Search

ABSTRACT: Despite good manufacturing practices and rigorous cleaning and sanitizing procedures established in dairy processing plants, microbiological contamination remains the main cause of products being noncompliant or atypical and hence not fit for human consumption. The objective of this study was to isolate, identify, and characterize bacteria, yeasts, and molds associated with substandard dairy products in Canada and to create a collection of reference isolates. In addition to conventional microbiological characterization, each isolate was tested for biofilm-forming ability and susceptibility to heat, antimicrobial agents, and common industrial disinfectants. Among the 105 microbial strains isolated from pasteurized milk, cream, and cheese samples, 24 bacterial isolates, belonging mainly to the genus Pseudomonas, were shown to be moderate or strong biofilm producers in 96-well plates and highly resistant to peracetic acid (100 ppm, 5 min contact time) and sodium hypochlorite (70 ppm, 5 min contact time). In addition, 56 bacterial isolates, including Acinetobacter baumannii, Enterobacter bugandensis, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Pseudomonas spp., were found resistant to ampicillin, fosfomycin or ceftriaxone, while 14 others, such as Bacillus spp. and Macrococcus spp., withstood a heat treatment equivalent to low-temperature, long-time pasteurization (63°C for 30 min). This descriptive study provides new information on potential problematic microorganisms in dairies and will guide the development of novel control strategies intended to prevent and reduce microbiological contamination and the associated economic losses.

Clinically approved iron chelators, originally designed to address iron overload disorders, have emerged as potential anticancer agents. Deferasirox (Def), a tridentate iron chelator, has demonstrated antiproliferative effects in cancer. Background/Objectives: This study aims to elucidate the mechanism of action of Def and its impact on non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). Methods: NSCLC A549 cells were treated with Def to assess cytotoxicity, the effect on nuclear and mitochondrial pathways, and iron-containing proteins and genes to evaluate anti-metastasis and chemoresistance. A lung carcinoma mouse model was used for in vivo studies. Results: Our findings revealed that Def induced cytotoxicity, effectively chelated intracellular iron, and triggered apoptosis through the increase in phosphatidylserine externalization and caspase 3 activity. Additionally, Def caused G0/G1 cell cycle arrest by downregulating the ribonucleotide reductase catalytic subunit. Furthermore, Def perturbed mitochondrial function by promoting the production of reactive oxygen species and the inhibition of glutathione as a measurement of ferroptosis activation. Def demonstrated inhibitory effects on cell migration in scratch assays, which was supported by the upregulation of n-myc downstream-regulated gene 1 and downregulation of the epidermal growth factor receptor protein. Also, Def downregulated one of the main markers of chemoresistance, the ABCB1 gene. In vivo experiments using a lung carcinoma mouse model showed that Def treatment did not affect the animal’s body weight and showed a significant decrease in tumor growth. Conclusions: This investigation lays the groundwork for unraveling Def action’s molecular targets and mechanisms in lung carcinoma, particularly within iron-related pathways, pointing out its anti-metastasis and anti-chemoresistance effect.

To promote collaboration across canine science, address replicability issues, and advance open science practices within animal cognition, we have launched the ManyDogs consortium, modeled on similar ManyX projects in other fields. We aimed to create a collaborative network that (a) uses large, diverse samples to investigate and replicate findings, (b) promotes open science practices of pre-registering hypotheses, methods, and analysis plans, (c) investigates the influence of differences across populations and breeds, and (d) examines how different research methods and testing environments influence the robustness of results. Our first study combines a phenomenon that appears to be highly reliable—dogs’ ability to follow human pointing—with a question that remains controversial: do dogs interpret pointing as a social communicative gesture or as a simple associative cue? We collected data (N = 455) from 20 research sites on two conditions of a 2-alternative object choice task: (1) Ostensive (pointing to a baited cup after making eye-contact and saying the dog’s name); (2) Non-ostensive (pointing without eye-contact, after a throat-clearing auditory control cue). Comparing performance between conditions, while both were significantly above chance, there was no significant difference in dogs’ responses. This result was consistent across sites. Further, we found that dogs followed contralateral, momentary pointing at lower rates than has been reported in prior research, suggesting that there are limits to the robustness of point-following behavior: not all pointing styles are equally likely to elicit a response. Together, these findings underscore the important role of procedural details in study design and the broader need for replication studies in canine science.

This article is the third in a dedicated series entitled ‘Spot the CLOT’, which aims to raise awareness of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) to improve patient and provider education, patient outcomes and, ultimately, reduce the burden of CAT. The first two articles, entitled ‘The significance of VTE in cancer: Introduction of the Spot the CLOT’ (Sardo et al., 2021) and ‘Spot the CLOT: What cancer patients want to know’ (Bayadinova et al., 2022) described CAT, the knowledge deficits of CAT in cancer patients, and strategies for raising awareness and educating patients diagnosed with cancer. The focus of this third article in the series is promoting awareness of CAT in healthcare providers. It will identify knowledge gaps among medical personnel, suggest tools for identifying patients at highest risk, and offer strategies and available resources for increasing awareness among providers.

Le présent article est le troisième d’une série intitulée « Prévenir la thrombose », qui vise à mieux faire connaître la thrombose associée au cancer (TAC) et ainsi améliorer les connaissances des malades et des soignants à ce sujet, l’état des patients et, en bout de ligne, réduire le fardeau de cette comorbidité. Les deux premiers articles, Importance de la thromboembolie veineuse liée au cancer (Sardo et al., 2021) et Ce que les personnes atteintes de cancer veulent savoir (Bayadinova et al., 2022) ont décrit la TAC, le manque de connaissances sur cette affection touchant la population atteinte de cancer, puis présenté des stratégies de sensibilisation et d’éducation destinées aux malades. L’objectif de ce troisième article est de sensibiliser les professionnels de la santé à la thrombose liée au cancer, en dégageant les lacunes relatives au savoir du personnel médical, en suggérant des outils pour identifier les patients à plus haut risque et en proposant des stratégies et des ressources pour sensibiliser davantage le personnel soignant.

The formation of biofilms in dairy processing plants can reduce equipment efficiency, contribute to surface deterioration, and contaminate dairy products by releasing the microorganisms they contain, which may cause spoilage or disease. However, a more representative identification of microbial communities and physico-chemical characterization requires to detach and recover adequately the entire biofilm from the surface. The aim of this study is to develop an efficient technique for in-plant biofilm sampling by growing a strain of Pseudomonas azotoformans PFl1A on stainless-steel surface in a dynamic CDC biofilm reactor system using tryptic soy broth (TSB) and milk as growth media. Different techniques, namely, swabbing, scraping, sonic brushing, synthetic sponge, and sonicating synthetic sponge were used and the results were compared to a standard ASTM International method using ultrasonication. Their efficiencies were evaluated by cells enumeration and scanning electron microscopy. The maximum total viable counts of 8.65 ± 0.06, 8.75 ± 0.08, and 8.71 ± 0.09 log CFU/cm2 were obtained in TSB medium using scraping, synthetic sponge, and sonicating synthetic sponge, respectively, which showed no statistically significant differences with the standard method, ultrasonication (8.74 ± 0.02 log CFU/cm2). However, a significantly (p < 0.05) lower cell recovery of 8.57 ± 0.10 and 8.60 ± 0.00 log CFU/cm2 compared to ultrasonication were achieved for swabbing and sonic brushing, respectively. Furthermore, scanning electron microscopy showed an effective removal of biofilms by sonic brushing, synthetic sponge, and sonicating synthetic sponge; However, only the latter two methods guaranteed a superior release of bacterial biofilm into suspension. Nevertheless, a combination of sonication and synthetic sponge ensured dislodging of sessile cells from surface crevices. The results suggest that a sonicating synthetic sponge could be a promising method for biofilm recovery in processing plants, which can be practically used in the dairy industries as an alternative to ultrasonication.

