Search

Checkpoint blockade immunotherapy has failed in pancreatic cancer and other poorly responsive tumor types in part due to inadequate T cell priming. Naive T cells can receive costimulation not only via CD28 but also through TNF superfamily receptors that signal via NF-κB. Antagonists of the ubiquitin ligases cellular inhibitor of apoptosis protein (cIAP)1/2, also called second mitochondria-derived activator of caspases (SMAC) mimetics, induce degradation of cIAP1/2 proteins, allowing for the accumulation of NIK and constitutive, ligand-independent activation of alternate NF-κB signaling that mimics costimulation in T cells. In tumor cells, cIAP1/2 antagonists can increase TNF production and TNF-mediated apoptosis; however, pancreatic cancer cells are resistant to cytokine-mediated apoptosis, even in the presence of cIAP1/2 antagonism. Dendritic cell activation is enhanced by cIAP1/2 antagonism in vitro, and intratumoral dendritic cells show higher expression of MHC class II in tumors from cIAP1/2 antagonism-treated mice. In this study, we use in vivo mouse models of syngeneic pancreatic cancer that generate endogenous T cell responses ranging from moderate to poor. Across multiple models, cIAP1/2 antagonism has pleiotropic beneficial effects on antitumor immunity, including direct effects on tumor-specific T cells leading to overall increased activation, increased control of tumor growth in vivo, synergy with multiple immunotherapy modalities, and immunologic memory. In contrast to checkpoint blockade, cIAP1/2 antagonism does not increase intratumoral T cell frequencies. Furthermore, we confirm our previous findings that even poorly immunogenic tumors with a paucity of T cells can experience T cell-dependent antitumor immunity, and we provide transcriptional clues into how these rare T cells coordinate downstream immune responses., (Copyright © 2023 by The American Association of Immunologists, Inc.)

Loss of major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I and interferon-γ (IFN-γ) sensing are major causes of primary and acquired resistance to checkpoint blockade immunotherapy. Thus, additional treatment options are needed for tumors that lose expression of MHC class I. The cellular inhibitor of apoptosis proteins 1 and 2 (cIAP1/2) regulate classical and alternative nuclear factor κB (NF-κB) signaling. Induction of noncanonical NF-κB signaling with cIAP1/2 antagonists mimics costimulatory signaling, augmenting antitumor immunity. We show that induction of noncanonical NF-κB signaling induces T cell-dependent immune responses, even in β 2 -microglobulin (β 2 M)-deficient tumors, demonstrating that direct CD8 T cell recognition of tumor cell-expressed MHC class I is not required. Instead, T cell-produced lymphotoxin reprograms both mouse and human macrophages to be tumoricidal. In wild-type mice, but not mice incapable of antigen-specific T cell responses, cIAP1/2 antagonism reduces tumor burden by increasing phagocytosis of live tumor cells. Efficacy is augmented by combination with CD47 blockade. Thus, activation of noncanonical NF-κB stimulates a T cell-macrophage axis that curtails growth of tumors that are resistant to checkpoint blockade because of loss of MHC class I or IFN-γ sensing. These findings provide a potential mechanism for controlling checkpoint blockade refractory tumors., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.)

