Abstract: There is increasing evidence that early diagnosis and treatment are key for outcomes in infants with spinal muscular atrophy (SMA), and newborn screening programs have been implemented to detect the disease before onset of symptoms. However, data from controlled studies that reliably confirm the benefits of newborn screening are lacking. Objective To compare data obtained on patients with SMA diagnosed through newborn screening and those diagnosed after clinical symptom onset. Design, Setting, and Participants This nonrandomized controlled trial used data from the SMARTCARE registry to evaluate all children born between January 2018 and September 2021 with genetically confirmed SMA and up to 3 SMN2 copies. The registry includes data from 70 participating centers in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Data analysis was performed in February 2023 so that all patients had a minimal follow-up of 18 months. Exposure Patients born in 2 federal states in Germany underwent screening in a newborn screening pilot project. All other patients were diagnosed after clinical symptom onset. All patients received standard care within the same health care system. Main Outcomes The primary end point was the achievement of motor milestones. Results A total of 234 children (123 [52.6%] female) were identified who met inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis: 44 (18.8%) in the newborn screening cohort and 190 children (81.2%) in the clinical symptom onset cohort. The mean (SD) age at start of treatment with 1 of the approved disease-modifying drugs was 1.3 (2.2) months in the newborn screening cohort and 10.7 (9.1) months in the clinical symptom onset cohort. In the newborn screening cohort, 40 of 44 children (90.9%) gained the ability to sit independently vs 141 of 190 (74.2%) in the clinical symptom onset cohort. For independent ambulation, the ratio was 28 of 40 (63.6%) vs 28 of 190 (14.7%). Conclusions and Relevance This nonrandomized controlled trial demonstrated effectiveness of newborn screening for infants with SMA in the real-world setting. Functional outcomes and thus the response to treatment were significantly better in the newborn screening cohort compared to the unscreened clinical symptom onset group. Trial Registration German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00012699

Abstract: The development and approval of disease modifying treatments have dramatically changed disease progression in patients with spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). Nusinersen was approved in Europe in 2017 for the treatment of SMA patients irrespective of age and disease severity. Most data on therapeutic efficacy are available for the infantile-onset SMA. For patients with SMA type 2 and type 3, there is still a lack of sufficient evidence and long-term experience for nusinersen treatment. Here, we report data from the SMArtCARE registry of non-ambulant children with SMA type 2 and typen 3 under nusinersen treatment with a follow-up period of up to 38 months. Methods SMArtCARE is a disease-specific registry with data on patients with SMA irrespective of age, treatment regime or disease severity. Data are collected during routine patient visits as real-world outcome data. This analysis included all non-ambulant patients with SMA type 2 or 3 below 18 years of age before initiation of treatment. Primary outcomes were changes in motor function evaluated with the Hammersmith Functional Motor Scale Expanded (HFMSE) and the Revised Upper Limb Module (RULM). Results Data from 256 non-ambulant, pediatric patients with SMA were included in the data analysis. Improvements in motor function were more prominent in upper limb: 32.4% of patients experienced clinically meaningful improvements in RULM and 24.6% in HFMSE. 8.6% of patients gained a new motor milestone, whereas no motor milestones were lost. Only 4.3% of patients showed a clinically meaningful worsening in HFMSE and 1.2% in RULM score. Conclusion Our results demonstrate clinically meaningful improvements or stabilization of disease progression in non-ambulant, pediatric patients with SMA under nusinersen treatment. Changes were most evident in upper limb function and were observed continuously over the follow-up period. Our data confirm clinical trial data, while providing longer follow-up, an increased number of treated patients, and a wider range of age and disease severity.

Abstract: By means of a nationwide, prospective, multicenter, observational cohort registry collecting data on 7375 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 admitted to children's hospitals in Germany, March 2020–November 2022, our study assessed the clinical features of children and adolescents hospitalized due to SARS-CoV-2, evaluated which of these patients might be at highest risk for severe COVID-19, and identified underlying risk factors. Outcomes tracked included: symptomatic infection, case fatality, sequelae at discharge and severe disease. Among reported cases, median age was one year, with 42% being infants. Half were admitted for reasons other than SARS-CoV-2. In 27%, preexisting comorbidities were present, most frequently obesity, neurological/neuromuscular disorders, premature birth, and respiratory, cardiovascular or gastrointestinal diseases. 3.0% of cases were admitted to ICU, but ICU admission rates varied as different SARS-CoV-2 variants gained prevalence. Main risk factors linked to ICU admission due to COVID-19 were: patient age ( 〉  12 and 1–4 years old), obesity, neurological/neuromuscular diseases, Trisomy 21 or other genetic syndromes, and coinfections at time of hospitalization. With Omicron, the group at highest risk shifted to 1–4-year-olds. For both health care providers and the general public, understanding risk factors for severe disease is critical to informing decisions about risk-reduction measures, including vaccination and masking guidelines.

