Search

I viscerally remember while reading The New Yorker article “The Dynamism of Janet McTeer,” as I sat in my cubicle in Chicago at a survival temp job turned actual fake career, sitting slack-jawed, elated, and sucker punched. McTeer talked of acting as jazz where artists re-invent every performance. I finally had words to describe the craving I longed for in my work; something I could point to and say ‘YES! See?? I want to do that!’ But with no idea how to bridge the gap from where I was to where I now dreamed to explore my craft. Admittedly, it is disorienting to look back on a MFA experience that is so vastly different from what I expected and still say… absolutely; I bridged that gap. Perhaps the incubation period is intensified when confined in isolation for most of your grad school career. Where your bed, kitchen, green screen, movement studio, shower, anger, digitalized classmates, heart aches, work, suffering students, tears, panic attacks, pee-inducing laughter, triumphs, failures, and you all manifest together like a hundred piece orchestra playing in a 425sq foot studio apartment. It is deafening. Yet, among all this is where I learned to breathe through my emotions as I speak; sustain in the power of living thought; really do what I’m doing for real, really; and forever challenge myself to embrace the free-fall of a soft belly. Held by my training, I enter back into the professional world saying ‘YES! See?? I now act jazz!”

Background Involving patients and their carers in research has become more common, as funders demand evidence of involvement. The ‘Patient Voice in Cancer Research’ (PVCR) is an initiative led by University College Dublin (UCD) in Ireland. It encourages and enables people affected by cancer, and their families to become involved in shaping and informing the future of cancer research across the island of Ireland. Its aim is to identify the questions and needs that matter most to (i) people living with a cancer diagnosis, and (ii) those most likely to improve the relevance of cancer research. The initiative commenced in April 2016. Methods This paper presents a reflective case study of our journey thus far. We outline three key stages of the initiative and share what we have learnt. At the core of PVCR, is a focus on building long-term relationships. Results We have developed over time an inclusive initiative that is built on trust and respect for everyone’s contributions. This work is grounded on collegiality, mixed with a good sense of humour and friendship. Conclusion The development of PVCR has taken time and investment. The benefits and impact of undertaking this work have been immensely rewarding and now require significant focus as we enhance cancer research across the island of Ireland.