Background: Based on the early results of the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trial, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an accepted treatment for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are not suitable for surgery. However, little information is available about the late clinical outcomes in such patients., Methods: We did this randomised controlled trial at 21 experienced valve centres in Canada, Germany, and the USA. We enrolled patients with severe symptomatic inoperable aortic stenosis and randomly assigned (1:1) them to transfemoral TAVR or to standard treatment, which often included balloon aortic valvuloplasty. Patients and their treating physicians were not masked to treatment allocation. The randomisation was done centrally, and sites learned of the assignment only after a patient had been screened, consented, and entered into the database. The primary outcome of the trial was all-cause mortality at 1 year in the intention-to-treat population, here we present the prespecified findings after 5 years. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00530894., Findings: We screened 3015 patients, of whom 358 were enrolled (mean age 83 years, Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality 11·7%, 54% female). 179 were assigned to TAVR treatment and 179 were assigned to standard treatment. 20 patients crossed over from the standard treatment group and ten withdrew from study, leaving only six patients at 5 years, of whom five had aortic valve replacement treatment outside of the study. The risk of all-cause mortality at 5 years was 71·8% in the TAVR group versus 93·6% in the standard treatment group (hazard ratio 0·50, 95% CI 0·39-0·65; p<0·0001). At 5 years, 42 (86%) of 49 survivors in the TAVR group had New York Heart Association class 1 or 2 symptoms compared with three (60%) of five in the standard treatment group. Echocardiography after TAVR showed durable haemodynamic benefit (aortic valve area 1·52 cm(2) at 5 years, mean gradient 10·6 mm Hg at 5 years), with no evidence of structural valve deterioration., Interpretation: TAVR is more beneficial than standard treatment for treatment of inoperable aortic stenosis. TAVR should be strongly considered for patients who are not surgical candidates for aortic valve replacement to improve their survival and functional status. Appropriate selection of patients will help to maximise the benefit of TAVR and reduce mortality from severe comorbidities., Funding: Edwards Lifesciences., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The higher risk of adverse outcomes after transapical (TA) versus transfemoral (TF) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) could be attributable to TA-TAVR being an open surgical procedure or to clinical differences between TA- and TF-TAVR patients. We compared outcomes after neutralizing patient differences using propensity score matching., Methods and Results: From April 2007 to February 2012, 1100 Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER)-I patients underwent TA-TAVR and 1521 underwent TF-TAVR with Edwards SAPIEN balloon-expandable bioprostheses. Propensity matching based on 111 preprocedural variables, exclusive of femoral access morphology, identified 501 well-matched patient pairs (46% of possible matches), 95% of whom had peripheral arterial disease. Matched TA-TAVR patients experienced more adverse procedural events, longer length of stay (5 versus 8 days; P<0.0001), and slower recovery (New York Heart Association class I, 31% versus 38% at 30 days, equalizing by 6 months at 51% versus 47%); stroke risk was similar (3.4% versus 3.3% at 30 days and 6.0% versus 6.7% at 3 years); mortality was elevated for the first 6 postprocedural months (19% versus 12%; P=0.01); but aortic regurgitation was less (34% versus 52% mild and 8.9% versus 12% moderate to severe at discharge, P=0.001; 36% versus 50% mild and 10% versus 15% moderate to severe at 6 months, P<0.0001)., Conclusions: The likelihood of adverse periprocedural events and prolonged recovery is greater after TA-TAVR than TF-TAVR in vasculopathic patients after accounting for differences in cardiovascular risk factors, although stroke risk is equivalent and aortic regurgitation is less. As smaller delivery systems permit TF-TAVR in many of these patients, we recommend a TF-first access strategy for TAVR when anatomically feasible., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00530894., (© 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: The long-term outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis remain unknown., Methods and Results: In the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) study, 358 patients were randomly assigned to TAVR or standard therapy. We report the 3-year outcomes on these patients, and the pooled outcomes for all randomly assigned inoperable patients (n=449) in PARTNER, as well, including the randomized portion of the continued access study (n=91). The 3-year mortality rate in the TAVR and standard therapy groups was 54.1% and 80.9%, respectively (P<0.001; hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.68; P<0.001). In survivors, there was significant improvement in New York Heart Association functional class sustained at 3 years. The cumulative incidence of strokes at 3-year follow-up was 15.7% in TAVR patients versus 5.5% in patients undergoing standard therapy (hazard ratio, 2.