Search

At JADPRO Live Virtual 2021, Colleen Lewis, MSN, ANP-BC, AOCNP®, discussed the trajectory of the advanced practitioner role in clinical research, including the historical experience, potential barriers to practice, and future possibilities to advance patient care and maximize the role of the advanced practitioner in research.

Background Purpose: The combination of a mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor and lenalidomide showed enhanced preclinical cytotoxicity. We conducted a phase 1 study in advanced solid tumour patients to assess safety, efficacy and pharmacodynamic (PD) outcomes. Methods We employed a 3+3 dose escalation design to establish the safety and recommended phase 2 doses (RP2D) of daily everolimus and lenalidomide in patients with advanced solid tumours. The starting doses were 5 and 10 mg, respectively, with planned escalation to maximum single-agent doses of 10 and 25 mg in the absence of dose-limiting toxicity. PD endpoints of lymphocyte subsets and immune cytokines were assessed in peripheral blood using multiparameter flow cytometry and LUMINEX assay. Efficacy was evaluated by cross-sectional imaging after every two cycles of treatment. Results The study enrolled 44 patients, median age of 58 years and 28 males (63.6%). The RP2D was established as 10 and 25 mg daily continuously for everolimus and lenalidomide. Common (>5%) grade ≥3 adverse events included rash (19%), neutropenia (19%), hypokalaemia (11%) and fatigue (9%). Best efficacy outcomes in 36 evaluable patients were partial response in 5 (13.8%), stable disease in 24 (55.8%) and progressive disease in 7 (19.4%) patients. PD assessment revealed significant association of cytokine levels (interleukin-2 (IL2), IL21 and IL17), baseline activated and total CD8+ lymphocytes and change in B cell lymphocytes and activated NK cells with clinical benefit. Conclusions The study demonstrated the safety of everolimus and lenalidomide with promising efficacy signal in thyroid and adenoid cystic cancers. Clinical Trial Registration NCT01218555

Summary Background Data on patients with COVID-19 who have cancer are lacking. Here we characterise the outcomes of a cohort of patients with cancer and COVID-19 and identify potential prognostic factors for mortality and severe illness. Methods In this cohort study, we collected de-identified data on patients with active or previous malignancy, aged 18 years and older, with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection from the USA, Canada, and Spain from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) database for whom baseline data were added between March 17 and April 16, 2020. We collected data on baseline clinical conditions, medications, cancer diagnosis and treatment, and COVID-19 disease course. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality within 30 days of diagnosis of COVID-19. We assessed the association between the outcome and potential prognostic variables using logistic regression analyses, partially adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, and obesity. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04354701, and is ongoing. Findings Of 1035 records entered into the CCC19 database during the study period, 928 patients met inclusion criteria for our analysis. Median age was 66 years (IQR 57–76), 279 (30%) were aged 75 years or older, and 468 (50%) patients were male. The most prevalent malignancies were breast (191 [21%]) and prostate (152 [16%]). 366 (39%) patients were on active anticancer treatment, and 396 (43%) had active (measurable) cancer. At analysis (May 7, 2020), 121 (13%) patients had died. In logistic regression analysis, independent factors associated with increased 30-day mortality, after partial adjustment, were: increased age (per 10 years; partially adjusted odds ratio 1·84, 95% CI 1·53–2·21), male sex (1·63, 1·07–2·48), smoking status (former smoker vs never smoked: 1·60, 1·03–2·47), number of comorbidities (two vs none: 4·50, 1·33–15·28), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or higher (status of 2 vs 0 or 1: 3·89, 2·11–7·18), active cancer (progressing vs remission: 5·20, 2·77–9·77), and receipt of azithromycin plus hydroxychloroquine (vs treatment with neither: 2·93, 1·79–4·79; confounding by indication cannot be excluded). Compared with residence in the US-Northeast, residence in Canada (0·24, 0·07–0·84) or the US-Midwest (0·50, 0·28–0·90) were associated with decreased 30-day all-cause mortality. Race and ethnicity, obesity status, cancer type, type of anticancer therapy, and recent surgery were not associated with mortality. Interpretation Among patients with cancer and COVID-19, 30-day all-cause mortality was high and associated with general risk factors and risk factors unique to patients with cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to better understand the effect of COVID-19 on outcomes in patients with cancer, including the ability to continue specific cancer treatments. Funding American Cancer Society, National Institutes of Health, and Hope Foundation for Cancer Research.

Purpose: Concurrent inhibition of mTOR and PI3K led to improved efficacy in preclinical models and provided the rationale for this phase I study of everolimus and buparlisib (BKM120) in patients with advanced solid tumor. Patients and Methods: We used the Bayesian Escalation with Overdose Control design to test escalating doses of everolimus (5 or 10 mg) and buparlisib (20, 40, 60, 80, and 100 mg) in eligible patients. Pharmacokinetic assessment was conducted using blood samples collected on cycle 1, days 8 and 15. Pharmacodynamic impact on mTOR/PI3K pathway modulation evaluated in paired skin biopsies collected at baseline and end of cycle 1. Results: We enrolled 43 patients, median age of 63 (range, 39–78) years; 25 (58.1%) females, 35 (81.4%) Caucasians, and 8 (18.6%) Blacks. The most frequent toxicities were hyperglycemia, diarrhea, nausea, fatigue, and aspartate aminotransferase elevation. Dose-limiting toxicities observed in 7 patients were fatigue (3), hyperglycemia (2), mucositis (1), acute kidney injury (1), and urinary tract infection (1). The recommended phase II dose (RP2D) for the combination was established as everolimus (5 mg) and buparlisib (60 mg). The best response in 27 evaluable patients was progressive disease and stable disease in 3 (11%) and 24 (89%), respectively. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 2.7 (1.8–4.2) and 9 (6.4–13.2) months. Steady-state pharmacokinetic analysis showed dose-normalized maximum concentrations and AUC values for everolimus and buparlisib in combination to be comparable with single-agent pharmacokinetic. Conclusions: The combination of everolimus and buparlisib is safe and well-tolerated at the RP2D of 5 and 60 mg on a continuous daily schedule.

