Multiomics Profiling Distinguishes Sebaceous Carcinoma from Benign Sebaceous Neoplasms and Provides Insight into the Genetic Evolution of Sebaceous Carcinogenesis.

PURPOSE: Sebaceous carcinoma is the third most common nonkeratinocyte skin cancer in the United States with 1,000 cases per year. The clinicopathologic features of sebaceous carcinoma and benign sebaceous neoplasms (adenomas, sebaceomas) can overlap, highlighting the need for molecular biomarkers to improve classification. This study describes the genomic and transcriptomic landscape of sebaceous neoplasms in order to understand tumor etiology and biomarkers relevant for diagnosis and treatment. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We performed whole-genome sequencing (WGS) and whole-transcriptome sequencing (WTS) of sebaceous neoplasms from six academic and two federal healthcare facilities in the United States diagnosed between January 1, 1999, and December 31, 2021. RESULTS: We evaluated 98 sebaceous neoplasms: 64 tumors (32 adenomas, 2 sebaceomas, 5 atypical sebaceous neoplasms, 25 carcinomas) had sufficient material for WGS, 96 tumors (42 adenomas, 11 sebaceomas, 8 atypical sebaceous neoplasms, 35 carcinomas) had sufficient material for WTS, and 62 tumors (31 adenomas, 2 sebaceomas, 5 atypical sebaceous neoplasms, 24 carcinomas) had sufficient material for combined WGS and WTS. Overall, we found decreased cholesterol biosynthesis and increased TP53 mutations, copy number gains (chromosome 6, 8q, and/or 18), and tumor mutation burden-high (>10 mutations/MB) in carcinomas compared to adenomas. Although diminished compared to adenomas, most carcinomas still had higher cholesterol biosynthesis than nonmalignant skin. Multiomics profiling also supported a precancerous model of tumor evolution with sebaceomas and atypical sebaceous neoplasms being likely intermediate lesions. CONCLUSIONS: The study findings highlight key diagnostic biomarkers for sebaceous carcinoma and suggest that immunotherapy and modulation of cholesterol biosynthesis could be effective treatment strategies.

Survival Among Veterans Receiving Steroids for Immune-Related Adverse Events After Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy.

Importance: Systemic steroids are commonly used to manage immune-related adverse events (irAEs), but it remains unclear whether they may undermine immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy outcomes. Few studies have assessed the impact of steroid timing and its association with continuation or cessation of ICI therapy. Objective: To characterize how systemic steroids and steroid timing for irAEs are associated with survival in patients receiving ICI therapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter retrospective cohort study encompassed veterans receiving ICI for cancer between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2021. Data analysis was conducted September 8, 2023. Exposures: Identifiable primary diagnosis of cancer. Patients were categorized into 3 cohorts: those receiving no steroids, systemic steroids for irAEs, and steroids for non-irAE-associated reasons. All eligible patients received 1 or more doses of an ICI (atezolizumab, avelumab, cemiplimab, durvalumab, ipilimumab, nivolumab, or pembrolizumab). Eligible patients in the steroid group received at least 1 dose (intravenous, intramuscular, or oral) of dexamethasone, hydrocortisone, methylprednisolone, prednisone, or prednisolone. Steroid use at baseline for palliation or infusion prophylaxis or delivered as a single dose was deemed to be non-irAE associated. All other patterns of steroid use were assumed to be for irAEs. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was overall survival, with a 5-year follow-up after ICI initiation. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were performed with pairwise log-rank tests to determine significance. Risk was modeled with Cox proportional hazard regression. Results: The cohort consisted of 20 163 veterans receiving ICI therapy including 12 221 patients (mean [SD] age, 69.5 [8.0] years; 11 830 male patients [96.8%]; 9394 White patients [76.9%]) who received systemic steroids during ICI treatment and 7942 patients (mean [SD] age, 70.3 [8.5] years; 7747 male patients [97.5%]; 6085 White patients [76.6%]) who did not. Patients with an irAE diagnosis had significantly improved overall survival (OS) compared with those without (median [IQR] OS, 17.4 [6.6 to 48.5] months vs 10.5 [3.5 to 36.8] months; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.81-0.84; P < .001). For patients with irAEs, systemic steroids for irAEs were associated with significantly improved survival compared with those who received steroids for non-irAE-related reasons or no steroid treatment (median [IQR] OS, 21.3 [9.3 to 58.2] months vs 13.6 [5.5 to 33.7] months vs 15.8 [4.9 to not reached] months; P <.001). However, among those who received steroids for irAEs, early steroid use (<2 months after ICI initiation) was associated with reduced relative survival benefit vs later steroid use, regardless of ICI continuation or cessation following steroid initiation (median [IQR] OS after ICI cessation 4.4 [1.9 to 19.5] months vs 16.0 [8.0 to 42.2] months; median [IQR] OS after ICI continuation, 16.0 [7.1 to not reached] months vs 29.2 [16.5 to 53.5] months; P <.001). Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that steroids for irAE management may not abrogate irAE-associated survival benefits. However, early steroid administration within 2 months of ICI initiation is associated with shorter survival despite continuation of ICI therapy.

Risk of Cardiovascular Events After COVID-19.

We aimed to determine absolute and relative risks of either symptomatic or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection for late cardiovascular (CV) events and all-cause mortality. We conducted a retrospective double cohort study of patients with either symptomatic or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19+ cohort) and its documented absence (COVID-19- cohort). The study investigators drew a simple random sample of records from all patients under the Oregon Health & Science University Healthcare (n = 65,585), with available COVID-19 test results, performed March 1, 2020 to September 13, 2020. Exclusion criteria were age <18 years and no established Oregon Health & Science University care. The primary outcome was a composite of CV morbidity and mortality. All-cause mortality was the secondary outcome. The study population included 1,355 patients (mean age 48.7 ± 20.5 years; 770 women [57%], 977 White non-Hispanic [72%]; 1,072 ensured [79%]; 563 with CV disease history [42%]). During a median 6 months at risk, the primary composite outcome was observed in 38 of 319 patients who were COVID-19+ (12%) and 65 of 1,036 patients who were COVID-19- (6%). In the Cox regression, adjusted for demographics, health insurance, and reason for COVID-19 testing, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with the risk for primary composite outcome (hazard ratio 1.71, 95% confidence interval 1.06 to 2.78, p = 0.029). Inverse probability-weighted estimation, conditioned for 31 covariates, showed that for every patient who was COVID-19+, the average time to all-cause death was 65.5 days less than when all these patients were COVID-19-: average treatment effect on the treated -65.5 (95% confidence interval -125.4 to -5.61) days, p = 0.032. In conclusion, either symptomatic or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with an increased risk for late CV outcomes and has a causal effect on all-cause mortality in a late post-COVID-19 period.