Search

Purpose Dental professionals are exposed to hazardous noise levels on a daily basis in clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to compare the hearing status of dental hygienists who utilize ultrasonic scalers in the workplace compared to age-matched control participants (non-dental hygienists) who were not exposed to ultrasonic noise. Methods A convenience sample of nineteen dental hygienists (experimental) and nineteen non-dental hygienists (control) was recruited for this study. A matched pairs design was utilized; participants in each group were matched based on age and gender to eliminate confounding variables. The testing procedure consisted of an audiologist performing a series of auditory tests including otoacoustic emissions test, pure-tone audiometry, and tympanometry on the experimental and control groups. Results In the right ear, there were notable differences from 1000 Hz - 10,000 Hz and in the left ear from 6000 Hz - 10,000 Hz, with higher hearing thresholds in the experimental group of dental hygienists. While 56% of the univariate tests conducted on how many days were worked per week showed statistical significance, the regression line slope indicated those that worked more days had better hearing statuses. The variables for years in practice for dental hygienists, how many of those years were full-time employment, and how many years the dental hygienist had used an ultrasonic scaling device, also had many significant univariate tests for the experimental group only. These variables were more likely to serve as proxies representing true noise exposure. The paired t-test between the groups demonstrated statistically significant differences between the experimental and control group at 9000 Hz in both ears. Conclusion While results from this study demonstrated various qualitative differences in hearing status of the control group (non-dental hygienists) and experimental group (dental hygienists), age was found to be the most critical variable. Furthermore, this data demonstrated differences in hearing status based on various frequencies between dental hygienists and age-matched controls that should be further explored with a larger population., (Copyright © 2024 The American Dental Hygienists’ Association.)

Tertiary Lymphoid Structures (TLS) are lymphoid structures commonly associated with improved survival of cancer patients and response to immunotherapies. However, conflicting reports underscore the need to consider TLS heterogeneity and multiple features such as TLS size, composition, and maturation status, when assessing their functional impact. With the aim of gaining insights into TLS biology and evaluating the prognostic impact of TLS maturity in Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma (NSCLC), we developed a multiplex immunofluorescent (mIF) panel including T cell (CD3, CD8), B cell (CD20), Follicular Dendritic cell (FDC) (CD21, CD23) and mature dendritic cell (DC-LAMP) markers. We deployed this panel across a cohort of primary tumor resections from NSCLC patients (N=406) and established a mIF image analysis workstream to specifically detect TLS structures and evaluate the density of each cell phenotype. We assessed the prognostic significance of TLS size, number, and composition, to develop a TLS scoring system representative of TLS biology within a tumor. TLS relative area, (total TLS area divided by the total tumor area), was the most prognostic TLS feature (C-index: 0.54, p = 0.04). CD21 positivity was a marker driving the favorable prognostic impact, where CD21 + CD23 - B cells (C-index: 0.57, p = 0.04) and CD21 + CD23 - FDC (C-index: 0.58, p = 0.01) were the only prognostic cell phenotypes in TLS. Combining the three most robust prognostic TLS features: TLS relative area, the density of B cells, and FDC CD21 + CD23 - we generated a TLS scoring system that demonstrated strong prognostic value in NSCLC when considering the effect of age, sex, histology, and smoking status. This TLS Score also demonstrated significant association with Immunoscore, EGFR mutational status and gene expression-based B-cell and TLS signature scores. It was not correlated with PD-L1 status in tumor cells or immune cells. In conclusion, we generated a prognostic TLS Score representative of the TLS heterogeneity and maturity undergoing within NSCLC tissues. This score could be used as a tool to explore how TLS presence and maturity impact the organization of the tumor microenvironment and support the discovery of spatial biomarker surrogates of TLS maturity, that could be used in the clinic., Competing Interests: Authors JB, HA, PP, EJ, SW, JB, MSa, FN and MSu were employed by the company AstraZeneca and are shareholders. Authors FS, EJ, MV, TG, AA, HH and MH-B were employed by the company AstraZeneca. Author JG was employed by the company Veracyte. The remaining author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The authors declare that this study received funding from AstraZeneca. Additionally, Author TG received research funding from Idera Pharmaceuticals, consulting fees from Mendus, LAVA Therapeutics and GE Health, and is shareholder of LAVA Therapeutics. Author RV received research funding from Genmab BV. However, none of these funders, except AstraZeneca, were involved in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision., (Copyright © 2024 Berthe, Poudel, Segerer, Jennings, Ng, Surace, Andoni, Testori, Saraiya, Vuko, Hessel, Heininen-Brown, Blando, Jones, Willis, Galon, van de Ven, de Gruijl and Angell.)