Colleen Lewis, MSN, ANP-BC, AOCNP®, and R. Donald Harvey, PharmD, BCOP, FCCP, FHOPA, presented on the new world of tumor-agnostic treatment approaches, including those aimed at managing patients with tumors that have high microsatellite instability (MSI-H) or neurotrophic receptor tyrosine kinase (NTRK) fusions. Learn about the clinical trial designs that enable development of these novel therapies, and discover how testing methodologies support precision medicine advances.

In phase I trials, some biospecimens are used both for research and patient care and some for research only. Some research participants have therapeutic misconception, assuming all biospecimens are for patient care. This study’s aim was to test if a simple information chart would improve understanding of nontherapeutic research procedures. A two-arm study was conducted. Participants in the control group (C) were asked whether biospecimens were for their care, for research only, or for both. The experimental group (E) was asked the same questions but provided with a study-specific information chart labeling the purpose of each biospecimen. One hundred one patients were interviewed. In both arms, understanding that pretreatment blood draws were for patient care and research was moderate (49% for C and 62% for E). Understanding that posttreatment blood draws were for research only was significantly higher in the experimental arm (16% for C and 44% for E; p = 0.002). Providing a simple information chart may help alleviate this aspect of therapeutic misconception.

Background Sarcopenia and inflammation have been associated with poor survival in patients with cancer. We explored the combined effects of these variables on survival in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy. Methods We performed a retrospective review of 90 patients enrolled on immunotherapy‐based phase I clinical trials at Emory University from 2009 to 2017. Baseline neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio, monocyte‐to‐lymphocyte ratio, and platelet‐to‐lymphocyte ratio (PLR) were used as surrogates of inflammation. The skeletal muscle index (SMI) was derived from the skeletal muscle density calculated from baseline abdominal computed tomography images. Optimal cutoffs for continuous inflammation biomarkers and SMI were determined by bias‐adjusted log‐rank test. A four‐level risk stratification was used to create low‐risk (PLR, The interaction between chronic inflammation and body composition is particularly important in the era of immunotherapy, considering that immune checkpoint inhibitors rely on the host immune system for their efficacy. This article reports on the combined effects of inflammation and sarcopenia on clinical outcomes in patients with solid tumors treated with immunotherapy‐based regimens.

BACKGROUND Body mass index (BMI) is used to define obesity, but it is an imperfect measure of body composition. In the current study, the authors explored the association between types of fat and survival in patients treated with immunotherapy. METHODS A retrospective analysis of 90 patients who were treated with immunotherapy on phase 1 clinical trials at the Winship Cancer Institute in Atlanta, Georgia, from 2009 through 2017 was performed. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were used to measure clinical outcomes. Baseline BMI and radiographic images at the middle of the third lumbar vertebrae were obtained. Fat densities were calculated and converted to indices (subcutaneous fat index [SFI], intermuscular fat index [IFI], and visceral fat index [VFI]) after dividing by height in meters squared. Risk groups were created using recursive partitioning and the regression trees method for SFI and IFI, which were selected by stepwise variable selection among all fat-related variables. The Cox proportional hazards model and Kaplan-Meier method were used for the association with OS and PFS. RESULTS The majority of patients (59%) were male and diagnosed with melanoma (33%) or gastrointestinal cancers (22%). The median BMI was 27.4 kg/m2 , the median SFI was 62.78, the median IFI was 4.06, and the median VFI was 40.53. Low-risk patients (those with an SFI ≥73) had a significantly longer OS (hazard ratio, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.09-0.46 [P

Purpose: We aim to better understand the curricular, staffing, and achievement trade-offs entailed by expansions of high-school computer science (CS) for students, schools, and school leaders. Methods: We use descriptive, correlational, and quasi-experimental methods to analyze statewide longitudinal course-, school-, and staff-level data from California, where CS course taking has expanded rapidly. Findings: We find that these rapid CS course expansions have not come at the expense of CS teachers’ observable qualifications (namely certification, education, or experience). Within-school course taking patterns over time suggest that CS enrollment growth has come at the expense of social studies, English/language arts (ELA), and arts courses, as well as from other miscellaneous electives. However, we find no evidence that increased enrollment of students in CS courses at a school has a significant effect on students’ math or ELA test scores. Implications: Flexible authorization requirements for CS teachers appear to have allowed school leaders to staff new CS courses with teachers whose observable qualifications are strong, though we do not observe teachers’ CS teaching skill. Increasing CS participation is unlikely to noticeably improve school-level student test scores, but administrators also do not need to be overly concerned that test scores will suffer. However, school leaders and policymakers should think carefully about what courses new CS courses will replace and whether such replacements are worthwhile.

PURPOSE: Debate continues over whether explicit recommendations for a clinical trial should be included as an element of shared decision making within oncology. We aimed to determine if and how providers make explicit recommendations in the setting of phase I cancer clinical trials. METHODS: Twenty-three patient/provider conversations about phase I trials were analyzed to determine how recommendations are made and how the conversations align with a shared decision-making framework. In addition, 19 providers (9 of whose patient encounters were observed) were interviewed about the factors they consider when deciding whether to recommend a phase I trial. RESULTS: We found that providers are comprehensive in the factors they consider when recommending clinical trials. The two most frequently stated factors were performance status (89%) and patient preferences (84%). Providers made explicit recommendations in 19 conversations (83%), with 12 of those being for a phase I trial (12 [63%] of 19). They made these recommendations in a manner consistent with a shared decision-making model; 18 (95%) of the 19 conversations during which a recommendation was made included all steps, or all but 1 step, of shared decision making, as did 11 of the 12 conversations during which a phase I trial was recommended. In 7 (58%) of these later conversations, providers also emphasized the importance of the patient’s opinion. CONCLUSION: We suggest that providers not hesitate to make explicit recommendations for phase I clinical trials, because they are able to do so in a manner consistent with shared decision making. With further research, these results can be applied to other clinical trial settings.

