Search

Gender disparities in scientific publications have been identified in oncological research. Oral research presentations at major conferences enhance visibility of presenters. The share of women presenting at such podia is unknown. We aim to identify gender‐based differences in contributions to presentations at two major oncological conferences. Abstracts presented at plenary sessions of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meetings and European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congresses were collected. Trend analyses were used to analyze female contribution over time. The association between presenter's sex, study outcome (positive/negative) and journals' impact factors (IFs) of subsequently published papers was assessed using Chi‐square and Mann–Whitney U tests. Of 166 consecutive abstracts presented at ASCO in 2011–2018 (n = 34) and ESMO in 2008–2018 (n = 132), 21% had female presenters, all originating from Northern America (n = 17) or Europe (n = 18). The distribution of presenter's sex was similar over time (p = 0.70). Of 2,425 contributing authors to these presented abstracts, 28% were women. The proportion of female abstract authors increased over time (p < 0.05) and was higher in abstracts with female (34%) compared to male presenters (26%; p < 0.01). Presenter's sex was not associated with study outcome (p = 0.82). Median journals' IFs were lower in papers with a female first author (p < 0.05). In conclusion, there is a clear gender disparity in research presentations at two major oncological conferences, with 28% of authors and 21% of presenters of these studies being female. Lack of visibility of female presenters could impair acknowledgement for their research, opportunities in their academic career and even hamper heterogeneity in research. What's new? Presenting one's research at a conference is a great way to get your name and ideas heard within the professional community. In this study, the authors investigated how often women served as presenters at plenary sessions of ASCO Annual Meetings and ESMO Congresses. Looking through 166 abstracts over a period of 8 years, they found that 21% had female presenters, while 28% of study authors were female. Lack of visibility for female researchers at conferences can slow their career progress, and greater representation should be encouraged. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Afatinib is an oral irreversible epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine-kinase inhibitor (TKI) indicated in first-line treatment of advanced EGFR-mutant (EGFRm+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Dose dependent side effects can limit drug exposure, which may impact on extracranial and central nervous system (CNS) disease control.Methods: We performed a retrospective study of 125 patients diagnosed with advanced EGFRm+ NSCLC treated with first-line afatinib at a tertiary Asian cancer center, exploring clinicopathological factors that may influence survival outcomes. Median progression free survival (PFS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Comparison of PFS between subgroups of patients was done using log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards models.Results: Out of 125 patients, 62 (49.6%) started on 40 mg once daily (OD) afatinib, 61 (48.8%) on 30 mg OD and 1 (0.8%) on 20 mg OD. After median follow-up of 13.8 months from afatinib initiation, the observed response rate was 70.4% and median PFS 11.9 months (95% CI 10.3-19.3). 42 (33.6%) patients had baseline brain metastases (BM) and PFS of those who started on 40 mg OD (n = 17) vs. 30 mg OD (n = 25) was 13.3 months vs. 5.3 months (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.15-0.99). BM+ patients who started on 40 mg had similar PFS to patients with no BM (13.3 months vs. 15.0 months; HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.34-1.80).Conclusion: In patients with advanced EGFRm+ NSCLC with BM+, initiating patients on afatinib 40 mg OD was associated with improved PFS compared to 30 mg OD, underscoring the potential importance of dose intensity in control of CNS disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a heterogeneous disease that remains highly prevalent in many Asian countries and is the second most common cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Significant differences exist between Eastern and Western populations on many key aspects of HCC, contributing to the potential different treatment outcomes and challenges of clinical trial design and data interpretation. In this review, the authors compare HCC in Asia versus the West and highlight 1) differences in terms of epidemiology and trends and their correlation with etiology, 2) differences in genetics and how they relate to underlying etiology, 3) differences in treatment approaches based on existing guidelines and consensus statements, and 4) differences in clinical outcomes for Asian versus non-Asian patients with HCC in clinical trials and the implications for future clinical trial design. Cancer 2016;122:3430-3446. © 2016 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ᅟ. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) in nonsmokers are mostly driven by mutations in the oncogenes EGFR, ERBB2, and MET and fusions involving ALK and RET. In addition to occurring in nonsmokers, alterations in these "nonsmoking-related oncogenes" (NSRO) also occur in smokers. To better understand the clonal architecture and genomic landscape of NSRO-driven tumors in smokers compared with typical-smoking NSCLCs, we investigated genomic and transcriptomic alterations in 173 tumor sectors from 48 NSCLC patients. NSRO-driven NSCLCs in smokers and nonsmokers had similar genomic landscapes. Surprisingly, even in patients with prominent smoking histories, the mutational signature caused by tobacco smoking was essentially absent in NSRO-driven NSCLCs, which was confirmed in two large NSCLC data sets from other geographic regions. However, NSRO-driven NSCLCs in smokers had higher transcriptomic activities related to the regulation of the cell cycle. These findings suggest that, whereas the genomic landscape is similar between NSRO-driven NSCLC in smokers and nonsmokers, smoking still affects the tumor phenotype independently of genomic alterations., Significance: Non-small cell lung cancers driven by nonsmoking-related oncogenes do not harbor genomic scars caused by smoking regardless of smoking history, indicating that the impact of smoking on these tumors is mainly nongenomic., (©2024 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: In early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), recurrence is frequently observed. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has emerged as a noninvasive tool to risk stratify patients for recurrence after curative intent therapy. This study aimed to risk stratify patients with early-stage NSCLC via a personalized, tumor-informed multiplex polymerase chain reaction (mPCR) next-generation sequencing assay., Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients with stage I-III NSCLC. Recruited patients received standard-of-care management (surgical resection with or without adjuvant chemotherapy, followed by surveillance). Whole-exome sequencing of NSCLC resected tissue and matched germline DNA was used to design patient-specific mPCR assays (Signatera, Natera, Inc) to track up to 16 single-nucleotide variants in plasma samples., Results: The overall cohort with analyzed plasma samples consisted of 57 patients. Stage distribution was 68% for stage I and 16% each for stages II and III. Presurgery (i.e., at baseline), ctDNA was detected in 15 of 57 patients (26%). ctDNA detection presurgery was significantly associated with shorter recurrence-free survival (RFS; hazard ratio [HR], 3.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-12.62; p = .009). In the postsurgery setting, ctDNA was detected in seven patients, of whom 100% experienced radiological recurrence. ctDNA positivity preceded radiological findings by a median lead time of 2.8 months (range, 0-12.9 months). Longitudinally, ctDNA detection at any time point was associated with shorter RFS (HR, 16.1; 95% CI, 1.63-158.9; p < .0001)., Conclusions: ctDNA detection before surgical resection was strongly associated with a high risk of relapse in early-stage NSCLC in a large unique Asian cohort. Prospective studies are needed to assess the clinical utility of ctDNA status in this setting., (© 2024 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Background: Osimertinib is a third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) approved for use in EGFR-mutant lung cancer. We examined its performance in the second/subsequent line after resistance to first- and second-generation (1/2G) EGFR-TKI., Methods: We reviewed electronic records of 202 patients who received osimertinib from July 2015 to January 2019 in the second/subsequent line after progression on prior EGFR-TKI. Of these, complete data from 193 patients were available. Clinical data including patient characteristics, primary EGFR mutation, T790M mutation status, presence of baseline brain metastases (BM), first-line EGFR-TKI use, and survival outcomes were extracted, and results retrospectively analyzed., Results: Of 193 evaluable patients, 151 (78.2%) were T790M+ (T790M positive) with 96 (49.2%) tissue confirmed; 52% of patients received osimertinib in the second line setting. After median follow up of 37 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) of the entire cohort was 10.3 [95% confidence interval (CI): 8.64-11.50] months and median overall survival (OS) was 20 (95% CI: 15.61-23.13) months. Overall response rate (ORR) to osimertinib was 43% (95% CI: 35.9-50.3%); 48.3% in T790M+ vs . 20% in T790M- (T790M negative) patients. OS in T790M+ patients was 22.6 vs . 7.9 months in T790M- patients (HR 0.43, P=0.001), and PFS was 11.2 vs . 3.1 months respectively (HR 0.52, P=0.01). Tumour T790M+ was significantly associated with longer PFS (P=0.007) and OS (P=0.01) compared to tumour T790M- patients, however this association was not seen with plasma T790M+. Of the 22 patients with paired tumor/plasma T790M testing, response rate (RR) to osimertinib was 30% for those plasma T790M+/tumour T790M-, compared to 63% and 67% for those who were plasma T790M+/tumour T790M+ and plasma T790M-/tumour T790M+, respectively. By multivariable analysis (MVA), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≥2 was associated with shorter OS (HR 2.53, P<0.001) and PFS (HR 2.10, P<0.001), whereas presence of T790M+ was associated with longer OS (HR 0.50, P=0.008) and PFS (HR 0.57, P=0.027)., Conclusions: This cohort demonstrated the efficacy of osimertinib in second line/beyond for EGFR+ (EGFR mutation-positive) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Tissue T790M result appeared more predictive of osimertinib efficacy compared to plasma, highlighting potential T790M heterogeneity and the advantage with paired tumor-plasma T790M testing at TKI resistance. T790M- disease at resistance remains an unmet treatment need., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://tlcr.