Purpose: To assess the efficacy of various machine learning (ML) algorithms in predicting late-stage colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnoses against the backdrop of socio-economic and regional healthcare disparities., Methods: An innovative theoretical framework was developed to integrate individual- and census tract-level social determinants of health (SDOH) with sociodemographic factors. A comparative analysis of the ML models was conducted using key performance metrics such as AUC-ROC to evaluate their predictive accuracy. Spatio-temporal analysis was used to identify disparities in late-stage CRC diagnosis probabilities., Results: Gradient boosting emerged as the superior model, with the top predictors for late-stage CRC diagnosis being anatomic site, year of diagnosis, age, proximity to superfund sites, and primary payer. Spatio-temporal clusters highlighted geographic areas with a statistically significant high probability of late-stage diagnoses, emphasizing the need for targeted healthcare interventions., Conclusions: This research underlines the potential of ML in enhancing the prognostic predictions in oncology, particularly in CRC. The gradient boosting model, with its robust performance, holds promise for deployment in healthcare systems to aid early detection and formulate localized cancer prevention strategies. The study's methodology demonstrates a significant step toward utilizing AI in public health to mitigate disparities and improve cancer care outcomes.

Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy improves pathologic complete response rate and event-free survival in patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) versus chemotherapy alone. NeoCOAST was the first randomized, multidrug platform trial to examine novel neoadjuvant immuno-oncology combinations for patients with resectable NSCLC, using major pathologic response (MPR) rate as the primary endpoint. Eighty-three patients received a single cycle of treatment: 26 received durvalumab (anti-PD-L1) monotherapy, 21 received durvalumab plus oleclumab (anti-CD73), 20 received durvalumab plus monalizumab (anti-NKG2A), and 16 received durvalumab plus danvatirsen (anti-STAT3 antisense oligonucleotide). MPR rates were higher for patients in the combination arms versus durvalumab alone. Safety profiles for the combinations were similar to those of durvalumab alone. Multiplatform immune profiling suggested that improved MPR rates in the durvalumab plus oleclumab and durvalumab plus monalizumab arms were associated with enhanced effector immune infiltration of tumors, interferon responses and markers of tertiary lymphoid structure formation, and systemic functional immune cell activation., Significance: A neoadjuvant platform trial can rapidly generate clinical and translational data using candidate surrogate endpoints like MPR. In NeoCOAST, patients with resectable NSCLC had improved MPR rates after durvalumab plus oleclumab or monalizumab versus durvalumab alone and tumoral transcriptomic signatures indicative of augmented immune cell activation and function. See related commentary by Cooper and Yu, p. 2306. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 2293., (©2023 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: MEDI0680 is a humanized anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) antibody, and durvalumab is an anti-PD-L1 antibody. Combining treatment using these antibodies may improve efficacy versus blockade of PD-1 alone. This phase II study evaluated antitumor activity and safety of MEDI0680 plus durvalumab versus nivolumab monotherapy in immunotherapy-naïve patients with advanced clear-cell renal cell carcinoma who received at least one prior line of antiangiogenic therapy., Patients and Methods: Patients received either MEDI0680 (20 mg/kg) with durvalumab (750 mg) or nivolumab (240 mg), all intravenous, every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included best overall response, progression-free survival (PFS), safety, overall survival (OS), and immunogenicity. Exploratory endpoints included changes in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), baseline tumor mutational burden, and tumor-infiltrated immune cell profiles., Results: Sixty-three patients were randomized (combination, n = 42; nivolumab, n = 21). ORR was 16.7% [7/42; 95% confidence interval (CI), 7.0-31.4] with combination treatment and 23.8% (5/21; 95% CI, 8.2-47.2) with nivolumab. Median PFS was 3.6 months in both arms; median OS was not reached in either arm. Because of adverse events, 23.8% of patients discontinued MEDI0680 and durvalumab and 14.3% of patients discontinued nivolumab. In the combination arm, reduction in ctDNA fraction was associated with longer PFS. ctDNA mutational analysis did not demonstrate an association with response in either arm. Tumor-infiltrated immune profiles showed an association between immune cell activation and response in the combination arm., Conclusions: MEDI0680 combined with durvalumab was safe and tolerable; however, it did not improve efficacy versus nivolumab monotherapy., (©2022 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)