Introduction Bortezomib plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRD) is a standard induction therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. Given preclinical and clinical data suggesting the synergistic activity of the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat with both bortezomib and lenalidomide for the treatment of multiple myeloma, we hypothesized that adding vorinostat to VRD (R2V2) would increase the rate and the quality of responses to induction treatment. Here we report the results of a phase 1 trial (NCT01038388) evaluating R2V2 as up-front treatment for NDMM patients. Patients and Methods R2V2 was tested as induction therapy in a dose-escalation phase 1 study in 30 NDMM patients deemed eligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. Treatment consisted of 4 induction cycles with R2V2, followed by either autologous stem-cell transplantation or 4 additional R2V2 cycles and lenalidomide maintenance therapy. Results The maximum tolerated dose of vorinostat was 200 mg daily. The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal (87%), fatigue and peripheral neuropathy (60%), and thrombocytopenia (33%). R2V2 induced an objective response in 96% of patients, with 48% obtaining at least a complete remission. Median progression-free survival was 52 months, with 77% of patients alive at 5 years. Conclusion R2V2 as induction treatment for NDMM patients resulted in remarkable response rates at the cost of increased toxicity.

BACKGROUND Optimal prognostic and predictive biomarkers for patients with advanced-stage cancer patients who received immunotherapy (IO) are lacking. Inflammatory markers, such as the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), the monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), and the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), are readily available. The authors investigated the association between these markers and clinical outcomes of patients with advanced-stage cancer who received IO. METHODS A retrospective review was conducted of 90 patients with advanced cancer who received treatment on phase 1 clinical trials of IO-based treatment regimens. NLR, MLR, and PLR values were log-transformed and treated as continuous variables for each patient. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and clinical benefit were used to measure clinical outcomes. For univariate associations and multivariable analyses, Cox proportional-hazards models or logistic regression models were used. RESULTS The median patient age was 63 years, and most were men (59%). The most common histologies were melanoma (33%) and gastrointestinal cancers (22%). High baseline NLR, MLR, and PLR values were associated significantly with worse OS and PFS (P < .05) and a lower chance of benefit (NLR and PLR; P < .05). Increased NLR, MLR, and PLR values 6 weeks after baseline were associated with shorter OS and PFS (P ≤ .052). CONCLUSIONS Baseline and early changes in NLR, MLR, and PLR values were strongly associated with clinical outcomes in patients who received IO-based treatment regimens on phase 1 trials. Confirmation in a homogenous patient population treated on late-stage trials or outside of trial settings is warranted. These values may warrant consideration for inclusion when risk stratifying patients enrolled onto phase 1 clinical trials of IO agents.

This article presents the results of a survey of student and faculty perspectives within a university-level instructional physical activity (PA) program. The results revealed that students enrolled in the courses primarily for enjoyment and to stay fit. A majority of students ranked the quality of instruction as excellent, were interested in new activity offerings such as SCUBA and training for road races, and would be likely or very likely to continue pursuing the activity in the future. Faculty responses included challenges in teaching instructional PA courses (e.g., varying skill levels, equipment access), the benefits of teaching including improved student skills and student enjoyment, and an interest in professional development opportunities. An ongoing evaluation of student and instructor perspectives within instructional PA programs is recommended and necessary, but responsiveness to this information is paramount for ensuring high-quality, engaging programs.

Background: The impact of age-, gender-, and race-based differences on safety and efficacy in phase I clinical trials has not been well studied. Methods: We analyzed data from phase I clinical trials evaluating targeted biologic agents in patients with advanced solid malignancies. Race and gender distribution of enrolled patients was compared to the referral population demographics at the city, metro, and state levels. The association between age, gender, and race with type, frequency, and severity of treatment-emergent toxicities and clinical benefit was assessed using univariate and multivariable models. Results: Data from 117 eligible patients – Blacks/Caucasians/Others (27/85/5); male/female (66/51) – were obtained. Blacks were younger than Caucasian patients (median age of 56 vs. 62 years, p = 0.004). Nausea/vomiting was more frequent in female patients (43 vs. 24%, p = 0.03), while hematologic toxicity was more likely in Whites. While median time on treatment was comparable (113 vs. 91; p = 0.840), the median overall survival was significantly shorter for Blacks versus Caucasians (7.4 vs. 11.4 months; p = 0.0227). Black race (HR 2.11; 95% CI 1.24–3.60; p = 0.006) and older age (HR 1.03; 95% CI 1.00–1.06; p = 0.029) were associated with an increased risk of death. Conclusions: Age-, gender-, and race-based disparities were observed with specific toxicity and survival outcomes on phase I clinical trials of anticancer agents.

Little is known about the extent to which expansions of K-12 computer science (CS) have been equitable for students of different racial backgrounds and gender identities. Using longitudinal course-level data from all high schools in California between the 2003–2004 and 2018–2019 school years we find that 79% of high school students in California, including majorities of all racial groups, are enrolled in schools that offer CS, up from 45% in 2003. However, while male and female students are equally likely to attend schools that offer CS courses, CS courses represent a much smaller share of course enrollments for female students than for male students. Non-Asian students enroll in relatively few CS courses, and this is particularly true for Black, Hispanic, and Native American students. Race gaps in CS participation are to a substantial degree explicable in terms of access gaps, but gender gaps in CS participation are not. Different groups of students have access to CS teachers with similar observable qualifications, but CS teachers remain predominantly white and male. Consequently, white and male CS students are much more likely than other students to have same-race or same-gender instructors. Our findings and the implications we draw for practice will be of interest to administrators and policymakers who, over and above needing to ensure equitable access to CS courses for students, need to attend carefully to equity-related course participation and staffing considerations.

