease (<0.001), and atrial fibrillation (p = 0.04) were significantly associated with all-cause mortality at 30 months in the multivariate analysis. At 1 year, more patients undergoing SAVR (92.3%) or TAVI (93.2%) had New York Heart Association functional class I/II as compared with patients with MT (70.8%, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with severe AS with increased surgical risk, SAVR and TAVI improve survival and symptoms compared with MT. Clinical outcomes of TAVI and SAVR seem similar among carefully selected patients with severe symptomatic AS at increased risk.

Clinical outcome and predictors for adverse events after transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the use of different devices and access routes.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a treatment option for high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. Previous reports focused on a single device or access site, whereas little is known of the combined use of different devices and access sites as selected by the heart team. The purpose of this study is to investigate clinical outcomes of TAVI using different devices and access sites. METHODS: A consecutive cohort of 200 patients underwent TAVI with the Medtronic CoreValve Revalving system (Medtronic Core Valve LLC, Irvine, CA; n = 130) or the Edwards SAPIEN valve (Edwards Lifesciences LLC, Irvine, CA; n = 70) implanted by either the transfemoral or transapical access route. RESULTS: Device success and procedure success were 99% and 95%, respectively, without differences between devices and access site. All-cause mortality was 7.5% at 30 days, with no differences between valve types or access sites. Using multivariable analysis, low body mass index (<20 kg/m(2)) (odds ratio [OR] 6.6, 95% CI 1.5-29.5) and previous stroke (OR 4.4, 95% CI 1.2-16.8) were independent risk factors for short-term mortality. The VARC-defined combined safety end point occurred in 18% of patients and was driven by major access site complications (8.0%), life-threatening bleeding (8.5%) or severe renal failure (4.5%). Transapical access emerged as independent predictor of adverse outcome for the Valve Academic Research Consortium-combined safety end point (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.5-7.1). CONCLUSION: A heart team-based selection of devices and access site among patients undergoing TAVI resulted in high device and procedural success. Low body mass index and history of previous stroke were independent predictors of mortality. Transapical access emerged as a risk factor for the Valve Academic Research Consortium-combined safety end point.