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.26-6.26; P=0.012); however, the composite of death or strokes was significantly lower after TAVR versus standard therapy (57.4% versus 80.9%, P<0.001; hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-0.77; P<0.001). Echocardiography showed a sustained increase in aortic valve area and decrease in transvalvular gradient after TAVR. Analysis of the 449 pooled randomly assigned patients (TAVR, n=220; standard therapy, n=229) demonstrated significant improvement in all-cause mortality and functional status during early and 3-year follow-up. The results of the pooled cohort were similar to the results obtained from the pivotal PARTNER trial., Conclusions: TAVR resulted in better survival and functional status in inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis with durable hemodynamic benefit on long-term follow-up. However, high residual mortality, even in successfully treated TAVR patients, highlights the need for more strategic patient selection., Clinical Trial Registration Url: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00530894., (© 2014 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) who were deemed too high risk or inoperable for conventional aortic valve replacement (AVR) in the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) trial were randomized to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus AVR (PARTNER-A arm) or standard therapy (PARTNER-B arm)., Objectives: This study compared when and how deaths occurred after TAVR versus surgical AVR or standard therapy., Methods: The PARTNER-A arm included 244 transfemoral (TF) and 104 transapical (TA) TAVR patients, and 351 AVR patients; the PARTNER-B arm included 179 TF-TAVR patients and 179 standard therapy patients. Deaths were categorized as cardiovascular, noncardiovascular, or uncategorizable, and were characterized by multiphase hazard modelling., Results: In the PARTNER-A arm, the risk of death peaked after randomization in the TA-TAVR and AVR groups, falling to low levels commensurate with the U.S. population within 3 months. Early risk was less in TF-TAVR patients, resulting in initial superior survival; between 12 and 18 months, risk increased, such that within 2 years, TF-TAVR and AVR patients had similar survival rates. Cardiovascular, noncardiovascular, and uncategorizable deaths for TF-TAVR were 37%, 43%, and 20%, respectively, versus 22%, 41%, and 37%, respectively, for TA-TAVR and 33%, 43%, and 24%, respectively, for AVR. In the PARTNER-B arm, risk with standard therapy was 60% per year; TF-TAVR reduced risk to 20% per year, resulting in 0.5 years of life added within 2.5 years., Conclusions: In inoperable AS patients, TAVR substantially reduced the risk of cardiovascular death. In high-risk patients, TA-TAVR and AVR were associated with elevated peri-procedural risk more than with TF-TAVR, although cardiovascular death was higher after TF-TAVR. Therefore, TF-TAVR should be considered the standard of care for severely symptomatic inoperable patients or those at high risk of noncardiovascular mortality after conventional surgery. (THE PARTNER TRIAL: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial; NCT00530894)., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to compare echocardiographic findings in patients with critical aortic stenosis following surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)., Background: The PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) trial randomized patients 1:1 to SAVR or TAVR., Methods: Echocardiograms were obtained at baseline, discharge, 30 days, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after the procedure and analyzed in a core laboratory. For the analysis of post-implantation variables, the first interpretable study (≤6 months) was used., Results: Both groups showed a decrease in aortic valve gradients and increase in effective orifice area (EOA) (p < 0.0001), which remained stable over 2 years. Compared with SAVR, TAVR resulted in larger indexed EOA (p = 0.038), less prosthesis-patient mismatch (p = 0.019), and more total and paravalvular aortic regurgitation (p < 0.0001). Baseline echocardiographic univariate predictors of death were lower peak transaortic gradient in TAVR patients, and low left ventricular diastolic volume, low stroke volume, and greater severity of mitral regurgitation in SAVR patients. Post-implantation echocardiographic univariate predictors of death were: larger left ventricular diastolic volume, left ventricular systolic volume and EOA, decreased ejection fraction, and greater aortic regurgitation in TAVR patients; and smaller left ventricular systolic and diastolic volumes, low stroke volume, smaller EOA, and prosthesis-patient mismatch in SAVR patients., Conclusions: Patients randomized to either SAVR or TAVR experience enduring, significant reductions in transaortic gradients and increase in EOA. Compared with SAVR, TAVR patients had higher indexed EOA, lower prosthesis-patient mismatch, and more aortic regurgitation. Univariate predictors of death for the TAVR and SAVR groups differed and might allow future refinement in patient selection. (THE PARTNER TRIAL: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial; NCT00530894)., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trial showed that among high-risk patients with aortic stenosis, the 1-year survival rates are similar with transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical replacement. However, longer-term follow-up is necessary to determine whether TAVR has prolonged benefits., Methods: At 25 centers, we randomly assigned 699 high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis to undergo either surgical aortic-valve replacement or TAVR. All patients were followed for at least 2 years, with assessment of clinical outcomes and echocardiographic evaluation., Results: The rates of death from any cause were similar in the TAVR and surgery groups (hazard ratio with TAVR, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.15; P=0.41) and at 2 years (Kaplan-Meier analysis) were 33.9% in the TAVR group and 35.0% in the surgery group (P=0.78). The frequency of all strokes during follow-up did not differ significantly between the two groups (hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.67 to 2.23; P=0.52). At 30 days, strokes were more frequent with TAVR than with surgical replacement (4.6% vs. 2.4%, P=0.12); subsequently, there were 8 additional strokes in the TAVR group and 12 in the surgery group. Improvement in valve areas was similar with TAVR and surgical replacement and was maintained for 2 years. Paravalvular regurgitation was more frequent after TAVR (P<0.001), and even mild paravalvular regurgitation was associated with increased late mortality (P<0.001)., Conclusions: A 2-year follow-up of patients in the PARTNER trial supports TAVR as an alternative to surgery in high-risk patients. The two treatments were similar with respect to mortality, reduction in symptoms, and improved valve hemodynamics, but paravalvular regurgitation was more frequent after TAVR and was associated with increased late mortality. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00530894.).