Background: Psychological stress – when an individual perceives that the environment exceeds their ability to meet the demands placed on them - is common in college students and exercise, and specifically instructional physical activity courses, is frequently cited as a one method of stress reduction. Objective: Determine any relationship between exercise empowerment and perceived life stress for those participating in instructional physical activity courses (IPAC). Methods: All undergraduate students (n = 3388) enrolled in IPAC in 15-week IPAC at a large university were surveyed on perceived life stress (PSS), empowerment in exercise (EES), and specific demographic variables. Results: 944 of 3388 enrolled students (Nov. 2015, April 2016) completed the survey. The data revealed GPA (p < 0.002), sex (p < 0.000), and EES (p < 0.001) showed differences for PSS. It was determined that EES, sex, and GPA predicted PSS differently for students according to their year in college. Conclusions: For freshman and seniors, sex and lower GPA were a stronger predictor of PSS with no mitigating effect of exercise empowerment. For sophomores and juniors the level of life stress was lower at higher levels of exercise empowerment. These findings support a complex relationship between exercise empowerment and life stress. While exercise is cited as a method for stress reduction the relationship between exercise empowerment and life stress for college-aged students is not as straightforward as it may seem.

Background Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy is a fast-developing field within the spectrum of cancer care. ICIs are associated with distinctive immune-related adverse events (irAEs), reflecting their unique mechanisms of action. Objectives Effective management of irAEs requires early recognition and prompt reporting of their signs and symptoms; appropriate patient education is critical to maximizing this opportunity. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted in the public domain concerning awareness, assessment, and management of irAEs associated with ICIs. Findings Educational resources should provide timely, consistent, and personalized information, using a variety of teaching strategies that consider individual patient needs. Patient education should be developed with interprofessional team input and regularly reviewed in response to emerging guidance. Key messages include timing of therapeutic response and corresponding irAEs, early identification of irAEs, and the unique ability of ICIs to influence immune responses after treatment discontinuation.

Proteasome (PIs) and hystone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACis) have previously shown synergistic activity in the treatment of relapesed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients. In this phase 1 study, we combined carfilzomib, a second generation PI, with panobinostat, a HDACi, to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination (CarPan) and assess safety and efficacy among RRMM patients. Thirty-two patients (median of 4 prior lines of therapy) were enrolled. The MTD was carfilzomib 36 mg/m2 (on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16) and panobinostat 20 mg (TIW, 3 weeks on/1 week off, every 28 days), administered until progression. At the MTD, the most common grade 3/4, treatment-related adverse events were thrombocytopenia (41%), fatigue (17%), and nausea/vomiting (12%). The objective response rate (ORR) and clinical benefit rate were 63% and 68%, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the entire population were 8 and 23 months, respectively. No differences in terms of ORR (55% vs. 57%), median PFS (months 8 vs. 7 months) and OS (24 vs. 22 months) were observed between bortezomib-sensitive and -refractory patients. CarPan proved to be a safe and effective steroid-sparing regimen in a heavily pre-treated population of MM patients. (Trial registered at ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01549431), Key points CarPan is a highly active, steroid-sparing regimen, effective in both bortezomib-sensitive and refractory patients.The safety profile of CarPan, particularly thrombocytopenia and gastrointestinal adverse events, compares favorably with that of panobinostat and bortezomib.

Background Given the increasing number of available immunotherapeutic agents, more patients are presenting after failing immunotherapy in need of new treatment options. In this study, we investigated the clinical outcomes of patients treated with sequential immunotherapy. Methods We performed a retrospective review of 90 advanced stage cancer patients treated on immunotherapy-based phase 1 clinical trials at Winship Cancer Institute from 2009 to 2017. We included 49 patients with an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-indicated histology. Patients were analyzed based on whether they had received prior ICI. Clinical outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and clinical benefit (best response of complete response, partial response, or stable disease). Univariate analysis (UVA) and multivariate analysis (MVA) were performed using Cox proportional hazard or logistic regression model. Covariates included age, liver metastases, number of prior lines of therapy, histology, and Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) risk group. Results The most common histologies were melanoma (61%) and lung/head and neck cancers (37%). More than half of patients (n = 27, 55%) received at least one ICI prior to trial enrollment: ten received anti-PD-1, two received anti-CTLA-4, five received anti-PD-1/CTLA-4 combination, and ten received multiple ICI. In MVA, ICI-naive patients had significantly longer OS (HR: 0.22, CI: 0.07–0.70, p = 0.010) and trended towards higher chance of CB (HR: 2.52, CI: 0.49–12.97, p = 0.268). Patients who received prior ICI had substantially shorter median OS (10.9 vs 24.3 months, p = 0.046) and PFS (2.8 vs. 5.1 months, p = 0.380) than ICI-naive patients per Kaplan-Meier estimation. Within the ICI-naive group, 78% (7 of 9) of patients who received prior interleukin (IL-2) or interferon gamma (IFNγ) experienced disease control for at least 6 months, compared to a disease control rate of 15% (2 of 13) in patients who had received chemotherapy, targeted therapy, or no prior treatment. Conclusions ICI-naive patients may experience improved clinical outcomes on immunotherapy-based phase 1 clinical trials than patients who have received prior ICI. This may be particularly true for patients who received prior IL-2 or IFNγ. Further development of immunotherapy combination therapies is needed to improve clinical outcomes of these patients. These results should be validated in a larger study.