Reports on difficulties encountered when attempts were made to measure potassium salt (K[sup +]) activity in epidermal cells of barley leaves using triple-barrelled K[sup +]-selective microelectrodes. Values derived from initial attempts to measure K[sup +] activity in vacuoles of barley leaf epidermal cells; Effect of nitrate on the response of K[sup +] sensors made with three types of plasticizers.

Though there are similarities to music therapy, the field of community music in healthcare, while in its infancy, is steadily growing. This case study explored how semi-formal, active music-making can play a role in illness and recovery and provide patients with a sense of voice, connection, and community, and the efficacy of community music programming in a hospital. Six participants began and three participants completed a 6-week music class learning the ukulele. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was used as a method for data analysis from semi-structured pre-questionnaires, transcribed classes, transcribed post-interviews, and weekly questionnaires from both the participants and the facilitator. Emergent and recurrent themes central to the participants’ experiences were discovered: (1) Music as a connector, (2) Music within us external to cancer, (3) Musical experiences interrupted by cancer, (4) Music creates empowerment. Subthemes and individual experiences are also explored. Implications for future research and music’s role in improving the Patient Experience in hospital settings are discussed.

Early indicators of metastatic cancer response to therapy are important for evaluating new drugs and stopping ineffective treatment. The RECIST guidelines based on repeat cancer imaging are widely adopted in clinical trials, are used to identify active regimens that may change practice, and contribute to regulatory approvals. However, these criteria do not provide insight before 6 to 12 weeks of treatment and typically require that patients have measurable disease. Recent data suggest that measuring on-treatment changes in the amount or proportion of ctDNA in peripheral blood plasma may accurately identify responding and nonresponding cancers at earlier time points. Over the past year, the RECIST working group has evaluated current evidence for plasma ctDNA kinetics as a treatment response biomarker in metastatic cancers and early endpoint in clinical trials to identify areas of focus for future research and validation. Here, we outline the requirement for large standardized trial datasets, greater scrutiny of optimal ctDNA collection time points and assay thresholds, and consideration of regulatory body guidelines and patient opinions. In particular, clinically meaningful changes in plasma ctDNA abundance are likely to differ by cancer type and therapy class and must be assessed before ctDNA can be considered a potential pan-cancer response evaluation biomarker. Despite the need for additional data, minimally invasive on-treatment ctDNA measurements hold promise to build upon existing response assessments such as RECIST and offer opportunities for developing novel early endpoints for modern clinical trials., (©2024 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Radiomics, the science of extracting quantifiable data from routine medical images, is a powerful tool that has many potential applications in oncology. The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Working Group (RWG) held a workshop in May 2022, which brought together various stakeholders to discuss the potential role of radiomics in oncology drug development and clinical trials, particularly with respect to response assessment. This article summarizes the results of that workshop, reviewing radiomics for the practicing oncologist and highlighting the work that needs to be done to move forward the incorporation of radiomics into clinical trials.