Background: Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) is the recommended therapy for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are not suitable candidates for surgery. The outcomes beyond 1 year in such patients are not known., Methods: We randomly assigned patients to transfemoral TAVR or to standard therapy (which often included balloon aortic valvuloplasty). Data on 2-year outcomes were analyzed., Results: A total of 358 patients underwent randomization at 21 centers. The rates of death at 2 years were 43.3% in the TAVR group and 68.0% in the standard-therapy group (P<0.001), and the corresponding rates of cardiac death were 31.0% and 62.4% (P<0.001). The survival advantage associated with TAVR that was seen at 1 year remained significant among patients who survived beyond the first year (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.92; P=0.02 with the use of the log-rank test). The rate of stroke was higher after TAVR than with standard therapy (13.8% vs. 5.5%, P=0.01), owing, in the first 30 days, to the occurrence of more ischemic events in the TAVR group (6.7% vs. 1.7%, P=0.02) and, beyond 30 days, to the occurrence of more hemorrhagic strokes in the TAVR group (2.2% vs. 0.6%, P=0.16). At 2 years, the rate of rehospitalization was 35.0% in the TAVR group and 72.5% in the standard-therapy group (P<0.001). TAVR, as compared with standard therapy, was also associated with improved functional status (P<0.001). The data suggest that the mortality benefit after TAVR may be limited to patients who do not have extensive coexisting conditions. Echocardiographic analysis showed a sustained increase in aortic-valve area and a decrease in aortic-valve gradient, with no worsening of paravalvular aortic regurgitation., Conclusions: Among appropriately selected patients with severe aortic stenosis who were not suitable candidates for surgery, TAVR reduced the rates of death and hospitalization, with a decrease in symptoms and an improvement in valve hemodynamics that were sustained at 2 years of follow-up. The presence of extensive coexisting conditions may attenuate the survival benefit of TAVR. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00530894.).

Background: Many patients with severe aortic stenosis and coexisting conditions are not candidates for surgical replacement of the aortic valve. Recently, transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) has been suggested as a less invasive treatment for high-risk patients with aortic stenosis., Methods: We randomly assigned patients with severe aortic stenosis, whom surgeons considered not to be suitable candidates for surgery, to standard therapy (including balloon aortic valvuloplasty) or transfemoral transcatheter implantation of a balloon-expandable bovine pericardial valve. The primary end point was the rate of death from any cause., Results: A total of 358 patients with aortic stenosis who were not considered to be suitable candidates for surgery underwent randomization at 21 centers (17 in the United States). At 1 year, the rate of death from any cause (Kaplan–Meier analysis) was 30.7% with TAVI, as compared with 50.7% with standard therapy (hazard ratio with TAVI, 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40 to 0.74; P<0.001). The rate of the composite end point of death from any cause or repeat hospitalization was 42.5% with TAVI as compared with 71.6% with standard therapy (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.59; P<0.001). Among survivors at 1 year, the rate of cardiac symptoms (New York Heart Association class III or IV) was lower among patients who had undergone TAVI than among those who had received standard therapy (25.2% vs. 58.0%, P<0.001). At 30 days, TAVI, as compared with standard therapy, was associated with a higher incidence of major strokes (5.0% vs. 1.1%, P=0.06) and major vascular complications (16.2% vs. 1.1%, P<0.001). In the year after TAVI, there was no deterioration in the functioning of the bioprosthetic valve, as assessed by evidence of stenosis or regurgitation on an echocardiogram., Conclusions: In patients with severe aortic stenosis who were not suitable candidates for surgery, TAVI, as compared with standard therapy, significantly reduced the rates of death from any cause, the composite end point of death from any cause or repeat hospitalization, and cardiac symptoms, despite the higher incidence of major strokes and major vascular events. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00530894.).