Programmed death-1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint inhibitors are novel immuno-oncology agents. Unlike chemotherapy or targeted agents, which inhibit tumor cell proliferation or induce tumor cell death, immune checkpoint inhibitors are designed to stimulate a patient's own immune system to eliminate tumors. As a result of their mechanism of action, PD-1 pathway inhibitors are associated with adverse events (AEs) with immunologic etiologies, termed immune-mediated AEs (imAEs). These include skin and gastrointestinal AEs, and endocrine, hepatic, renal, and respiratory AEs, including pneumonitis. Most imAEs can be effectively managed with treatment interruption/discontinuation and/or steroids or other immunosuppressive agents. A specialist consult may be required in some cases, and endocrine imAEs may require permanent hormone replacement therapy.This article provides an overview of PD-1 inhibitors, including the potential mechanism of action, key clinical trial data, and strategies for managing patients who may receive PD-1 inhibitors for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer.Information in the article comes from PubMed literature searches and the author's experience with these agents in clinical trials.Oncology clinicians must thoroughly assess baseline functioning and symptoms and be vigilant for imAEs, which require prompt diagnosis and management. A good understanding of the clinical profile of PD-1 pathway inhibitors is instrumental in helping clinicians manage patients receiving these new therapies.

e24193 Background: It is difficult for patients to distinguish non-therapeutic from therapeutic procedures in research. In phase I trials, day 1 pretreatment biological samples are used for research and care; posttreatment samples are for research purposes only. Preliminary data suggested patients did not understand this difference. Our study tested to see if a simple information chart would improve understanding of the nontherapeutic research procedure. Methods: A sequential two arm study was conducted. Controls (C) were asked whether samples taken at different times on day 1 of the trial were to be used for their care, for research only, or for both. The experimental (E) group provided patients with a study-specific information chart labeling the purpose of required samples and patients were then asked the same questions. Results: 100 patients (50 each C and E) were interviewed after consenting to a trial. Patients were mostly white (63%), male (53%), with an annual income > $60,000 (51%); 49% had a college degree. In both arms, understanding that pretreatment samples were for patient care and research was moderate (50% C; 62% E). Understanding that posttreatment samples were for research was significantly higher in the experimental arm (16% C; 44% E p = 0.002). Conclusions: Questions regarding the purpose of biological samples taken pre-administration of study drug were less susceptible to therapeutic misconception due to the “both” option being true. Since the provision of an informational chart significantly improved understanding of the purpose of the posttreatment sample, we suggest that providing such a chart may help alleviate this type of therapeutic misconception. [Table: see text]

Background Selecting the appropriate patients to receive immunotherapy (IO) remains a challenge due to the lack of optimal biomarkers. The presence of liver metastases has been implicated as a poor prognostic factor in patients with metastatic cancer. We investigated the association between sites of metastatic disease and clinical outcomes in patients receiving IO. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of 90 patients treated on IO-based phase 1 clinical trials at Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University between 2009 and 2017. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were measured from the first dose of IO to date of death or hospice referral and clinical or radiographic progression, respectively. Clinical benefit (CB) was defined as a best response of complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD). Univariate analysis (UVA) and Multivariate analysis (MVA) were carried out using Cox proportional hazard model or logistic regression model. Covariates included age, whether IO is indicated for the patient’s histology, ECOG performance status, Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) risk group, number of metastatic sites, and histology. Results The median age was 63 years and 53% of patients were men. The most common histologies were melanoma (33%) and gastrointestinal cancers (22%). Most patients (73.3%) had more than one site of distant metastasis. Sites of metastasis collected were lymph node (n = 58), liver (n = 40), lung (n = 37), bone (n = 24), and brain (n = 8). Most patients (80.7%) were RMH good risk. Most patients (n = 62) had received 2+ prior lines of systemic treatment before receiving IO on trial; 27 patients (30.0%) received prior ICB. Liver metastases were associated with significantly shorter OS (HR: 0.38, CI: 0.17–0.84, p = 0.017). Patients with liver metastasis also trended towards having shorter PFS (HR: 0.70, CI: 0.41–1.19, p = 0.188). The median OS was substantially longer for patients without liver metastases (21.9 vs. 8.1 months, p = 0.0048). Conclusions Liver metastases may be a poor prognostic factor in patients receiving IO on phase 1 clinical trials. The presence of liver metastases may warrant consideration in updated prognostic models if these findings are validated in a larger prospective cohort.

Rebecca D. Pentz*, Kristopher A. Hendershot, Louisa Wall, Taylor E. White, Susan K. Peterson, Cheryl B. Thomas, Jennifer McCormick, Michael J. Green, Colleen Lewis, Zachary Luke Farmer, Fay J. Hlubocky, Tehseen Dossul, Margie D. Dixon, Yuan Liu, Jeffrey M. Switchenko, Carolina Salvador, Taofeek K. Owonikoko, R. Donald Harvey and Fadlo R. Khuri Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA Winship Cancer Institute, Atlanta, GA, USA The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, USA Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA Emory Healthcare, Atlanta, GA, USA The University of Alabama School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL, USA The University of Chicago Medical Center, USA Interactive Research and Development, Main Shahrah-e-Faisal, Karachi, Pakistan