Background: Pleural mesothelioma usually presents at an advanced, incurable stage. Chemotherapy with platinum-pemetrexed is a standard treatment. We hypothesised that the addition of pembrolizumab to platinum-pemetrexed would improve overall survival in patients with pleural mesothelioma., Methods: We did this open-label, international, randomised phase 3 trial at 51 hospitals in Canada, Italy, and France. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, with previously untreated advanced pleural mesothelioma, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenous chemotherapy (cisplatin [75 mg/m 2 ] or carboplatin [area under the concentration-time curve 5-6 mg/mL per min] with pemetrexed 500 mg/m 2 , every 3 weeks for up to 6 cycles), with or without intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks (up to 2 years). The primary endpoint was overall survival in all randomly assigned patients; safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study therapy. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02784171, and is closed to accrual., Findings: Between Jan 31, 2017, and Sept 4, 2020, 440 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to chemotherapy alone (n=218) or chemotherapy with pembrolizumab (n=222). 333 (76 %) of patients were male, 347 (79%) were White, and median age was 71 years (IQR 66-75). At final analysis (database lock Dec 15, 2022), with a median follow-up of 16·2 months (IQR 8·3-27·8), overall survival was significantly longer with pembrolizumab (median overall survival 17·3 months [95% CI 14·4-21·3] with pembrolizumab vs 16·1 months [13·1-18·2] with chemotherapy alone, hazard ratio for death 0·79; 95% CI 0·64-0·98, two-sided p=0·0324). 3-year overall survival rate was 25% (95% CI 20-33%) with pembrolizumab and 17% (13-24%) with chemotherapy alone. Adverse events related to study treatment of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 60 (27%) of 222 patients in the pembrolizumab group and 32 (15%) of 211 patients in the chemotherapy alone group. Hospital admissions for serious adverse events related to one or more study drugs were reported in 40 (18%) of 222 patients in the pembrolizumab group and 12 (6%) of 211 patients in the chemotherapy alone group. Grade 5 adverse events related to one or more drugs occurred in two patients on the pembrolizumab group and one patient in the chemotherapy alone group., Interpretation: In patients with advanced pleural mesothelioma, the addition of pembrolizumab to standard platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy was tolerable and resulted in a significant improvement in overall survival. This regimen is a new treatment option for previously untreated advanced pleural mesothelioma., Funding: The Canadian Cancer Society and Merck & Co., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MP has received grants for research to institution from AstraZeneca and Roche; payment for educational events from Astellas, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca; and received drugs for research from Roche and AstraZeneca. GLR received consulting fees from MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca, Roche, Novartis, Lilly, Amgen, Sanofi, Pfizer, Takeda, GSK, and Italfarmaco; received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca, Roche, Novartis, Lilly, Amgen, Sanofi, Pfizer, Takeda, GSK, and Italfarmaco; received support for attending meetings or travel from Roche, MSD, BMS, and Amgen; has participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca, Roche, Novartis, Lilly, Amgen, Sanofi, Pfizer, Takeda, GSK, and Italfarmaco; and has other financial or non-financial interests from MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca, Roche, Novartis, Amgen, Sanofi, Pfizer, Takeda, and GSK. YL holds stock or stock options from Merck. SL received consulting fees from Lilly, MSD, Sanofi, and AbbVie and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AstraZeneca. AS received grants or contracts (payments to institution) from MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca, Roche, and Amphera; received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AstraZeneca, BMS, MSD, and Roche; received support for attending meetings or travel from AstraZeneca, BMS, MSD, and Roche; and participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for AstraZeneca, BMS, MSD, and Roche. MF received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, BMS, and Takeda and received honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AstraZeneca, BMS, and Takeda. SAL has participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Sanofi and Bayer. JRG received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AstraZeneca and BMS. PB received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Merck and participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Mirati and AbbVie. NL has received editorial support from EMD Serono; received grants to institute (unrelated) from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Guardant Health, Inivata, Janssen, Merck/MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda; received honoraria or travel funding for CME lectures (unrelated) from AstraZeneca, Beigene, BMS, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, and Takeda; and participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Mirati, Helsinn, and Daichii Sankyo. LS has received grants or contracts to institution to support clinical trial from AstraZeneca, Merck, Bayer, Novartis, Repare, GSK, and Janssen and holds stock or stock options from AstraZeneca. DED has received research grants from CIHR, CancerCare Manitoba Foundation, and AstraZeneca; received research grants and salary awards from Manitoba Medical Services Foundation; received payment for educational events from Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, and BMS; served on an advisory board for Merck, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and Novartis; has acted in a leadership or fiduciary role in a board, society, committee or advocacy group, paid or unpaid for Lung Cancer Canada (Medical Advisory Committee), Canadian Association of Medical Oncologists (Chair, Fellowship Committee), and Canadian Cancer Trials Group (Chair, Small Cell Lung Cancer Working Group); and received equipment, materials, drugs, medical writing, gifts, or other services from AstraZeneca (Medical writing assistance on a small-cell lung cancer paper). QC has received grants to institution from Alkermes, Amgen, Apollomics, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bicycle, BMS, Conjupro, Decipher, Eli Lilly, Esperas, Exactis, GSK, iTEOS, Kelun, Merck, Mirati, Nuvalent, Ocellaris, Pfizer, Rvolution Medicines, Roche, SeaGen, Spectrum, and Treadwell; received consulting fees from Amgen, AnHeart, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, GSK, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Merck and Co, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda; received payment for speaking or presentations from AstraZeneca; acted on an advisory board for Amgen, AnHeart, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, GSK, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Merck and Co, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda; acted on a Data Safety Monitoring Committee for Merck and KGaA; and occupied a leadership or fiduciary role in a board, society, committee, or advocacy group, paid or unpaid for Lung Cancer Canada and Canadian Mesothelioma Foundation. CWL has served as a member of the Board of Directors for Canadian Mesothelioma Foundation. LG received grants or contracts to institution from BMS, MSD, Takeda, Pfizer, Roche, Amgen, Sanofi, Janssen, Lilly, and Novartis; received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from BMS, MSD, Takeda, Pfizer, Roche, Amgen, Sanofi, Janssen, Lilly, and Novartis; received support for attending meetings or travel from Pfizer, MSD, AstraZeneca, and Takeda; and participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Inhatarget Therapeutics. XQ received support for attending meetings or travel from Pfizer (ESMO 2022), Janssen (ASCO 2022), and Sanofi (ASCO 2023). VW received consulting fees from Amgen; received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, Roche, and Sanofi; received support for attending meetings or travel from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, MSD, Roche, and Sanofi; and participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Amgen, AstraZeneca, and Ipsen. GZ received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Inventiva Pharma, Lilly, MSD Oncology, Pfizer, and Roche; acted in a consulting or advisory role for AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Da Volterra, Inventiva Pharma, MSD Oncology, Pfizer, and Roche; received research funding from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda; and received travel, accommodations, and expenses from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly, Pfizer, and Roche. MLS received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from BMS and support for attending meetings or travel from Pfizer (ESMO 2022). AM received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Roche, AstraZeneca, BMS, MSD, Pfizer, Takeda, Boehringer, Sanofi, Lilly, Novartis, and Italfarmaco and participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Roche, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, MSD, and Takeda. FG received consulting fees from Novocure, BMS, Novartis, PharmaMar, Pierre Fabre, and MSD; received payment for speaker bureau from Novocure; received support for attending meetings or travel from Novartis, MSD, BMS, PharmaMar, and Pierre Fabre. SD received payment for presentations from Novartis, Pierre-Fabre, and BMS and travel and accommodation support during meetings from Istituto Gentili, Novartis, Pierre-Fabre, and BMS. GLC received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Novocure and BMS and participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Novocure. PAZ received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Merck Sharp and Dohme, Astellas, Janssen, Sanofi, Ipsen, Pfizer, Novartis, Bristol Meyer Squibb, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Roche, and Bayer; received support for attending meetings or travel from Merck Sharp and Dohme, Astellas, Janssen, Sanofi, Ipsen, Pfizer, Novartis, Bristol Meyer Squibb, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Roche, and Bayer; and participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Merck Sharp and Dohme, Astellas, Janssen, Sanofi, Ipsen, Pfizer, Novartis, Bristol Meyer Squibb, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Roche, and Bayer. MM received support for attending meetings or travel from Roche, Pfizer, and Novartis. FLC received consulting fees from Takeda, Amgen, Novartis, AstraZeneca, and Roche; received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Takeda, Amgen, Novartis, AstraZeneca, and Roche; and received support for attending meetings or travel from Takeda and Amgen. CG received consulting fees from Karyopharm, Menarini, and Roche; received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaux, manuscript writing, or educational events from MSD, BMS, Novartis, Amgen, Sanofi, Eli Lilly, GSK, Roche, Takeda, Boehringer, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer; and participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for MSD, BMS, Novartis, Amgen, Sanofi, Eli Lilly, GSK, Roche, Takeda, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer. FP received partial funding to institution and experimental study drug from Pfizer; received financial support to institution from Roche, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Incyte, Tesaro/GSK, and Merck; and received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Bayer, Pierre Fabre, AstraZeneca, Incyte, Ipsen, Clovis, Astellas, Sanofi, Roche, and Pfizer. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has shown promise in capturing primary resistance to immunotherapy. BR.36 is a multi-center, randomized, ctDNA-directed, phase 2 trial of molecular response-adaptive immuno-chemotherapy for patients with lung cancer. In the first of two independent stages, 50 patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer received pembrolizumab as standard of care. The primary objectives of stage 1 were to ascertain ctDNA response and determine optimal timing and concordance with radiologic Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) response. Secondary endpoints included the evaluation of time to ctDNA response and correlation with progression-free and overall survival. Maximal mutant allele fraction clearance at the third cycle of pembrolizumab signified molecular response (mR). The trial met its primary endpoint, with a sensitivity of ctDNA response for RECIST response of 82% (90% confidence interval (CI): 52-97%) and a specificity of 75% (90% CI: 56.5-88.5%). Median time to ctDNA response was 2.1 months (90% CI: 1.5-2.6), and patients with mR attained longer progression-free survival (5.03 months versus 2.6 months) and overall survival (not reached versus 7.23 months). These findings are incorporated into the ctDNA-driven interventional molecular response-adaptive second stage of the BR.36 trial in which patients at risk of progression are randomized to treatment intensification or continuation of therapy. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04093167 ., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Brigimadlin (BI 907828) is an oral MDM2-p53 antagonist that has shown encouraging antitumor activity in vivo. We present phase Ia results from an open-label, first-in-human, phase Ia/Ib study investigating brigimadlin in patients with advanced solid tumors (NCT03449381). Fifty-four patients received escalating doses of brigimadlin on day 1 of 21-day cycles (D1q3w) or days 1 and 8 of 28-day cycles (D1D8q4w). Based on dose-limiting toxicities during cycle 1, the maximum tolerated dose was selected as 60 mg for D1q3w and 45 mg for D1D8q4w. The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) were nausea (74.1%) and vomiting (51.9%); the most common grade ≥3 TRAEs were thrombocytopenia (25.9%) and neutropenia (24.1%). As evidence of target engagement, time- and dose-dependent increases in growth differentiation factor 15 levels were seen. Preliminary efficacy was encouraging (11.1% overall response and 74.1% disease control rates), particularly in patients with well-differentiated or dedifferentiated liposarcoma (100% and 75% disease control rates, respectively)., Significance: We report phase Ia data indicating that the oral MDM2-p53 antagonist brigimadlin has a manageable safety profile and shows encouraging signs of efficacy in patients with solid tumors, particularly those with MDM2-amplified advanced/metastatic well-differentiated or dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Further clinical investigation of brigimadlin is ongoing. See related commentary by Italiano, p. 1765. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1749., (©2023 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have activity in mesothelioma. IND.227 was a phase 2 trial (120 patients planned) comparing progression-free survival of standard platinum and pemetrexed (CP) versus CP + pembrolizumab (pembro) versus pembro. Accrual to the pembro arm was discontinued on the basis of interim analysis (IA-16 wk disease control rate). CP + pembro was tolerable, with progression-free survival similar between arms and median survival and overall response rate higher than those of CP alone (19.8 mo [95% confidence interval or CI: 8.4-41.36] versus 8.9 mo [95% CI: 5.3-12.8] and 47% [95% CI: 24%-71%] versus 19% [95% CI: 5%-42%], respectively). The subsequent phase 3 trial has completed accrual; results are expected in 2023., (Copyright © 2023 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Liquid biopsy (LB) can detect actionable genomic alterations in plasma circulating tumor circulating tumor DNA beyond tissue testing (TT) alone in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of adding LB to TT in the Canadian healthcare system., Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted using a decision analytic Markov model from the Canadian public payer (Ontario) perspective and a 2-year time horizon in patients with treatment-naïve stage IV non-squamous NSCLC and ⩽10 pack-year smoking history. LB was performed using the comprehensive genomic profiling Guardant360™ assay. Standard of care TT for each participating institution was performed. Costs and outcomes of molecular testing by LB + TT were compared to TT alone. Transition probabilities were calculated from the VALUE trial (NCT03576937). Sensitivity analyses were undertaken to assess uncertainty in the model., Results: Use of LB + TT identified actionable alterations in more patients, 68.5 versus 52.7% with TT alone. Use of the LB + TT strategy resulted in an incremental cost savings of $3065 CAD per patient (95% CI, 2195-3945) and a gain in quality-adjusted life-years of 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01-0.02) versus TT alone. More patients received chemo-immunotherapy based on TT with higher overall costs, whereas more patients received targeted therapy based on LB + TT with net cost savings. Major drivers of cost-effectiveness were drug acquisition costs and prevalence of actionable alterations., Conclusion: The addition of LB to TT as initial molecular testing of clinically selected patients with advanced NSCLC did not increase system costs and led to more patients receiving appropriate targeted therapy., Competing Interests: Competing Interests: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest., (© The Author(s), 2022.)