Introduction: Potential advantages of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) include downstaging disease to minimise surgery, and in vivo assessment of tumour sensitivity to therapeutic drugs. Considerable variation in NST use remains, however, and it is unclear whether pathological response rates reflect those reported in trials, or whether downstaging achieved impacts on surgical decision-making. The NeST prospective multicentre study will address these questions through investigating patterns of care in the UK. Methods: Women undergoing NST as their primary breast cancer treatment (chemotherapy (CT), endocrine (ET) and targeted therapies) in UK centres between December 2017 and November 2018 were included. Anonymised data was collected at 37 participating centres, and uploaded to REDCap. Results: 1179 patients received neoadjuvant treatment during the study period. 41% had HER2+ disease, 28% TNBC and 31% ER+ HER2- disease. 48% were node positive and 52% node negative. Cited indications for neoadjuvant treatment were (more than one option applicable to each patient): Downstaging (mastectomy to breast conservation) 37% Facilitate dual antiHER2 therapy 33% Inoperable disease 19% Improved cosmesis (reduced volume of excision) 17% Facilitate BRCA testing 9% Inflammatory breast cancer 6% In patients recommended to receive NST, the MDT decision was for neoadjuvant CT in 87% of cases and neoadjuvant ET in 13%. For ER+ disease, the commonest reasons for prescribing CT were high grade disease and pre-menopausal status. The majority were treated with anthracycline-taxane combinations. 21% of TNBC patients were treated with platinum-containing regimens. In HER2+ disease, 54% were treated with dual antiHER2 therapies/chemotherapy, with 10% receiving chemotherapy/single antiHER2 agent (trastuzumab). Centres were asked to indicate primary breast surgical treatment recommended prior to/without NST. At abstract submission, this data was available for 887 patients. 31 had inoperable disease. A total of 477 were considered to require mastectomy, with disease not amenable to breast conservation surgery (BCS). A further 379 patients were considered candidates for BCS. Data on final surgical procedure was available for 765 patients. Of those patients determined suitable only for mastectomy at diagnosis, 123 underwent BCS as their primary operation - a downstaging rate of 26%. The overall mastectomy rate in this cohort was 48%, with 33% having mastectomy and 15% mastectomy with immediate reconstruction. Pathological response data was available in 672 patients, with an overall pathological complete response (pCR) rate of 29% (defined as no residual invasive or in situ disease). pCR rate according to molecular subtype was 37% for HER2+ disease, 35% for TNBC and 7% for ER+, HER2-ve disease. The pCR rate in patients downstaged from mastectomy to BCS was 27%. Conclusions: This UK national prospective study suggests that surgical downstaging remains a key indication for the use of NST. This is reflected in the fact that 26% of patients in this series were downstaged from an original surgical plan for mastectomy, with NST enabling BCS in these patients. However, based on this data it appears that surgical downstaging is no more likely in those with pCR compared to those without a pCR. Additional indications for NST are emerging, according to disease biology. There is widespread use of dual antiHER2 targeted therapies in this setting, with increasing use of platinum-containing regimens for TNBC. Neoadjuvant CT continues to be frequently used in the treatment of ER+ disease, despite known low pCR rates in this context, which are again confirmed. Low rates of neoadjuvant ET use are reported. Data collection is ongoing; updated data will be presented in December 2019. Citation Format: Stuart A McIntosh, Gareth W Irwin, Finian Bannon, Charlotte Coles, Ellen Copson, Ramsey Cutress, Rajiv Dave, Margaret Grayson, Chris Holcombe, Sheeba Irshad, Ciara O'Brien, Rachel O'Connell, Carlo Palmieri, Abeer M Shaaban, Nisha Sharma, Jagdeep Singh, Ian Whitehead, Shelley Potter. National utilisation of neoadjuvant systemic therapy and impact on surgical treatment - A prospective multi-centre cohort study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-16-04.

BackgroundNeoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) is increasingly used in the treatment of breast cancer, yet it is clear that there is significant geographical variation in its use in the UK. This study aimed to examine stated practice across UK breast units, in terms of indications for use, radiological monitoring, pathological reporting of treatment response, and post-treatment surgical management.MethodsMultidisciplinary teams (MDTs) from all UK breast units were invited to participate in the NeST study. A detailed questionnaire assessing current stated practice was distributed to all participating units in December 2017 and data collated securely usingREDCap. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each questionnaire item.ResultsThirty-nine MDTs from a diverse range of hospitals responded. All MDTs routinely offered neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) to a median of 10% (range 5–60%) of patients. Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) was offered to a median of 4% (range 0–25%) of patients by 66% of MDTs. The principal indication given for use of neoadjuvant therapy was for surgical downstaging. There was no consensus on methods of radiological monitoring of response, and a wide variety of pathological reporting systems were used to assess tumour response. Twenty-five percent of centres reported resecting the original tumour footprint, irrespective of clinical/radiological response. Radiologically negative axillae at diagnosis routinely had post-NACT or post-NET sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in 73.0 and 84% of centres respectively, whereas 16% performed SLNB pre-NACT. Positive axillae at diagnosis would receive axillary node clearance at 60% of centres, regardless of response to NACT.DiscussionThere is wide variation in the stated use of neoadjuvant systemic therapy across the UK, with general low usage of NET. Surgical downstaging remains the most common indication of the use of NAC, although not all centres leverage the benefits of NAC for de-escalating surgery to the breast and/or axilla. There is a need for agreed multidisciplinary guidance for optimising selection and management of patients for NST. These findings will be corroborated in phase II of the NeST study which is a national collaborative prospective audit of NST utilisation and clinical outcomes.BackgroundNeoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) is increasingly used in the treatment of breast cancer, yet it is clear that there is significant geographical variation in its use in the UK. This study aimed to examine stated practice across UK breast units, in terms of indications for use, radiological monitoring, pathological reporting of treatment response, and post-treatment surgical management.MethodsMultidisciplinary teams (MDTs) from all UK breast units were invited to participate in the NeST study. A detailed questionnaire assessing current stated practice was distributed to all participating units in December 2017 and data collated securely usingREDCap. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each questionnaire item.ResultsThirty-nine MDTs from a diverse range of hospitals responded. All MDTs routinely offered neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) to a median of 10% (range 5–60%) of patients. Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) was offered to a median of 4% (range 0–25%) of patients by 66% of MDTs. The principal indication given for use of neoadjuvant therapy was for surgical downstaging. There was no consensus on methods of radiological monitoring of response, and a wide variety of pathological reporting systems were used to assess tumour response. Twenty-five percent of centres reported resecting the original tumour footprint, irrespective of clinical/radiological response. Radiologically negative axillae at diagnosis routinely had post-NACT or post-NET sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in 73.0 and 84% of centres respectively, whereas 16% performed SLNB pre-NACT. Positive axillae at diagnosis would receive axillary node clearance at 60% of centres, regardless of response to NACT.DiscussionThere is wide variation in the stated use of neoadjuvant systemic therapy across the UK, with general low usage of NET. Surgical downstaging remains the most common indication of the use of NAC, although not all centres leverage the benefits of NAC for de-escalating surgery to the breast and/or axilla. There is a need for agreed multidisciplinary guidance for optimising selection and management of patients for NST. These findings will be corroborated in phase II of the NeST study which is a national collaborative prospective audit of NST utilisation and clinical outcomes.