Background: There are now six approved immune checkpoint inhibitors for several different malignancies including melanoma, head and neck cancer, lung cancer, and renal cell carcinoma. Given the increased number of available immunotherapeutic agents, more patients are presenting in clinic as candidates for sequential immunotherapy. However, the efficacy of sequential immunotherapy in a trial setting is unknown. We investigated the association between prior treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors and clinical outcomes in patients treated with subsequent immunotherapy in a phase 1 clinical trial. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of 90 advanced stage cancer patients treated on immunotherapy-based phase 1 clinical trials at Winship Cancer Institute between 2009 and 2017. We included 49 patients with an immune checkpoint-indicated histology (melanoma, lung cancer, head and neck cancer, and bladder cancer). Patients were then analyzed based on whether they had received at least one immune checkpoint inhibitor prior to enrollment. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated in months from immunotherapy initiation on trial to date of death and clinical or radiographic progression, respectively. Clinical benefit (CB) was defined as a best response of complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD). Univariate analysis (UVA) and multivariate analysis (MVA) were carried out using Cox proportional hazard or logistic regression model. Covariates included age, presence of liver metastases, number of prior lines of systemic therapy, histology, and Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) risk group. Results: The median age was 67 years and most patients (78%) were men. The most common histologies were melanoma (61%) and lung/head and neck cancers (37%). The majority (81%) of patients were RMH good risk. More than half of patients (n=27, 55%) had received at least one immune checkpoint inhibitor prior to trial enrollment: ten received anti-PD-1, two received anti-CTLA-4, five received anti-PD-1/CTLA-4 combination therapy, and ten received multiple immune checkpoint inhibitors. In MVA, patients who had not received a prior immune checkpoint inhibitor had significantly longer OS (HR: 0.22, CI: 0.07-0.70, p=0.010). These patients also trended towards longer PFS (HR: 0.86, CI: 0.39-1.87, p=0.699) and higher chance of CB (HR: 2.52, CI: 0.49-12.97, p=0.268). Immunotherapy-naïve patients had substantially longer OS (24.3 vs 10.9 months) and PFS (5.1 vs. 2.8 months) than patients who had prior immunotherapy per Kaplan-Meier estimation. Conclusion: Optimal treatment options for oncology patients who progress on immune checkpoint inhibitors are lacking. In this study, patients who received at least one prior immune checkpoint inhibitor had worse clinical outcomes on immunotherapy-based phase 1 clinical trials than immune checkpoint-naïve patients. This suggests that further development of immunotherapy combination therapies is needed to improve clinical outcomes of these patients. The results from this study should be validated in a larger, prospective study. Citation Format: Mehmet Bilen, Dylan Martini, Yuan Liu, Colleen Lewis, Hannah Collins, Julie Shabto, Mehmet Akce, Haydn Kissick, Bradley Carthon, Walid Shaib, Olatunji Alese, Rathi Pillai, Conor Steuer, Christina Wu, David Lawson, Ragini Kudchadkar, Bassel El-Rayes, Viraj Master, Suresh Ramalingam, Taofeek Owonikoko, R. Donald Harvey. Sequential immunotherapy and association with clinical outcomes in advanced-stage cancer patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Fourth CRI-CIMT-EATI-AACR International Cancer Immunotherapy Conference: Translating Science into Survival; Sept 30-Oct 3, 2018; New York, NY. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Immunol Res 2019;7(2 Suppl):Abstract nr B176.

Background: This phase 1 trial utilising a Bayesian continual reassessment method evaluated bortezomib and sunitinib to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), and recommended doses of the combination. Methods: Patients with advanced solid organ malignancies were enrolled and received bortezomib weekly with sunitinib daily for 4 weeks, every 6 weeks. Initial doses were sunitinib 25 mg and bortezomib 1 mg m−2. Cohort size and dose level estimation was performed utilising the Escalation with Overdose Control (EWOC) adaptive method. Seven dose levels were evaluated; initially, sunitinib was increased to a goal dose of 50 mg with fixed bortezomib, then bortezomib was increased. Efficacy assessment occurred after each cycle using RECIST criteria. Results: Thirty patients were evaluable. During sunitinib escalation, DLTs of grade 4 thrombocytopenia (14%) and neutropenia (6%) at sunitinib 50 mg and bortezomib 1.3 mg m−2 were seen. Subsequent experience showed tolerability and activity for sunitinib 37.5 mg and bortezomib 1.9 mg m−2. Common grade 3/4 toxicities were neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, hypertension, and diarrhoea. The recommended doses for further study are bortezomib 1.9 mg m−2 and sunitinib 37.5 mg. Four partial responses were seen. Stable disease >6 months was noted in an additional six patients. Conclusion: Bortezomib and sunitinib are well tolerated and have anticancer activity, particularly in thyroid cancer. A phase 2 study of this combination in thyroid cancer patients is planned.

BACKGROUND: Ethical concerns about phase 1 trials persist. Important conceptual advances have been made in understanding concepts used to describe misunderstanding. However, a systematic, empirical evaluation of the frequency of misunderstanding incorporating recent developments is lacking. METHODS: The authors queried 95 participants in phase 1 trials to provide a more sophisticated estimate of the proportion who had therapeutic misconception (TM), defined as misunderstanding the research purpose or how research differs from individualized care, and therapeutic misestimation (TMis), defined as incorrectly estimating the chance of a research trial benefit as >20% or underestimating risk as 0%. RESULTS: Sixty-five of 95 respondents (68.4%) had TM, which was associated in a multivariate analysis with lower education and family income (P ¼ .008 and P ¼ .001, respectively), but TM was not associated with the vulnerability of having hardly any treatment options. Eighty-nine of 95 respondents (94%) had TMis, although only 18% reported this was a factual estimate. Although the risks of investigational agents and those exacerbated by research, such as uncertain outcomes, were mentioned (39% and 41% of respondents, respectively), risks novel to research, such as research biopsies, were rarely mentioned (3% of respondents). Although most of these respondents believed that their chance of benefit was greater and that their risk was lower than the population chance (optimists) (54.6%), a substantial minority of respondents (37.6%) were pessimists. CONCLUSIONS: TM continues to be prevalent. Estimates of personal benefit were not usually meant to report facts, it remains unknown whether respondents in the current study had TMis. Although they are not more vulnerable, phase 1 participants need improved understanding of key TM concepts, with attention to risks that are not present in standard of care. Cancer 2012;118:4571-8. V C 2012 American Cancer Society.