CX-5461 is a G-quadruplex stabilizer that exhibits synthetic lethality in homologous recombination-deficient models. In this multicentre phase I trial in patients with solid tumors, 40 patients are treated across 10 dose levels (50-650 mg/m 2 ) to determine the recommended phase II dose (primary outcome), and evaluate safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (secondary outcomes). Defective homologous recombination is explored as a predictive biomarker of response. CX-5461 is generally well tolerated, with a recommended phase II dose of 475 mg/m 2 days 1, 8 and 15 every 4 weeks, and dose limiting phototoxicity. Responses are observed in 14% of patients, primarily in patients with defective homologous recombination. Reversion mutations in PALB2 and BRCA2 are detected on progression following initial response in germline carriers, confirming the underlying synthetic lethal mechanism. In vitro characterization of UV sensitization shows this toxicity is related to the CX-5461 chemotype, independent of G-quadruplex synthetic lethality. These results establish clinical proof-of-concept for this G-quadruplex stabilizer. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02719977., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Introduction: First-line therapy for patients with metastatic NSCLC includes checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy, dual checkpoint inhibition, or combination with chemotherapy. We compared outcomes with combination chemoimmunotherapy versus dual checkpoint inhibition as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic NSCLC., Methods: This open-label, randomized clinical trial was conducted at 44 sites in Canada and Australia. Patients with treatment-naive, metastatic NSCLC without sensitizing EGFR or ALK alterations were randomized (1:1) to receive treatment with durvalumab plus tremelimumab with or without platinum-doublet chemotherapy. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were progression-free survival, overall response rate, and safety., Results: A total of 301 patients were randomized. Median OS was 16.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12.6-19.1) with chemotherapy plus immunotherapy and 14.1 months (95% CI: 10.6-18.3) with immunotherapy (hazard ratio = 0.88, 90% CI: 0.67-1.16, p = 0.46). Median progression-free survival with chemotherapy plus immunotherapy was 7.7 months (95% CI: 5.5-8.5) and 3.2 months (95% CI: 2.7-5.1) with immunotherapy (hazard ratio = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.52-0.88). The overall response rate with chemoimmunotherapy was 42.4% and 29.3% with immunotherapy (adjusted OR = 1.69, 95% CI: 1.04-2.76). The percentage of patients with grade 3 or higher adverse events was 82% in the chemotherapy plus immunotherapy group and 70% in the immunotherapy group. Exploratory analyses of programmed death-ligand 1 expression and blood-based tumor mutation burden revealed no differential treatment effect on OS., Conclusions: The addition of chemotherapy to durvalumab plus tremelimumab in the first-line treatment of stage IV NSCLC did not improve survival compared with durvalumab plus tremelimumab alone. Further study is warranted to identify patients that benefit from initial immunotherapy alone versus combination chemotherapy plus immunotherapy as first-line treatment., (Copyright © 2021 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Increasingly, systemic treatment decisions in nonsmall cell lung cancer require the determination of predictive biomarkers on biopsy or surgical specimens. Although currently these have their major role in the advanced setting, these tumor-specific treatments are increasingly moving into earlier stage disease. As part of the multidisciplinary team managing those with nonsmall cell lung cancer, thoracic surgeons need to be aware of these biomarkers and in particular of the need for adequate biopsy specimens containing sufficient tissue to perform the necessary analyses that guide treatment selection., Competing Interests: Disclosure S.A. Laurie reports consulting fees/honoraria from Roche, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer. Bryan Lo - (consulting / honoraria): AstraZeneca, Amgen, Pfizer., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

In this chapter, the authors review and discuss the literature on multidisciplinary cancer conferences (MCCs, aka tumor boards), clarifying the terminology, showing the evolution of the field, and providing an evidence-based perspective on positive outcomes, best practices, factors influencing the quality of MCCs, evaluation tools to assess the quality of MCCs, and quality improvement interventions for MCCs. The authors then discuss some perspectives from their MCC and initiatives that they undertook to improve the work of their team and the care that they provide to patients in the area of thoracic oncology., Competing Interests: Disclosure M.M. Gomes: Educational Grants: Pfizer, BMS, Merck, AstraZeneca, Hoffmann-La Roche, Eli Lilly, Boehringer-Ingelheim. Honoraria: AstraZeneca, Hoffmann-La Roche. C. Dennie: No financial disclosures. S.A. Laurie: Honoraria/consulting fees: Pfizer, Novartis, Hoffmann-La Roche, Eli Lilly, UpToDate. F.M. Shamji: No financial disclosures., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a leading cause of cancer death worldwide, with few treatment options. Rovalpituzumab tesirine (Rova-T) is an antibody-drug conjugate that targets delta-like 3 on SCLC cells to deliver a cytotoxic payload directly to tumor cells. In this study, the cardiac safety profile of Rova-T was assessed by evaluating changes in QT interval, electrocardiogram (ECG) waveform, heart rate, and proarrhythmic adverse events (AEs) after treatment with Rova-T in patients with previously treated extensive-stage SCLC. Patients underwent ECG monitoring for 2 weeks after each of 2 i.v. infusions of 0.3 mg/kg Rova-T over 30 minutes, administered 6 weeks apart. Forty-six patients received at least one dose of Rova-T. At the geometric mean Rova-T maximum serum concentration of 7,940 ng/mL, ECG monitoring showed no significant changes in the Fridericia-corrected QT (QTcF) interval; the upper limit of the 2-sided 90% confidence interval did not exceed 10 msec for any time point. There were no clinically significant changes in QRS or PR intervals, ECG waveforms, or heart rate after Rova-T administration. All patients experienced a treatment-emergent AE (TEAE); 78% had a grade ≥ 3 TEAE, 59% had a serious TEAE, and 41% had a cardiac-related TEAE. The TEAEs that might signal proarrhythmia tendencies were uncommon. Confirmed partial responses were observed in 24% of patients. Based on the evaluation of ECG data collected in this study from patients treated with Rova-T at 0.3 mg/kg i.v. administered every 6 weeks, a QTcF effect of clinical concern can be excluded., (© 2020 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (icis), including inhibitors of PD-1, PD-L1, and ctla-4, are relatively novel therapies for lung cancer, although their use might be limited by gastrointestinal toxicity. The aim of the present study was to determine the risk of diarrhea and colitis associated with icis in lung cancer and the rates of discontinuation because of those toxicities., Methods: Electronic databases were searched for prospective trials reporting the risk of diarrhea and colitis in patients with lung cancer treated with PD-1, PD-L1, and ctla-4 inhibitors. The incidences of diarrhea and colitis and their grades were assessed clinically using standardized reporting criteria. Pooled incidence and weighted relative risk estimates for diarrhea and colitis with 95% confidence intervals (cis) were estimated using a random effects model. The incidence of discontinuations for gi toxicity was also calculated., Results: Twenty-seven studies were included: sixteen studies with PD-1 inhibitors, nine studies with PD-L1 inhibitors, and four studies combining PD-based strategies with ctla-4 inhibitors. The incidence of all-grade diarrhea was 9.1% (95% ci: 7.8% to 10.5%) for anti-PD-1 therapy and 11.0% (95% ci: 7.5% to 14.5%) for anti-PD-L1 therapy. The incidence of all-grade colitis was 0.9% (95% ci: 0.4% to 1.3%) for anti-PD-1 therapy and 0.4% (95% ci: 0.0% to 0.8%) for anti-PD-L1 therapy. The relative risk for all-grade diarrhea was higher with combination anti-PD-1 and anti-ctla-4 than with anti-PD-1 monotherapy (relative risk: 1.61; 95% ci: 1.14 to 2.29). Anti-PD-1 therapy was discontinued in 4.1% of patients with diarrhea (95% ci: 0.7% to 7.4%) and in 35.7% of those with colitis (95% ci: 0.0% to 81.1%); combination therapy was discontinued in 10.1% of patients with diarrhea (95% ci: 4.8% to 15.4%) and in 39.9% of those with colitis (95% ci: 3.9% to 75.9%)., Conclusions: Diarrhea is a relatively frequently encountered gi toxicity when ici therapy is used in lung cancer treatment. Colitis is less frequently encountered, although when it does occur, it often results in therapy discontinuation., Competing Interests: CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES We have read and understood Current Oncology’s policy on disclosing conflicts of interest, and we declare that we have none., (2020 Multimed Inc.)