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/tlcr-22-661/coif). JM reports travel support for meetings from AstraZeneca. GGYL reports honoraria from Amgen and consulting/advisory role for Merck, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb and Roche. MKA reports support for meetings from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ipsen; honoraria from Boston Scientific and consulting/advisory role for Merck. RK reports research funding support from Sanofi (Inst), Janssen Pharmaceuticals (Inst); honoraria from Astellas Pharma, Novartis, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, MSD Oncology, Bristol-Myers Squibb, consulting/advisory role for Pfizer, Astellas Pharma, Novartis, Mundipharma. TR reports honoraria and Speakers’ Bureau from Novartis, consulting/advisory role for Ipsen and Eisai. TKHL reports honoraria for AstraZeneca and consulting/advisory role for MSD. DSWT reports research funding from Novartis (Inst), GlaxoSmithKline (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst); honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Roche and Pfizer; consulting/advisory role for Novartis, Merck, Loxo, AstraZeneca, Roche, Pfizer. DWTL reports research funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb (Inst), honoraria from Boehringer Ingelheim, consulting/advisory role for Roche, AstraZeneca, MSD Oncology, Novartis and Boehringer Ingelheim and stock ownership from Clearbridge Biomedics. QSN reports research funding from Novartis, MSD Oncology and Bayer; honoraria from MSD Oncology, AstraZeneca and Pierre Fabre and consulting/advisory role for Boehringer Ingelheim. WLT reports educational grant support from AstraZeneca; honoraria from Novartis, Merck, and Amgen; support for meetings from AstraZeneca, Ipsen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb (Inst), and DKSH. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2023 Translational Lung Cancer Research. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Despite the established role of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in EGFR -mutated NSCLC, drug resistance inevitably ensues, with a paucity of treatment options especially in EGFR T790M -negative resistance., Experimental Design: We performed whole-exome and transcriptome analysis of 59 patients with first- and second-generation EGFR TKI-resistant metastatic EGFR -mutated NSCLC to characterize and compare molecular alterations mediating resistance in T790M-positive (T790M + ) and -negative (T790M - ) disease., Results: Transcriptomic analysis revealed ubiquitous loss of adenocarcinoma lineage gene expression in T790M - tumors, orthogonally validated using multiplex IHC. There was enrichment of genomic features such as TP53 alterations, 3q chromosomal amplifications, whole-genome doubling and nonaging mutational signatures in T790M - tumors. Almost half of resistant tumors were further classified as immune hot , with clinical outcomes conditional on immune cell-infiltration state and T790M status. Finally, using a Bayesian statistical approach, we explored how T790M - and T790M + disease might be predicted using comprehensive genomic and transcriptomic profiles of treatment-naïve patients., Conclusions: Our results illustrate the interplay between genetic alterations, cell lineage plasticity, and immune microenvironment in shaping divergent TKI resistance and outcome trajectories in EGFR -mutated NSCLC. Genomic and transcriptomic profiling may facilitate the design of bespoke therapeutic approaches tailored to a tumor's adaptive potential., (©2021 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is a unique disease endemic in Asia. It is etiologically linked to the Epstein-Barr virus and is both radio- and chemo-sensitive. While radiotherapy (RT) remains the primary treatment modality with high cure rates for early stage disease, systemic treatment forms an important integral component in the treatment of NPC, both in the non-metastatic as well as palliative setting. Presently, standard therapy in locally advanced NPC comprises conventional cytotoxic chemotherapy administered concurrently during RT. The role of induction chemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy remain to be well-defined. Further research strategies in non-metastatic disease will require better identification of patients with high risk disease, and determining the optimal sequence and combination of chemotherapeutic regimens. In metastatic disease, whilst chemotherapy remains the mainstay of care, resistance inevitably develops. Development of molecularly targeted therapies has not yielded much success to date, and further research has been focused on development of EBV-targeted strategies such as vaccination or administration of cytotoxic T-cells directed towards EBV, as well as evaluation of immune checkpoint inhibition approaches.

Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the lung represents about 20-30% of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) and is associated with a poorer prognosis with limited treatment options. Erlotinib is an approved, standard second-line therapy in this setting, besides docetaxel. The LUX-Lung 8 study has shown superior overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), as well as disease control rates for treatment with afatinib compared to erlotinib in this head-to-head trial in patients with previously treated advanced SCC of the lung, with manageable side effect profile. This is the first and largest prospective phase III trial comparing two different tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with advanced SCC of the lung. Whether the results would be practice-changing remains to be seen, especially with the advent of novel immunotherapeutic agents such as nivolumab, which is recently approved for advanced lung SCC.