Background: Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) is increasingly used in the treatment of breast cancer, yet it is clear that there is significant geographical variation in its use in the UK. This study aimed to examine stated practice across UK breast units, in terms of indications for use, radiological monitoring, pathological reporting of treatment response, and post-treatment surgical management. Methods: Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) from all UK breast units were invited to participate in the NeST study. A detailed questionnaire assessing current stated practice was distributed to all participating units in December 2017 and data collated securely usingREDCap. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each questionnaire item.Results: Thirty-nine MDTs from a diverse range of hospitals responded. All MDTs routinely offered neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) to a median of 10% (range 5-60%) of patients. Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) was offered to a median of 4% (range 0-25%) of patients by 66% of MDTs. The principal indication given for use of neoadjuvant therapy was for surgical downstaging. There was no consensus on methods of radiological monitoring of response, and a wide variety of pathological reporting systems were used to assess tumour response. Twenty-five percent of centres reported resecting the original tumour footprint, irrespective of clinical/radiological response. Radiologically negative axillae at diagnosis routinely had post-NACT or post-NET sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in 73.0% and 84% of centres respectively, whereas 16% performed SLNB pre-NACT. Positive axillae at diagnosis would receive axillary node clearance at 60% of centres, regardless of response to NACT.Discussion: There is wide variation in the stated use of neoadjuvant systemic therapy across the UK, with general low usage of NET. Surgical downstaging remains the most common indication of the use of NAC, although not all centres leverage the benefits of NAC for de-escalating surgery to the breast and/or axilla. There is a need for agreed multidisciplinary guidance for optimising selection and management of patients for NST. These findings will be corroborated in phase II of the NeST study which is a national collaborative prospective audit of NST utilisation and clinical outcomes.

Background: Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) is increasingly used in the treatment of breast cancer, yet it is clear that there is significant geographical variation in its use in the UK. This study aimed to examine stated practice across UK breast units, in terms of indications for use, radiological monitoring, pathological reporting of treatment response, and post-treatment surgical management. Methods: Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) from all UK breast units were invited to participate in the NeST study. A detailed questionnaire assessing current stated practice was distributed to all participating units in December 2017 and data collated securely usingREDCap. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each questionnaire item.Results: Thirty-nine MDTs from a diverse range of hospitals responded. All MDTs routinely offered neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) to a median of 10% (range 5-60%) of patients. Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) was offered to a median of 4% (range 0-25%) of patients by 66% of MDTs. The principal indication given for use of neoadjuvant therapy was for surgical downstaging. There was no consensus on methods of radiological monitoring of response, and a wide variety of pathological reporting systems were used to assess tumour response. Twenty-five percent of centres reported resecting the original tumour footprint, irrespective of clinical/radiological response. Radiologically negative axillae at diagnosis routinely had post-NACT or post-NET sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in 73.0% and 84% of centres respectively, whereas 16% performed SLNB pre-NACT. Positive axillae at diagnosis would receive axillary node clearance at 60% of centres, regardless of response to NACT. Discussion: There is wide variation in the stated use of neoadjuvant systemic therapy across the UK, with general low usage of NET. Surgical downstaging remains the most common indication of the use of NAC, although not all centres leverage the benefits of NAC for de-escalating surgery to the breast and/or axilla. There is a need for agreed multidisciplinary guidance for optimising selection and management of patients for NST. These findings will be corroborated in phase II of the NeST study which is a national collaborative prospective audit of NST utilisation and clinical outcomes.