This multicenter phase Ib study aimed to establish a recommended phase II dose for durvalumab (Du) ± tremelimumab (Tr) in combination with standard platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Eligible patients were enrolled into one of six dose levels (DL) of Du ± Tr which included concomitant treatment with standard platinum-doublet regimens; (pemetrexed, gemcitabine, etoposide, (each with cisplatin or carboplatin) or nab-paclitaxel (with carboplatin)). Dose escalation was according to a Rolling Six type design. Both weight-based and fixed dosing of Du and Tr were explored. Du was continued until progression. Tr dosing was finite (up to 6 doses) with increasing dose and/or frequency by DL. 136 patients were enrolled. The majority of drug-related adverse events (AEs) were ≤ grade 2 and attributable to chemotherapy. AEs considered related to immunotherapy were mainly ≤ grade 2; the most frequent (occurring ≥10 %) were colitis/diarrhea, skin, and thyroid dysfunction. Seven patients had DLTs including pneumonitis, myocarditis, diarrhea, encephalitis, motor neuropathy, and enterocolitis. There were 2 treatment-related deaths. Tr and Du exposures did not appear affected by chemotherapy. Among the 73 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated, the objective response rate was 51 % (95 %CI = 38.7-62.6 %) with a median progression-free and overall survival of 6.5 months (95 % CI = 5.5-9.4 months) and 19.8 months (95 % CI = 14.8 months - not yet reached) respectively. Anti-tumour activity was observed across PD-L1 subtypes. Du 1500 mg q3w and Tr 75 mg q3wx5 can be safely combined with platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Efficacy among NSCLC patients appears comparable to results from other immunotherapy and chemotherapy combination trials. NCT02537418., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) is the most common cause of cancer deaths worldwide, with a 5-year survival of 17%. The low survival rate observed in patients with nsclc is primarily attributable to advanced stage of disease at diagnosis, with more than 50% of cases being stage iv at presentation. For patients with advanced disease, palliative systemic therapy can improve overall survival (os); however, a recent review at our institution of more than 500 consecutive cases of advanced nsclc demonstrated that only 55% of the patients received palliative systemic therapy. What is unknown to date is whether that observed low rate of systemic therapy in our previous study is uniform across oncologists., Methods: With ethics approval, we performed a retrospective analysis of newly diagnosed patients with stage iv nsclc seen as outpatients at our institution between 2009 and 2012 by 4 different oncologists. Demographics, treatment, and survival data were collected and compared for the 4 oncologists., Results: The 4 oncologists saw 528 patients overall, with D seeing 115; L, 158; R, 137; and M, 118. Significant variation was observed in the proportion receiving 1 line or more of chemotherapy: D, 60%; L, 65%; R, 43%; and M, 52%. Physician assignment was not associated with a difference in median os, with D's cohort having a median os of 6.8 months; L, 8.4 months; R, 7.0 months; and M, 7.0 months., Conclusions: Practice size and proportion of patients treated varied between oncologists, but those differences did not translate into significantly different survival outcomes for patients., Competing Interests: CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES We have read and understood Current Oncology’s policy on disclosing conflicts of interest, and we declare that we have none., (2020 Multimed Inc.)

Introduction: In an earlier report of the ASCEND-8 study (open-label, phase I, three-arm study, treatment-naive patients and pre-treated patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC), it was shown that ceritinib 450 mg with food had comparable exposure and better gastrointestinal tolerability than 750-mg fasted., Methods: Here, we report efficacy and updated safety data from primary efficacy analysis of the ASCEND-8 study. Key secondary endpoints were overall response rate and duration of response, assessed by blinded independent review committee (BIRC) using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1., Results: In total, 306 patients were randomized to ceritinib 450-mg fed (n = 108) or 600-mg fed (n = 87) or 750-mg fasted (n = 111), of which 304 patients were included in safety analysis and 198 treatment-naive patients (ALK receptor tyrosine kinase [ALK]-positive by immunohistochemistry) were included in the efficacy analysis (450-mg fed [n = 73], 600-mg fed [n = 51], and 750-mg fasted [n = 74]). The BIRC-assessed overall response rate was 78.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 66.9-86.9), 72.5% (95% CI: 58.3-84.1), and 75.7% (95% CI: 64.3-84.9), respectively; and the median duration of response (months) by BIRC was not estimable (NE) (95% CI: 11.2-NE), 20.7 (95% CI: 15.8-NE), and 15.4 (95% CI: 8.3-NE), respectively. Based on the safety analysis (n = 304), the 450-mg fed arm showed the highest median relative dose intensity (100% versus 78.5% versus 83.7%), lowest proportion of patients with dose reductions (24.1% versus 65.1% versus 60.9%), and lowest proportion of patients with gastrointestinal toxicities (75.9% versus 82.6% versus 91.8%)., Conclusion: Ceritinib at a dose of 450 mg with food compared to 750-mg fasted showed consistent efficacy and less gastrointestinal toxicity., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Activation of the RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathway may confer resistance to chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Selumetinib (AZD6244, ARRY142886), a MEK1/2 inhibitor combined with chemotherapy in patients with NSCLC was evaluated in two schedules to evaluate efficacy and toxicity., Methods: IND.219 was a three-arm study of first line pemetrexed/platinum chemotherapy with two schedules of selumetinib (Arm A: intermittent given on days 2-19; Arm B: continuous given on days 1-21) versus chemotherapy alone (Arm C). The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR); secondary objectives were tolerability, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS). The trial was stopped at the planned interim analysis., Results: Arms A/B/C enrolled 20/21/21 patients, ORR was 35% (95% CI 15-59% median duration 3.8 months), 62% (95% CI 38-82%; median duration 6.3 months), 24% (95% CI 8-47%; median duration 11.6 months) respectively. The PFS (months Arm A, B, C) was 7.5, 6.7, 4.0 respectively (hazard ratio (HR) PFS Arm A over Arm C: 0.76 [95% CI, 0.38-1.51, 2-sided p = 0.42]; Arm B over Arm C 0.75 [95% CI 0.37-1.54, p = 0.43]. Skin and gastrointestinal adverse events were more common with the addition of selumetinib. A high incidence of venous thromboembolism was seen in all arms., Conclusions: Selumetinib combined with chemotherapy was associated with a higher response rate. Continuous selumetinib appeared to be superior to an intermittent schedule. PFS was prolonged with the addition of selumetinib, however this was not statistically significant., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction Selumetinib (AZD6244, ARRY-142886) is a potent inhibitor of MEK1/2, thereby inhibiting phosphorylation of ERK2. We investigated the toxicity and the recommended phase II dose of the combination of selumetinib with two platinum based first line chemotherapy combinations in non-small cell lung cancer. Methods This was a phase I trial of escalating doses of selumetinib with carboplatin (AUC 6), paclitaxel (200 mg/m 2 ) (cohort 1) or pemetrexed (500 mg/m 2 ) and cisplatin (75 mg/m 2 ) (cohort 2) in patients with chemotherapy naïve, advanced or metastatic NSCLC. Patients enrolled on cohort 2 had non-squamous histology. Dose escalation of selumetinib proceeded using a 3 + 3 design: 50 mg b.i.d. days 2-19 (dose level 1); 75 mg b.i.d. days 2-19 (dose level 2); and 75 mg b.i.d. continuously. Adverse events were evaluated using CTC AE v4 and response by RECIST 1.1. Results Thirty-nine patients were enrolled (cohort 1 n = 16; cohort 2, n = 23). There were no dose limiting toxicities in either cohort and the recommended phase II dose for both regimens was standard doses of carboplatin, paclitaxel or pemetrexed and cisplatin with continuous selumetinib at a dose of 75 mg b.i.d. Most adverse events were grade 1 or 2 and were predominantly diarrhea, nausea, stomatitis, peripheral edema, neutropenia, and skin rash. Response rate was 37.5% for cohort 1 and 30.4% for cohort 2. Conclusion Selumetinib at a dose of 75 mg b.i.d continuously can be safely combined with paclitaxel and carboplatin or pemetrexed and cisplatin in patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC. This trial provided the dose for the regimens used in a randomized phase II trial in NSCLC (CCTG IND.219).

