Objective

 High-energy impact to the head, neck, and shoulder can result in cervical spine as well as brachial plexus injuries. Because cervical spine injuries are more common, this tends to be the initial focus for management. We present a case in which the initial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was somewhat misleading and a detailed neurological exam lead to the correct diagnosis.

Clinical presentation

 A 19-year-old man presented to the hospital following a shoulder injury during football practice. The patient immediately complained of significant pain in his neck, shoulder, and right arm and the inability to move his right arm. He was stabilized in the field for a presumed cervical-spine injury and transported to the emergency department.

Intervention

 Initial radiographic assessment (C-spine CT, right shoulder x-ray) showed no bony abnormality. MRI of the cervical-spine showed T2 signal change and cord swelling thought to be consistent with a cord contusion. With adequate pain control, a detailed neurological examination was possible and was consistent with an upper brachial plexus avulsion injury that was confirmed by CT myelogram. The patient failed to make significant neurological recovery and he underwent spinal accessory nerve grafting to the suprascapular nerve to restore shoulder abduction and external rotation, while the phrenic nerve was grafted to the musculocutaneous nerve to restore elbow flexion.

Conclusion

 Cervical spinal-cord injuries and brachial plexus injuries can occur by the same high energy mechanisms and can occur simultaneously. As in this case, MRI findings can be misleading and a detailed physical examination is the key to diagnosis. However, this can be difficult in polytrauma patients with upper extremity injuries, head injuries or concomitant spinal-cord injury. Finally, prompt diagnosis and early surgical renerveration have been associated with better long-term recovery with certain types of injury.

INTRODUCTION: EGFRvIII, a constitutively active EGFR deletion driver mutation, is associated with poor long-term survival in glioblastoma (GB). The investigational vaccine rindopepimut consists of a peptide sequence unique to EGFRvIII conjugated to keyhole limpet hemocyanin (KLH), delivered intradermally with granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor. Three phase II studies in newly diagnosed, resected, EGFRvIII+ GB demonstrated encouraging progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety profile. Compassionate-use experience suggests that rindopepimut may also provide benefit in relapsed GB, particularly with agents such as bevacizumab (BV). METHODS: In the Phase II "ReACT" study, BV-naïve patients in 1st or 2nd relapse with EGFRvIII+ GB were randomly assigned 1:1 to BV plus double-blinded injection of rindopepimut or control (KLH). END POINTS: 6-month PFS (PFS6; primary), objective response rate (ORR), PFS, OS, and safety. RESULTS: Accrual is complete (n = 72); study follow-up continues (n = 30). Primary rindopepimut toxicity is grade 1 to 2 injection site reaction. For rindopepimut + BV vs KLH + BV (per investigator; RANO criteria): PFS6 = 27% (9/33) vs 11% (4/35) (P = .048, 1-side χ test); ORR = 24% (7/29) vs 17% (5/30). Central PFS/ORR assessment is underway. Median (95% CI) OS = 12.0 (9.7, -) vs 8.8 (6.8, 11.4) months (HR = 0.47 [0.25, 0.91]; P = .0208), with 8 vs 4 patients progression-free. OS analyses favor rindopepimut including when adjusted for various prognostic factors. Rindopepimut induced robust anti-EGFRvIII titers (1:12800-1:6553600) in 80% of patients. Rapid titer generation was associated with prolonged OS (HR = 0.47 [0.18, 1.27]; P = .128) within the rindopepimut arm, and was most frequent in patients with KPS ≥ 90 (odds ratio = 9.75; P = .007). Evaluation of humoral response quality and HLA typing vs outcome are underway. In an additional cohort of BV-exposed patients (n = 53), four patients experienced objective tumor response. CONCLUSION: These near-final data show that rindopepimut induces potent EGFRvIII-specific immune response and tumor regression, and appears to significantly prolong survival when administered with BV in patients with relapsed GB.