Back to Authors

Mallak, Nadine

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3627-6880

Mayo Clinic

Oregon Health & Science University

Citations 2

Trial Design and Objectives for Patients With Prostate Cancer: Recommendations From the Prostate Cancer Working Group 4
Armstrong, Andrew J., Morris, M., Abida, Wassim , Aggarwal, Rahul R., Antonarakis, Emmanuel S., Attard, Gerhardt , Beltran, Himisha, Bryce, Alan H. , Carducci, Michael A. , Cheng, Heather H., Dahut, William L. , Emmett, Louise , Fizazi, Karim, Gafita, Andrei, George, Daniel J., Hermann, Ken, Hofman, Michael S., Hope, MD Thomas A., Hussain, Maha, Kelly, W. Kevin, Kuo, Phillip H. , Liu, Glenn X., Morgans, Alicia K., McKay, Rana R., Nanus, David, Nelson, P., Reichert, Zachery R. , Ryan, Charles J. , Sartor, A. Oliver, Schwartz, Lawrence H., Sharifi, Nima , Stadler, Walter M., Stein, M., Sternberg, Cora N., Szmulewitz, Russell Z., Tagawa, Scott T., Sokolova, Alexandra O., Wyatt, Alex, Yu, Evan Y., Halabi, S., Scher, Howard I., Group, for the PCWG4 Writing, Alumkal, Joshi J. , Aparicio, Ana, Barata, Pedro C., Drake, Charles G., Hamid, Anis , Heath, Elisabeth I. , Nauseef, Jones, Lage, Daniel E. , Mallak, Nadine , Patnaik, Akash, Prepelica, Kristofer, Rowe, Steven P., Slovin, Susan F. , Taplin, Mary‐Ellen , Zorko, Nicholas, Carducci, Michael A. , Halabi, Susan , Cheng, Heather H. , Antonarakis, Emmanuel S. , Morris, Michael J. , Armstrong, Andrew J. , Nauseef, Jones T. , Antonarakis, Emmanuel S. , Zorko, Nicholas A. , Armstrong, Andrew J , Morris, Michael J , Aggarwal, Rahul , Antonarakis, Emmanuel S , Beltran, Himisha , Bryce, Alan H , Cheng, Heather H , Chen, Delphine L , Chi, Kim N , Childs, Daniel S , Dahut, William , Emmett, Louise , Fizazi, Karim , Gafita, Andrei , George, Daniel J , Hermann, Ken , Hofman, Michael S , Hope, Thomas A , Hussain, Maha H A , Kelly, W Kevin , Kessler, Elizabeth , Lang, Joshua M , Liu, Glenn , Marshall, Catherine H , Morgans, Alicia K , McKay, Rana R , Nelson, Peter S , Paller, Channing J , Reichert, Zachery R , Sartor, A Oliver , Schöder, Heiko , Sharifi, Nima , Stadler, Walter M , Stein, Mark , Sternberg, Cora N , Szmulewitz, Russell Z , Tagawa, Scott T , Sokolova, Alexandra O , Wyatt, Alexander , Yamoah, Kosj , Yu, Evan Y , Halabi, Susan , Antonarakis, Emmanuel S , Zorko, Nicholas A , Nauseef, Jones T , N., Kim , Childs, Daniel S. , Fizazi, Karim , Gafita, Andrei , George, Daniel J. , Hofman, Michael S. , Lang, Joshua M. , Liu, Glenn , Marshall, Catherine H. , Morgans, Alicia K. , McKay, Rana R. , Paller, Channing J. , Sartor, Oliver , Schöder, Heiko , Schwartz, Lawrence H., Stadler, Walter M. , Tagawa, Scott T. , Scher, Howard I. , Aparicio, Ana, Barata, Pedro C. , Drake, Charles G. , Graff, Julie Nicole , Patnaik, Akash , Rathkopf, Dana E , Rettig, Matthew B.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 26, 2026 | Volume: 44 | Issue: 13 | Pages: 1249-1265

10.1200/jco-25-02834 Get It

PURPOSE The continuous development of new imaging approaches, molecular phenotyping, genetic subtypes, prognosis assessments, and effective therapies across a range of disease states has created a need to redefine terminology and best practices for clinical trial conduct in patients with advanced prostate cancer. Methods We convened an international expert committee of diverse working groups, the Prostate Cancer Working Group 4 (PCWG4), between 2016 and 2025. Our objective was to formulate updated criteria based on emerging evidence and clinical trial data in a biomarker context to provide guidance for clinical trial design, eligibility, and end point assessments for patients with advanced prostate cancer. RESULTS PCWG4 redefines terminology around the disease state and previous therapies in a patient-centric context and terminology focused on androgen pathway modulation. We consider imaging, with a particular focus on positron emission tomography (PET)–defined disease. New recommendations are provided for disease state terminology, defining eligibility criteria, response and delay/prevent end points, intervals for reassessments including imaging, and patient-reported outcome determination. We provide recommendations in a biomarker-based context of use for the intended indication, reflective of patient benefit for specific interventions. We emphasize the need for development of validated PET imaging and molecular and phenotypic criteria as well as trial designs to appropriately risk stratify patients, predict and assess benefit, and measure post-treatment outcomes reliably in a trial framework. CONCLUSION PCWG4 updates recommendations on patient and tumor characterization, therapy development, and imaging criteria and extends guidance into earlier androgen pathway modulator–naïve/sensitive disease states to reflect an evolving, heterogeneous, and diverse patient population to optimize treatment benefits for all patients.
Monitoring and Surveillance of Patients with Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors Undergoing Radioligand Therapy
Hálfdánarson, Þorvarður R. , Mallak, Nadine , Paulson, Scott, Natwa, Mona, Kendi, A. Tuba , Kennecke, Hagen F. , Kendi, A Tuba , Halfdanarson, Thorvardur R , Chandrasekharan, Chandrikha

Cancers | October 2, 2023 | Volume: 15 | Issue: 19 | Pages: 4836

10.3390/cancers15194836 Get It

Radioligand therapy (RLT) with [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE is a standard of care for adult patients with somatostatin-receptor (SSTR)-positive gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs). Taking advantage of this precision nuclear medicine approach requires diligent monitoring and surveillance, from the use of diagnostic SSTR-targeted radioligand imaging for the selection of patients through treatment and assessments of response. Published evidence-based guidelines assist the multidisciplinary healthcare team by providing acceptable approaches to care; however, the sheer heterogeneity of GEP-NETs can make these frameworks difficult to apply in individual clinical circumstances. There are also contradictions in the literature regarding the utility of novel approaches in monitoring and surveilling patients with GEP-NETs receiving RLT. This article discusses the emerging evidence on imaging, clinical biochemistry, and tumor assessment criteria in the management of patients receiving RLT for GEP-NETs; additionally, it documents our own best practices. This allows us to offer practical guidance on how to effectively implement monitoring and surveillance measures to aid patient-tailored clinical decision-making.