The last 20 years have seen significant advances in cancer care in Northern Ireland, leading to measureable improvements in patient outcomes. Crucial to this transformation has been an ethos that recognizes the primacy role of research in effecting heath care change. The authors' model of a cross‐sectoral partnership that unites patients, scientists, health care professionals, hospital trusts, bioindustry, and government agencies can be truly transformative, empowering tripartite clinical‐academic‐industry efforts that have already yielded significant benefit and will continue to inform strategy and its implementation going forward.

Biobanking in the twentieth century will become of increasing importance in health research. Regulation and governance of biobanks must be open and transparent to ensure public trust and confidence and increase donation. Effective Lay Involvement all levels in biobank organisations should be standard practice helping ensure patient benefit remains the central aim and assisting the Promotion of Biobanks and Recruitment of Donors. Properly selected, educated and supported, they become valued members of the Biobank Team. This chapter is based on the work of Independent Cancer Patients' Voice (ICPV) in the UK and recognises that the National Health Service provides a framework which is not universal and neither is the model of patient advocacy which has been developed particularly in cancer research. However, although it has not been easy to find potential members for ICPV, nor to attract funding, we have earned the respect of our professional colleagues by our commitment in giving time and developing the skills necessary to provide effective involvement. These colleagues have enthusiastically mentored and supported us and have provided venues and tutoring for Educational Events. We are sure that patient advocates in other countries would welcome the opportunity for similar involvement and hope our experiences will be of interest.

Biobanking in the twentieth century will become of increasing importance in health research. Regulation and governance of biobanks must be open and transparent to ensure public trust and confidence and increase donation. Effective Lay Involvement all levels in biobank organisations should be standard practice helping ensure patient benefit remains the central aim and assisting the Promotion of Biobanks and Recruitment of Donors. Properly selected, educated and supported, they become valued members of the Biobank Team. This chapter is based on the work of Independent Cancer Patients' Voice (ICPV) in the UK and recognises that the National Health Service provides a framework which is not universal and neither is the model of patient advocacy which has been developed particularly in cancer research. However, although it has not been easy to find potential members for ICPV, nor to attract funding, we have earned the respect of our professional colleagues by our commitment in giving time and developing the skills necessary to provide effective involvement. These colleagues have enthusiastically mentored and supported us and have provided venues and tutoring for Educational Events. We are sure that patient advocates in other countries would welcome the opportunity for similar involvement and hope our experiences will be of interest.

RAS activating mutations occur in ∼55% of metastatic (m) CRC. RASMT and >50% of RASWT mCRC patients (pts) do not benefit from anti-EGFR antibodies. c-MET is overexpressed in ∼50-60%, amplified in ∼2-3% and mutated in ∼1-3% of mCRC. Preclinical data support the clinical evaluation of MEK1/2 and METi, in particular in RASMT tumours and RASWT with aberrant c-MET expression. The primary aim of the phase I study was to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and assess safety/toxicity profile of PD-0325901 MEKi & crizotinib METi in pts with advanced solid tumours using NCI CTCAE V4.03.

TPS10143Background: Neutropenic sepsis is a common complication of systemic anti-cancer treatment (SACT) with management determined by the risk of developing septic complications. The UK National I...

TPS3632 Background: RAS is mutated (RASMT) in ~55% of mCRC, and phase III studies have shown that patients harbouring RAS mutations do not benefit from anti-EGFR MoAbs. In addition, ~50% of RAS Wil...