Background: Optimal biomarkers for cancer pts treated with IO are currently lacking. Markers of inflammation, such as neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) are readily available and associated with poor outcomes. We investigated the association between these markers and CO in pts treated with IO. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of 90 pts with advanced cancer treated on IO-based phase I trials at the Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University between 2009-2017. Baseline NLR, MLR, and PLR were treated as continuous variables and rescaled by their own standard deviation. Overall survival (OS) was measured from the first dose of IO to date of death or hospice referral. Progression-free survival (PFS) was determined from first dose of IO to clinical or radiographic progression or death. We defined clinical benefit (CB) as complete response, partial response, or stable disease. Univariate association (UVA) and multivariable analysis (MVA) were carried out using Cox proportional hazard model or logistic regression model. Baseline covariates included race, gender, ECOG PS, # of prior therapies, Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) risk group, IO indication, and # of metastatic sites. Results: The median pt age was 63 years and most (59%) were men. The most common histologies were melanoma (33%) and GI cancers (22%). The majority (81%) were RMH good risk. 46% of pts had CB on IO. The median NLR, MLR, and PLR was 3.63, 0.48, and 182.65, respectively. Increased NLR, MLR, and PLR were all associated with worse OS, PFS, and chance of CB (Table 1). NLR, MLR and PLR are highly correlated to each other (Pearson correlation coefficients ≥ 0.8, all p < 0.0001). Conclusion: NLR, MLR, and PLR are strongly associated with CO in pts treated with IO. Prospective validation of these findings are warranted. Table 1: UVA and MVA of NLR, MRL, and PLR with CO OS PFSCBUVAMVAUVAMVAUVAMVAHR (CI)p-valueHR (CI)p-valueHR (CI)p-valueHR (CI)p-valueOR (CI)p-valueOR (CI)p-valueNLR1.37 (1.11-1.70)0.003*1.30 (1.02-1.66)0.031*1.42 (1.18-1.70) *statistically significant Citation Format: Dylan J. Martini, Yuan Liu, Colleen Lewis, Hannah Collins, Mehmet Akce, Haydn Kissick, Bradley C. Carthon, Walid L. Shaib, Olatunji B. Alese, Rathi Pillai, Conor E. Steuer, Christina Wu, David H. Lawson, Ragini Kudchadkar, Bassel El-Rayes, Viraj A. Master, Suresh Ramalingam, Taofeek K. Owonikoko, R Donald Harvey, Mehmet Asim Bilen. Blood based biomarkers and association with clinical outcome (CO) in advanced stage patients (pts) treated with immunotherapy (IO) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 2607.

e15022Background: Ideal biomarkers for cancer pts receiving IO are currently lacking. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR...

e14035 Background: Optimal use of molecularly targeted therapies is achieved by pairing agents with driver mutations present in tumor tissue. Enrollment on clinical trials designed to demonstrate this objective requires obtaining informed consent prior to molecular analysis, with potential delays in tissue acquisition, testing results, and treatment initiation. We reviewed our experience and patient disposition with studies where assignment to treatment required mutation data. Methods: We identified trials requiring consent prior to tissue mutational analysis. Review included time intervals between landmark events starting with trial presentation to patient, consent, tissue shipment, mutation analysis results, and if and when treatment was initiated. Demographic data, change in ECOG PS, and subsequent therapy were also collected. Patients were included in the analysis if they signed consent. Results: Experience with 68 patients consented across 4 molecular selection trials was reviewed. Median age: 60 years (32-87); 56% female; self-identified race White (72%), African-American (24%), Asian (4%). Most common cancers were lung (35%), colorectal (18%), parotid (7%) and sarcoma (7%). Nineteen patients required new biopsies; 15 patients (22%) discontinued participation prior to molecular results being available. Common reasons for discontinuation included insufficient archival tissue (5), lost to follow up, initiation of other treatment, and death (2 each). In 53 patients who continued, overall median time from consent to test results received was 41 days (12-149); with median time from consent to obtaining tissue of 22 days (0-121), and tissue sent to results received was 13 days (1-77). In those with advanced disease (n = 36), PS worsening occurred in 28%. Three patients matched to therapy; 1 received more than 1 cycle. In those not matching (n = 50), 46% received approved therapies, 22% were lost to follow-up, 18% enrolled on another trial and 14% died. Conclusions: Molecular selection of patients for clinical trials requires additional time and resources, and many patients do not have driver mutations. Long time intervals between decision points can delay therapies and impair the ability to explore alternative treatment.