Background: Coronary artery bypass grafting on the beating heart causes significant hemodynamic compromise during displacement of the heart. The precise mechanisms causing altered hemodynamics have not been clearly understood. The purpose of this study was to define the hemodynamic changes caused by displacing the heart in patients undergoing beating heart surgical procedures., Methods: Forty-four patients (35 men, 9 women; mean age, 64.5 +/- 9.6 years) underwent off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. The hemodynamic variables were collected before and after positioning the heart for anastomosis of the left anterior descending, circumflex, and posterior descending coronary arteries., Results: There was a significant increase in right ventricular end-diastolic pressure during positioning for all vessels, and in left ventricular end-diastolic pressure during positioning for the left anterior descending and circumflex coronary arteries. Positioning for the circumflex artery showed the largest increase of left and right ventricular end-diastolic pressure, resulting in the greatest hemodynamic compromise., Conclusions: In the clinical setting of diseased human hearts, there is a biventricular contribution to altered hemodynamics. The increase of right ventricular end-diastolic pressure in all positions suggests that the major cause of hemodynamic changes is disturbed diastolic filling of the right ventricle, especially by direct ventricular compression.

Background: Revascularization of the posterior wall often causes hemodynamic instability in beating heart coronary artery bypass (CAB). Our previous clinical studies have shown that tilting the heart primarily alters right-heart hemodynamics. The purpose of this study was to evaluate right-heart support in clinical cases., Methods: Seventeen patients underwent beating heart CAB with right-heart support. The right-heart support system (A-Med Systems, West Sacramento, CA) consisted of a coaxial cannula placed through the right atrium and the tip of the cannula positioned in main pulmonary artery. Blood was removed from the right atrium and returned to the main pulmonary artery., Results: Elective beating heart CAB was accomplished successfully in 17 patients with right-heart support. Anastomoses performed were left anterior descending coronary artery (11), diagonal (3), circumflex (5), obtuse marginal artery (11), and right coronary artery (10). Right-heart support between 1 and 3 L/min improved hemodynamics especially in the circumflex position. No device-related patient incidents occurred, nor were there incidents of infection or air embolism. All 17 patients were discharged to their homes., Conclusions: The right-heart support system was safe without complications. Exposure of the posterior wall was possible in all cases without hemodynamic compromise.

Objective: The CardioThoracic Systems (CTS) registry of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) was established to examine baseline characteristics of patients undergoing this surgical procedure, document details of the procedures including grafting techniques and post-operative complication rates, and assess post-operative graft patency., Methods: A total of 508 consecutive patients who had MIDCAB using CTS instrumentation between April 1996 and March 1997 at 35 international centers were analyzed., Results: The mean age of patients, 27% of whom were women, was 63 years. Eight percent had previous coronary artery bypass surgery. While nearly all patients had significant stenoses in the left anterior descending artery, 23% had disease in two vessels and 9% in three vessels. Almost all procedures used the left internal mammary artery, with 7% employing multiple or sequential grafts. The entire surgical procedure lasted on average 135 min (median 2 h), with a mean time of 14 min to perform anastomosis. Surgical approaches, including anastomosis technique and method used to maintain bloodless field, varied widely across clinical centers. In-hospital complication rates were relatively low, with 0.6% mortality (0% perioperative), 1.2% conversion to sternotomy with cardiopulmonary bypass, 1.4% conversion to sternotomy without bypass, and 5.5% redo or reintervention. In total, 92% of patients were free from all of these events at hospital discharge; women showed a strong trend toward increased risk for major in-hospital events compared with men. Rib fracture was the most common complication, reported in 12% of patients. Post-operative angiography, performed in 83 patients at an average 2.2 days post-procedure, found full patency in 78 (94%)., Conclusions: The CTS registry data indicates that in the great majority of patients, MIDCAB using CTS instrumentation was performed safely and with acute success. Comparative studies, most importantly clinical trials, are needed to determine the types of patients who benefit most from this procedure, as well as its longer-term outcome.