Abstract: Purpose. Despite advanced medical treatment options, many prostate cancer patients are still confronted with unfavorable physical and psychological burdens. Physical exercise has proven to be beneficial for prostate cancer patients, yet specific exercise offers are rare. The ProRehab Study aimed to evaluate the exercise program offered in rehabilitative prostate cancer sports groups in Germany and determine whether it is beneficial for patients following prostatectomy. Methods. Eighty-five prostate cancer patients were recruited for a multicenter, 2-armed, nonrandomized controlled trial 6 to 12 weeks after prostatectomy. The intervention group (n = 56) took part in a 15-month supervised multimodal exercise program. Exercise sessions took place once a week for 60 minutes at a moderate intensity (3.84-4.84 MET-hour). The control group (n = 29) received no intervention. Outcomes included aerobic fitness, activity levels, quality of life, disease- and treatment-related adverse effects, such as urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction, and relapse-relevant blood values. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed. Results. A significant between-group difference was observed in the urinary symptom score ( P = .027). Physical fitness, urinary incontinence, physical, role, emotional, and social functioning, as well as further disease- and treatment-related side effects (dyspnea, urinary, and bowel symptoms) significantly improved within the intervention group. Erectile dysfunction and physical activity levels improved similarly in both groups. Conclusions. The presented data hint at the potential of rehabilitative sports groups for prostate cancer patients. However, according to the current state of the art, exercise intensity and volume may need to be increased to enhance the effects. A number of shorter studies (8-24 weeks) have proven significant between-group differences in quality of life, incontinence, and fitness outcomes when patients exercised 2 to 3 times per week. This is the first exercise intervention study with prostate cancer patients that was conducted over 15 months. Further studies are necessary to investigate whether prostate cancer patients recover sooner when receiving a supervised exercise program.

Abstract: 5q-associated spinal muscular atrophy is a rare neuromuscular disorder with the leading symptom of a proximal muscle weakness. Three different drugs have been approved by the European Medicines Agency and Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of spinal muscular atrophy patients, however, long-term experience is still scarce. In contrast to clinical trial data with restricted patient populations and short observation periods, we report here real-world evidence on a broad spectrum of patients with early-onset spinal muscular atrophy treated with nusinersen focusing on effects regarding motor milestones, and respiratory and bulbar insufficiency during the first years of treatment. Within the SMArtCARE registry, all patients under treatment with nusinersen who never had the ability to sit independently before the start of treatment were identified for data analysis. The primary outcome of this analysis was the change in motor function evaluated with the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia Infant Test of Neuromuscular Disorders and motor milestones considering World Health Organization criteria. Further, we evaluated data on the need for ventilator support and tube feeding, and mortality. In total, 143 patients with early-onset spinal muscular atrophy were included in the data analysis with a follow-up period of up to 38 months. We observed major improvements in motor function evaluated with the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia Infant Test of Neuromuscular Disorders. Improvements were greater in children & gt;2 years of age at start of treatment than in older children. 24.5% of children gained the ability to sit independently. Major improvements were observed during the first 14 months of treatment. The need for intermittent ventilator support and tube feeding increased despite treatment with nusinersen. Our findings confirm the increasing real-world evidence that treatment with nusinersen has a dramatic influence on disease progression and survival in patients with early-onset spinal muscular atrophy. Major improvements in motor function are seen in children younger than 2 years at the start of treatment. Bulbar and respiratory function needs to be closely monitored, as these functions do not improve equivalent to motor function.