Background: Little evidence has been generated for how best to manage patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) presenting with rarer clinical scenarios, including oligometastases, oligoprogression, and pseudoprogression. In each of those scenarios, oncologists have to consider how best to balance efficacy with quality of life, while maximizing the duration of each line of therapy and ensuring that patients are still eligible for later options, including clinical trial enrolment., Methods: An expert panel was convened to define the clinical questions. Using case-based presentations, consensus practice recommendations for each clinical scenario were generated through focused, evidence-based discussions., Results: Treatment strategies and best-practice or consensus recommendations are presented, with areas of consensus and areas of uncertainty identified., Conclusions: In each situation, treatment has to be tailored to suit the individual patient, but with the intent of extending and maximizing the use of each line of treatment, while keeping treatment options in reserve for later lines of therapy. Patient participation in clinical trials examining these issues should be encouraged., Competing Interests: CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES We have read and understood Current Oncology’s policy on disclosing conflicts of interest, and we declare the following interests: SAL has received honoraria from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novartis; SB has served on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol–Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche, and has received research funding from AstraZeneca and Merck; NB has served on advisory boards for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Merck, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol–Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Roche; SB has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol–Myers Squibb, Eisai, and Merck; PKC has served as an advisor for AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Hoffmann–La Roche, Pfizer, Novartis, Takeda, Eli Lilly, and Bristol–Myers Squibb, and has received research funding from Boehringer Ingelheim and Hoffmann–La Roche; PC has received grants for investigator-initiated research projects from AbbVie, Pfizer, and Sanofi–Aventis; DH has served on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol–Myers Squibb, and Merck, and has received honoraria from Pfizer; VH has participated on advisory boards for AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol–Myers Squibb, Merck, Pfizer, and Roche; RJ has served as an advisor or consultant for AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bristol–Myers Squibb, Merck, Pfizer/emd Serono, and Roche, has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol–Myers Squibb, Merck, Pfizer/emd Serono, and Roche, and has received research funding from AstraZeneca, Bristol–Myers Squibb, and Merck; JL has received honoraria for talks from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, and Roche, and her institution has received grant funding for research trials from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, and Roche; in the last 2 years, NL has received honoraria for independent unrelated continuing medical education from AstraZeneca, Bristol–Myers Squibb, and Merck; DR has received honoraria and support from Accuray, BrainLab, Elekta, Pfizer/emd Serono, Siemens Healthineers, and Varian Medical Systems; JR has received speaker and advisory board fees and institutional research support for clinical trials funded by Astra-Zeneca, Bristol–Myers Squibb, Merck, Pfizer, and Roche; DJS has received honoraria (2015–2018) from Roche Canada, Boehringer Ingelheim Canada, Novartis Canada, Merck Canada, AstraZeneca Canada, Bristol–Myers Squibb Canada, Exactis Innovation, and Pfizer Canada, and has received institutional research support from Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Bristol– Myers Squibb, and Celgene; MST has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol–Myers Squibb, Merck, and Roche/Ventana, and a research grant from Merck. The remaining authors have no conflicts to disclose.

Introduction: This phase I study evaluated nivolumab combined with erlotinib in patients with advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC., Methods: Patients with advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC who were EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-naive or TKI-treated but had not received chemotherapy were treated with nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks and erlotinib 150 mg/d until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective was safety and tolerability., Results: Twenty patients with TKI-treated and one with TKI-naive EGFR-mutant NSCLC were treated with nivolumab plus erlotinib. Treatment-related grade 3 toxicities occurred in five patients (liver enzyme elevations, n = 2; diarrhea, n = 2; weight loss, n = 1), with no grade ≥4 toxicities. In the TKI-treated population, the objective response rate was 15% (3 of 20, including one complete response), and the 24-week progression-free survival rate was 48%. Responses lasted 13.8, 17.6, and 38.2 months per investigator records. A fourth patient had a nonconventional immune-related response lasting 12.5 months. Among these four patients, two were never-smokers and one each had 35- and <1-pack-year histories. Post-EGFR TKI pre-trial tumor biopsy specimens from these patients detected EGFR T790M mutations in two patients and MNNG HOS Transforming gene (MET) amplification in a third; two patients each had primary EGFR exon 19 deletions or L858R mutations. The TKI-naive patient, who had compound EGFR mutations (L858R and S768I) and ultimately achieved a complete response, had an ongoing response lasting more than 5 years based on investigator records., Conclusions: Nivolumab plus erlotinib was tolerable, with durable responses in patients with EGFR-mutant, TKI-treated NSCLC., (Copyright © 2018 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The role of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) remains controversial in extensive stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) with the publication of 2 randomized control trials demonstrating differing outcomes in overall survival. The aim of this study is to determine the impact of PCI on survival and the development of brain metastasis while addressing the disparate use of postchemotherapy brain imaging in the aforementioned trials., Methods and Materials: The medical records of 397 consecutive patients with ES-SCLC between Jan. 1, 2005 and Dec. 31, 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. In those eligible patients (n = 155) without baseline brain metastases and who had at least a partial response to chemotherapy, overall survival and time to brain metastasis were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method comparing patients receiving PCI or not, using both univariate and multivariate analyses. Patients were stratified by their receipt of initial postchemotherapy brain imaging. Follow-up did not include serial brain imaging, which was performed when clinically indicated. Differences between the groups with covariates were analyzed using χ 2 statistics and Student's t-tests., Results: By multivariate analysis, statistically significant predictors of overall survival were the presence of extrathoracic metastases, performance status and use of PCI. There was a statistically significant difference in overall survival (HR 0.55; 95% CI: 0.39-0.77; P = .0005) and time to brain metastasis (HR 0.40; 95% CI: 0.23-0.66; P = .0004) with the use of PCI. Median survival for the PCI and non-PCI groups was 13.5 and 8.5 months respectively. A survival difference with PCI was observed in both patients that received postchemotherapy brain imaging (HR 0.55; 95% CI: 0.35-0.88; P = .012) and those who did not (HR 0.48; 95% CI: 0.29-0.77; P = .0025)., Conclusions: PCI in the setting of at least a partial response to chemotherapy was found to have a survival benefit and prolongation of the time to development of brain metastases, when factoring in the use of initial postchemotherapy but not routine surveillance brain imaging., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) represents a major health issue globally. Systemic treatment decisions are informed by clinical trials, which, over years, have improved the survival of patients with advanced nsclc. The applicability of clinical trial results to the broad lung cancer population is unclear because strict eligibility criteria in trials generally select for optimal patients., Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of all consecutive patients with advanced nsclc seen in outpatient consultation at our academic institution between September 2009 and September 2012, collecting data about patient demographics and cancer characteristics, treatment, and survival from hospital and pharmacy records. Two sets of arbitrary trial eligibility criteria were applied to the cohort. Scenario A stipulated Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ecog ps) 0-1, no brain metastasis, creatinine less than 120 μmol/L, and no second malignancy. Less-strict scenario B stipulated ecog ps 0-2 and creatinine less than 120 μmol/L. We then used the two scenarios to analyze treatment and survival of patients by trial eligibility status., Results: The 528 included patients had a median age of 67 years, with 55% being men and 58% having adenocarcinoma. Of those 528 patients, 291 received at least 1 line of palliative systemic therapy. Using the scenario A eligibility criteria, 73% were trial-ineligible. However, 46% of "ineligible" patients actually received therapy and experienced survival similar to that of the "eligible" treated patients (10.2 months vs. 11.6 months, p = 0.10). Using the scenario B criteria, only 35% were ineligible, but again, the survival of treated patients was similar in the ineligible and eligible groups (10.1 months vs. 10.9 months, p = 0.57)., Conclusions: Current trial eligibility criteria are often strict and limit the enrolment of patients in clinical trials. Our results suggest that, depending on the chosen drug, its toxicities and tolerability, eligibility criteria could be carefully reviewed and relaxed.