Platinum-based therapy combined with cetuximab is standard first-line therapy for recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (RMSCCHN). Preclinical studies have suggested that mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors may overcome resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor blockers and may augment cetuximab antitumor activity. We conducted a phase 1b trial of carboplatin, cetuximab, and everolimus for untreated RMSCCHN.Patients received carboplatin (area under the curve = 2 mg/ml/min; 3 weeks on, 1 week off), cetuximab (with a loading dose of 400 mg/m(2) and then 250 mg/m(2) weekly), and dose-escalating everolimus (2.5, 5.0, 7.5, and 10 mg/day) with a 3+3 design. After 4 cycles, patients without progression continued cetuximab/everolimus until progression or intolerable toxicity. Patients (age ≥ 18 years) had previously untreated, unresectable RMSCCHN not amenable to radiotherapy and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2.The study enrolled 20 patients (male/female = 18/2) with RMSCCHN; the median age was 65 years (44-75 years). Thirteen patients received everolimus (male/female = 92%). Two of 6 patients receiving 2.5 mg/day experienced dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) with grade 3 hyponatremia and nausea. In 7 patients receiving de-escalated everolimus (2.5 mg every other day), grade 3 hyperglycemia produced DLT in 1 of 6 patients. The objective response rate (RR) was 61.5% (all partial responses). Progression-free survival (PFS) was 8.15 months. The pharmacokinetics of everolimus was described with a 2-compartment mixed-effects model. There was a significant correlation between tumor p-p44/42 staining and response (P = .044) and a marginally significant correlation between phosphorylated mammalian target of rapamycin and overall survival.The maximum tolerated dose of everolimus with cetuximab and carboplatin was 2.5 mg every other day. The regimen was associated with an encouraging RR and PFS, and this suggested possible clinical efficacy in a select group of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) patients with histories of cocaine and alcohol abuse (CA-PTSD) were compared with normal volunteers. Positron emission tomography (PET) scans with 15O-butanol were used to compare regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) between the groups during rest and during an auditory continuous performance task (ACPT). CA-PTSD patients had significantly higher rCBF in right amygdala and left parahippocampal gyrus than normals during the ACPT. Normals had higher rCBF at frontal cortex during the resting scan and during the ACPT. The role of the amygdala in attention and fear conditioning suggests that increased amygdala rCBF may be related to clinical features of PTSD. Cocaine use may be associated with increased amygdala rCBF in PTSD patients. Amygdala and frontal cortex attention system components may be reciprocally related and their relative contributions to processing of neutral stimuli perturbed in CA-PTSD.

A current theory of anxiety effects in cognition claims that anxiety disrupts normal processing within the working memory system. We examined this theory in the context of a reading task, for participants who were high or low in assessed mathematics anxiety. The task was designed to measure the ability to inhibit attention to distracting information and the effects of this ability on explicit memory performance. The results suggested that math-anxious individuals have a deficient inhibition mechanism whereby working memory resources are consumed by task-irrelevant distracters. A consequence of this deficiency was that explicit memory performance was poorer for high-anxious individuals. Based on these results, the recommendation is made that Eysenck and Calvo's (1992) processing efficiency theory be integrated with Connelly, Hasher, and Zack's (1991) inhibition theory to portray more comprehensively the relation between anxiety and performance.

Background: Preclinical work showed improved anticancer efficacy with the combination of an mTOR and a PI3K inhibitor over either agent alone. We conducted a phase I study to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of the combination of everolimus (E), an mTOR inhibitor and buparlisib or BKM120 (B), a pan-PI3K inhibitor. Methods: Patients with advanced solid malignancies who have exhausted standard treatment options were enrolled. Main eligibility criteria include ECOG performance status 0-2, adequate end organ function and absence of glucose intolerance, uncontrolled hepatitis, anxiety or depression. Dose escalation was performed using a Bayesian Escalation with Overdose Control (EWOC) design to evaluate different doses of E (5mg or 10mg) and B (20, 40, 60 and 80 mg,) once daily continuously. Eligible patients were enrolled in cohorts of 3 patients. Pharmacokinetic (PK) assessment was conducted in cycle 1 on day 8 using peripheral blood samples collected at time 0, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 24 hours and prior to dosing on cycle 1 D day 15. Pharmacodynamic (PD) impact on mTOR/PI3K pathway modulation was evaluated in skin punch biopsies collected at baseline and at end of cycle 1. Results: We enrolled 35 patients: Median age 63yrs (range:40-79), 21 females (58%); 2 Latinos (6%), 7 Blacks (20%) and 26 Caucasians (74%); with cancers of the lung (8), colorectal (7), sarcomas (3), salivary gland (3), breast (3), thyroid (3), thymic (2), bladder (2), ovarian (2), head and neck (1) and PNET (1). The safety of 6 different dose combinations of E and B (5/20; 10/20; 5/40; 5/60; 10/60; 5/80) was assessed. The most frequent toxicities were: hyperglycemia, diarrhea, nausea, fatigue and AST elevation. The dose limiting toxicities observed in 6 patients were: fatigue (3), hyperglycemia (1), mucositis (1), acute renal failure (1) and urinary tract infection (1). The 5/60 combination was defined as the RP2D. The median number of cycles completed was 2 (range: 0-20). Of the 25 patients evaluable for efficacy, 8 (32%) had disease progression while 17 (68%) achieved stable disease (SD). Median duration of SD was 18 weeks (range: 2-83) and 7 patients had SD lasting ≥6 months. Steady-state PK data for both agents in 24 evaluable patients showed no evidence of drug-drug interaction, with dose-normalized maximum concentrations (Cmax) and area-under-the-curve (AUC0-∞) values for E and B in combination being comparable to single agent data. Preliminary signal of efficacy for the combination was observed in patients with thymic, breast and lung cancer. PD analysis is ongoing and will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion: The safety profile of the combination of everolimus plus buparlisib is well tolerated and the RP2D is 5mg/day and 60mg/day respectively on a continuous daily schedule. The efficacy data are encouraging and warrant further evaluation in phase II studies. Citation Format: Taofeek Kunle Owonikoko, R.Donald Harvey, Colleen Lewis, Zhengjia Chen, John S. Kauh, Meredith Renfroe, Rijalda Deovic, Gabriel L. Sica, Bradley C. Carthon, Wayne Bernard Harris, Bassel F. El-Rayes, Suresh S. Ramalingam, Fadlo R. Khuri. A phase I pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluation of the combination of everolimus and buparlisib for concurrent mTOR and PI3K pathway blockade in patients with advanced solid tumors. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 106th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2015 Apr 18-22; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(15 Suppl):Abstract nr CT303. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2015-CT303