Abstract: Background: For fit CLL patients (pts), continuous BTK inhibitor treatment is replacing CIT as standard of care in frontline setting, particularly in pts with unfavorable prognostic factors. The time limited combinations venetoclax plus obinutuzumab (GVe) and venetoclax plus rituximab (RVe) have produced high rates of undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD), which strongly associates with long progression-free survival (PFS) both in frontline and relapsed setting. For frontline therapy GVe is approved in this setting based on data from the CLL14 trial in an unfit population. However, data from a fit cohort are not yet available. The GAIA (CLL13) trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of three Ven+CD20 antibody-based regimens in comparison to CIT as a frontline treatment for fit pts with CLL and without TP53 mutation/deletion. Methods: Treatment-naïve fit (CIRS ≤6, normal creatinine clearance with ≥ 70ml/min) CLL pts requiring therapy were eligible. Based on known poor response to CIT, pts with TP53 aberrations were excluded. Pts were randomized in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive six courses of CIT (FCR for pt ≤65 years: fludarabine 25 mg/m² d1-3, cyclophosphamide 250 mg/m² d1-3, rituximab 375 mg/m² d1 cycle 1 and 500 mg/m² d1 cycle 2-6; BR for pt & gt;65 years: bendamustine 90mg/m² d1-2, rituximab) or one of three venetoclax (V) combinations (standard ramp-up from cycle 1 d22, 400 mg/d cycle 2-12): V and rituximab (375/500mg/m² d1 cycle 1-6) [RVe], V and obinutuzumab (1000 mg d1, 8, 15 cycle 1 and d1 cycle 2-6) [GVe] , or V, obinutuzumab and ibrutinib (420 mg/d cycle 1-12, if MRD-detectable continued until cycle 36) [GIVe] . Pts were stratified according to country, Binet stage and age (≤ 65/ & gt; 65 years). The co-primary endpoints of the trial are (1) the rate of uMRD ( & lt;10-4) by flow in peripheral blood (PB) at month 15 (MO15, GVe vs CIT) and (2) PFS (GIVe vs CIT), each with a significance level of 2.5%. The co-primary endpoint PFS will be analyzed within a pre-planned interim analysis as soon as 138 (65%) PFS events will have been reported in the GIVe and CIT arm. The co-primary endpoint analysis of uMRD per protocol was performed after the last MO15 MRD sample had been collected. In addition, comparisons regarding uMRD for all study arms were performed using a pre-specified hierarchical test sequence. Bone marrow (BM) was evaluated 3 months after end of treatment (MO9 for CIT, MO15 for all others arms) in pts with clinical CR. Key secondary endpoints as investigator-assessed responses according to iwCLL 2008 guidelines and safety were analyzed. Trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02950051). Results: A total of 926 pts (CIT: 229 (150 FCR, 79 BR), RVe: 237, GVe: 229, GIVe: 231) with a median age of 61 years (range 27-84) were accrued between 12/2016 and 09/2019. The majority of pts were in advanced Binet stage (B: 37.8%, C: 35.6%) and unmutated IGHV status was present in 56%. Fourteen pts did not receive study treatment (13 FCR, 1 GVe) and were not included in the safety population. The data cut for the first co-primary endpoint analysis was February 28, 2021. The median observation time was 27.9 months. The co-primary endpoint uMRD in PB at MO15 was met as the rate of uMRD in ITT population was significantly higher in GVe compared to CIT: 86.5% (97.5% CI 80.6-91.1) vs 52.0% (CI 44.4-59.5; p & lt;0.0001), respectively. GIVe also showed a superior uMRD rate of 92.2% (CI 87.3-95.7) compared to CIT (p & lt;0.0001), while RVe (57.0%, CI 49.5-64.2) did not (p=0.317) (Figure 1A). Corresponding BM uMRD rates in ITT population were 37.1% (CIT), 43.0% (RVe), 72.5% (GVe) and 77.9% (GIVe), respectively. MO15 overall response rates and complete response rates (CRR) are shown in Figure 1B. The most common grade 3-5 treatment-emergent AE were neutropenia (50.5% of all pts), thrombocytopenia (12.2%), tumor lysis syndrome (7.5%), infusion-related reaction (7.2%), febrile neutropenia (6.5%) and pneumonia (5.3%)). Atrial fibrillation and bleeding events occurred more frequently in GIVe while infusion-related reactions were most common in the GVe arm (Table 1). The absolute numbers of second malignancies were 33, 19, 22 and 21 for CIT, RVe, GVe and GIVe. Fatal AEs occurred in 5, 7, 6 and 9 of the patients. Conclusions: The time-limited therapies of GVe and GIVe provided superior uMRD rates in PB at MO 15 compared to CIT. In addition, uMRD rates in BM and CRR were higher in GVe and GIVe in particular than in CIT. All arms showed a good safety profile in this fit pt population. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Eichhorst: AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Speakers Bureau; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Speakers Bureau; Hexal: Speakers Bureau; ArQule: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oxford Biomedica (UK): Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Consultant Department I for Internal Medicine: Consultancy; University Hospital of Cologne: Current Employment. Kater: Genmab, LAVA: Other: Ad Board, Steering Committee; Janssen, AstraZeneca: Other: Ad Board, steering committee, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Other: Ad Board, Research Funding; BMS, Roche/Genentech: Other: Ad Board, , Research Funding. Von Tresckow: Celgene: Other: travel grant; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Other; Roche: Honoraria, Other: Reasearch support, travel grant; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Reasearch support, travel grant; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: advisory board, travel grant. Staber: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Tadmor: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Poulsen: Janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Janssens: Sanofi: Consultancy; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Beigene, AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Trael Grant, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie, Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Noesslinger: Roche: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie,: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Jaeger: Norvartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS/Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Frederiksen: Abbvie: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Alexion: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Hebart: Roche: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Simon: Gilead: Other: Travel support. Fink: AbbVie: Other: travel grant; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Fischer: Abbvie: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Other: Travel Grants. Kreuzer: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Ritgen: Abbvie: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Chugai: Consultancy; MSD: Consultancy, Other: Travel support; Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Celgene: Other: Travel support. Brüggemann: Amgen: Other: Advisory Board, Travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Other: Advisory Board; Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Levin: Roche, Janssen, Abbvie: Other: Travel Expenses, Ad-Board. Stilgenbauer: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Sunesis: Other: Research Support; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Sunesis: Consultancy; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Sunesis: Honoraria; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Sunesis: Research Funding. Hallek: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. OffLabel Disclosure: Ibrutinib in combaintion with Venetoclax + Obinutuzumab is not approved.