The treatment of squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) is evolving. In the past, the backbone of treatment was chemotherapy, with very few other options available. Fortunately, that situation is changing, especially with a better understanding of tumour biology. Various strategies have been tried to improve patient outcomes. The most notable advance must be immunotherapy, which has revolutionized the treatment paradigm for lung cancer in patients without a driver mutation. Immunotherapy is now the treatment of choice in patients who have progressed after chemotherapy and is replacing chemotherapy as upfront therapy in a selected population. Other strategies have also been tried, such as the addition of targeted therapy to chemotherapy. Targeted agents include ramucirumab, an inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2, and necitumumab, a monoclonal antibody against epithelial growth factor receptor. Recently, advances in molecular profiling have also been applied to tumours of squamous histology, in which multiple genetic alterations, including mutations and amplifications, have been described. Research is actively seeking targetable mutations and testing various therapies in the hopes of further improving prognosis for patients with squamous nsclc. Here, we review the various advances in the treatment of squamous nsclc and present a proposed treatment algorithm based on current evidence.

Objectives: Pelareorep (reolysin), a Dearing strain of reovirus serotype 3, has demonstrated oncolytic activity as single agent and synergy with chemotherapy. We evaluated pelareorep, combined with standard second-line chemotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Materials and Methods: This randomized phase II trial enrolled patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC after first line chemotherapy. After a safety run-in, patients were randomized 1:1 to chemotherapy (pemetrexed [500 mg/m2, non-squamous], or docetaxel [75 mg/m2], day 1 every 21 days]) +/- pelareorep (4.5 × 1010 TCID50, days 1-3 every 21 days), stratified by EGFR mutation status. The primary outcome was progression free survival (PFS) of patients randomized to chemotherapy + pelareorep vs. chemotherapy alone. Secondary outcomes included overall survival, objective response rate and exploratory translational analyses., Results: Between October 2012 and August 2015, 166 patients were enrolled (14 to the safety run in). Pelareorep did not improve the PFS vs. single agent chemotherapy (median PFS 3.0 months, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.6-4.1) vs. 2.8 months (95% CI 2.5-4.0), hazard ratio (HR) 0.90 (95% CI 0.65-1.25), P = 0.53). Neither KRAS or EGFR mutation was associated with improved PFS, but STK11 mutations did appear to have an association with improved PFS (HR 0.29 [0.12-0.67); as did PIK3CA mutation (HR 0.45 [0.22-0.93]). The combination was tolerable, although associated with increased rates of neutropenic fever., Conclusion: The addition of pelareorep to second-line chemotherapy did not improve the PFS of patients with NSCLC. The three-day pelareorep schedule was tolerable. Further research is needed to evaluate the potential benefit in molecular subtypes of NSCLC., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Purpose To update the guideline recommendations on the use of larynx-preservation strategies in the treatment of laryngeal cancer. Methods An Expert Panel updated the systematic review of the literature for the period from January 2005 to May 2017. Results The panel confirmed that the use of a larynx-preservation approach for appropriately selected patients does not compromise survival. No larynx-preservation approach offered a survival advantage compared with total laryngectomy and adjuvant therapy as indicated. Changes were supported for the use of endoscopic surgical resection in patients with limited disease (T1, T2) and for initial total laryngectomy in patients with T4a disease or with severe pretreatment laryngeal dysfunction. New recommendations for positron emission tomography imaging for the evaluation of regional nodes after treatment and best measures for evaluating voice and swallowing function were added. Recommendations Patients with T1, T2 laryngeal cancer should be treated initially with intent to preserve the larynx by using endoscopic resection or radiation therapy, with either leading to similar outcomes. For patients with locally advanced (T3, T4) disease, organ-preservation surgery, combined chemotherapy and radiation, or radiation alone offer the potential for larynx preservation without compromising overall survival. For selected patients with extensive T3 or large T4a lesions and/or poor pretreatment laryngeal function, better survival rates and quality of life may be achieved with total laryngectomy. Patients with clinically involved regional cervical nodes (N+) who have a complete clinical and radiologic imaging response after chemoradiation do not require elective neck dissection. All patients should undergo a pretreatment baseline assessment of voice and swallowing function and receive counseling with regard to the potential impact of treatment options on voice, swallowing, and quality of life. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/head-neck-cancer-guidelines and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .

Checkpoint inhibitors are a first-line therapy for advanced melanoma, though their use is limited by diarrhea and colitis. The aim of our study was to determine the risk of these toxicities associated with immunotherapy in advanced melanoma. Electronic databases were searched through June 2017 for prospective studies reporting the risk of diarrhea and colitis in advanced melanoma treated with anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1) or anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors. Standardized definitions assessed the grade of diarrhea and colitis. Pooled incidence and weighted relative risk estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using random effects model. Eighteen studies were included: 6 studies (1537 patients) with PD-1 inhibitors and 15 studies (3116 patients) with CTLA-4 inhibitors. The incidence of all-grade diarrhea was 13.7% (95% CI, 10.1%-17.2%) for anti-PD-1 and 35.4% (95% CI, 30.4%-40.5%) for anti-CTLA-4. The incidence of all-grade colitis was 1.6% (95% CI, 0.7%-2.4%) for anti-PD-1, and 8.8% (95% CI, 6.1%-11.5%) for anti-CTLA-4. When PD-1 inhibitors were compared directly with CTLA-4 inhibitors, the relative risk of all-grade diarrhea was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.43-0.77), and the relative risk of all-grade colitis was 0.16 (95% CI, 0.05-0.51). The rate of therapy discontinuation was numerically higher for anti-CTLA-4 therapy compared with anti-PD-1 therapy. Finally, 2 studies compared combination immunotherapy with anti-CTLA-4 therapy alone. The relative risk of developing all-grade diarrhea and colitis with combination therapy was 1.31 (95% CI, 1.09-1.57) and 1.21 (95% CI, 0.73-1.99), respectively. Diarrhea and colitis are frequent toxicities associated with checkpoint inhibitors, and seem to be most common with CTLA-4 inhibitors.

Background: Palliative systemic therapy is frequently underutilized in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), for many reasons. The aim of this study was to identify patient-reported factors that may predict for treatment decisions and survival in advanced NSCLC, using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), which is a self-reported questionnaire that quantifies symptom burden by asking patients to rate the severity of 9 common symptoms., Patients and Methods: With ethics approval, we analyzed ESAS scores at initial oncology consultation for 461 patients with advanced NSCLC seen at The Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre from 2009 to 2012. Subgroup analysis was performed to determine if treatment strategies or overall survival (OS) were related to the total symptom burden, as defined by the sum of the individual ESAS symptom scores., Results: The severity of the ESAS total symptom burden score was positively correlated with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (R = 0.48; P < .0001). Furthermore, patients with a higher symptom burden were less likely to receive systemic chemotherapy than those with fewer symptoms (43% vs. 66%; P < .0001), and had a significantly reduced OS (5.5 vs. 9.9 months; P < .0001). A higher ESAS symptom burden score was also associated with reduced OS by univariate analysis (hazard ratio, 1.78; 95% confidence interval, 1.45-2.18; P < .0001), although multivariate analysis showed only a trend towards significance (hazard ratio, 1.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-1.62; P = .06)., Conclusions: Overall, this demonstrates a novel role for the ESAS as a prognostic tool that could complement existing patient assessment models, such as Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, in the development of optimal treatment plans and estimation of survival, in patients with advanced lung cancer., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Ceritinib, 750 mg fasted, is approved for treatment of patients with ALK receptor tyrosine kinase gene (ALK)-rearranged (ALK-positive) NSCLC previously treated with crizotinib. Part 1 of the ASCEND-8 study determined whether administering ceritinib, 450 mg or 600 mg, with a low-fat meal may enhance gastrointestinal (GI) tolerability versus 750 mg fasted in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC while maintaining similar exposure., Methods: ASCEND-8 is a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 1 study. Part 1 investigated the steady-state pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of ceritinib, 450 mg or 600 mg, taken with a low-fat meal versus 750 mg fasted in patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC who were either treatment naive or pretreated with chemotherapy and/or crizotinib. Part 2 will assess efficacy and safety of ceritinib in treatment-naive patients., Results: As of June 16, 2016, 137 patients were randomized (450 mg fed [n = 44], 600 mg fed [n = 47], and 750 mg fasted [n = 46]); 135 patients received ceritinib. Median follow-up duration was 4.14 months. At steady state, relative to 750 mg fasted, 450 mg with food demonstrated comparable PK as assessed by maximum (peak) concentration of drug in plasma and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to 24 hours, whereas 600 mg with food demonstrated approximately 25% higher PK. Relative to 750 mg fasted, 450 mg with food was associated with a lower proportion of patients with GI toxicities, mostly grade 1 (diarrhea [43.2%], nausea [29.5%], and vomiting [18.2%]); there were no grade 3 or 4 events, study drug discontinuations, or serious AEs due to GI toxicities., Conclusion: Ceritinib, 450 mg with food, had similar exposure and a more favorable GI safety profile than ceritinib, 750 mg in fasted patients with ALK-positive NSCLC., (Copyright © 2017 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: BRM, a key catalytic subunit of the SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling complex, is a putative tumor susceptibility gene that is silenced in 15% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Two novel BRM promoter polymorphisms ( BRM -741 and BRM -1321) are associated with reversible epigenetic silencing of BRM protein expression. Experimental Design: Advanced NSCLC patients from the Princess Margaret (PM) cohort study and from the CCTG BR.24 clinical trial were genotyped for BRM promoter polymorphisms. Associations of BRM variants with survival were assessed using log-rank tests, the method of Kaplan and Meier, and Cox proportional hazards models. Promoter swap, luciferase assays, and chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) experiments evaluated polymorphism function. In silico analysis of publicly available gene expression datasets with outcome were performed. Results: Carrying the homozygous variants of both polymorphisms ("double homozygotes", DH) when compared with those carrying the double wild-type was associated with worse overall survival, with an adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) of 2.74 (95% CI, 1.9-4.0). This was confirmed in the BR.24 trial (aHR, 8.97; 95% CI, 3.3-18.5). Lower BRM gene expression (by RNA-Seq or microarray) was associated with worse outcome ( P < 0.04). ChIP and promoter swap experiments confirmed binding of MEF2D and HDAC9 only to homozygotes of each polymorphism, associated with reduced promoter activity in the DH. Conclusions: Epigenetic regulatory molecules bind to two BRM promoter sequence variants but not to their wild-type sequences. These variants are associated with adverse overall and progression-free survival. Decreased BRM gene expression, seen with these variants, is also associated with worse overall survival. Clin Cancer Res; 23(10); 2460-70. ©2016 AACR ., (©2016 American Association for Cancer Research.)

The identification of common molecular aberrations that drive cancer progression has led to targeted therapies that improve treatment efficacy in many tumor types. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors have been used to treat both lung and head and neck cancers with squamous cell histology. These tumors often show high EGFR expression and/or increased gene copy number, but low incidence of the activating kinase domain mutations common to adenocarcinomas of the lung. In this manuscript, we review clinical trial data on EGFR-inhibitors in the treatment of squamous cell carcinoma (SqCC) of the lung and head and neck (SCCHN), including both efficacy and biomarker analyses. Although some efficacy with use of EGFR inhibitors is observed, the level of benefit varies within and across tumor types, and the predictive capacity of high EGFR protein expression and/or gene amplification, if any, is limited. Due to the lack of candidate biomarkers that consistently predict response to EGFR-inhibitor therapy across treatment setting and class of agent in SqCC of the lung and SCCHN, we explore the biology, genomics and patterns of response to EGFR-inhibitors to inform identification of potential biomarkers, highlighting several key molecules that have shown promise in preclinical studies and clinical trials across multiple cancer sites., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Following failure of a platinum-antifolate combination regimen, there is no standard therapy for advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). The fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) signaling pathways may be a relevant target in MPM. Dovitinib inhibits multiple tyrosine receptor kinases, predominantly the vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFR), but also FGFRs, and could be active in MPM., Methods: This open-label multicentre phase II trial [NCT01769547] enrolled fit, consenting adult patients with advanced MPM who had previously received platinum-antifolate combination chemotherapy and up to one additional line of systemic therapy. Dovitinib was administered orally at 500mg/day for 5days on, 2days off, in 28-day cycles. Response was assessed every 2 cycles using RECIST 1.1 criteria modified for MPM. Correlative studies included FGFR-1 amplification on archival tumour and serum samples for circulating angiogenesis factors. The primary end-point was the proportion of patients progression-free at 3 months (PF3) using a two-stage design., Results: 12 patients (10 males, median age 67) were enrolled. The median number of cycles administered was 2.5 (range 1-8). One unconfirmed partial response was observed. PF3 was 50% (95% confidence interval 28.4% to 88.0%); although the criterion for proceeding to stage II accrual was met, the trial was halted due to a combination of minimal activity with several early progression events and poor tolerability in this patient population. One of 12 tumour specimens had low amplification of FGFR-1., Conclusions: Dovitinib has minimal activity in previously-treated MPM. The role of the FGFR pathway in MPM remains unclear., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)