Citations

Abstract BACKGROUND The diagnosis of vestibular schwannomas (VS) is associated with reduced patient quality of life (QOL). Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was introduced as the lowest improvement in a patient-reported outcome (PRO) score discerned as significant by the patient. We formerly presented an MCID for the Penn Acoustic Neuroma QOL (PANQOL) battery based on cross-sectional data from 2 tertiary referral centers. OBJECTIVE To validate the PANQOL MCID values using prospective data. METHODS A prospective registry capturing QOL was queried, comprising patients treated at the authors’ institution and Acoustic Neuroma Association members. Anchor- and distribution-based techniques were utilized to determine the MCID for domain and total scores. We only included anchors with Spearman's correlation coefficient larger than 0.3 in the MCID threshold calculations. Most domains had multiple anchors with which to estimate the MCID. RESULTS A total of 1254 patients (mean age: 57.4 yr, 65% females) were analyzed. Anchor-based methods produced a span of MCID values (median, 25th-75th percentile) for each PANQOL domain and the total score: hearing (13.1, 13-16 points), balance (14, 14-19 points), pain (21, 20-28 points), face (25, 16-36 points), energy (16, 15-18 points), anxiety (16 [1 estimate]), general (13 [1 estimate]), and total (12.5, 10-15 points). CONCLUSION Current findings corroborate our formerly shared experience using multi-institutional, cross-sectional information. These MCID thresholds can serve as a pertinent outcome when deciphering the clinical magnitude of VS QOL endpoints in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies.

Abstract Background: HRAS is a proto-oncogene that is mutated in head and neck, bladder, thyroid, and salivary gland tumors, among others. While discovered over 40 years ago, no specific therapies have yet been developed targeting mutant HRAS. Tipifarnib is a potent and highly selective inhibitor of farnesyltransferase, a critical enzyme requisite for HRAS activation. Over 5,000 patients (pts) have been treated with tipifarnib; although responses have been documented in several tumor indications, the mechanisms of response are still poorly understood. Tipifarnib has demonstrated robust activity in HRAS mutant patient derived xenograft (PDX) models of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and squamous non-small cell lung cancer that are resistant to standard therapies. This Phase 2 study (NCT02383927) was conducted to test the hypothesis that inhibition of mutant HRAS oncogenic activity with tipifarnib could translate to objective responses in HNSCC pts driven by the HRAS oncogene. Methods: The study was originally designed to enroll pts into 2 single-arm study cohorts: Cohort 1 (thyroid cancer) and Cohort 2 (other solid tumors), each one with a 2-stage design (11+7 evaluable pts) to determine overall response rate (ORR) as the primary objective. This design has 80% power to detect a difference between 10% and 30% ORR at one-sided significance level of 0.087. Two objective responses were needed to be observed in the first stage for each cohort to proceed to stage 2. The study is considered positive if at least 4 responses are observed in one of the 2 cohorts (N=18 each, stages 1 and 2 combined). The prespecified activity goal for the first stage of accrual in Cohort 2 was met and based on data observed in the first stage of this Cohort, ongoing enrollment to the second stage of Cohort 2 was limited to HRAS mutant HNSCC. For enrollment, pts must have an HRAS mutant, locally advanced/unresectable and/or metastatic solid tumor malignancy and RECIST v1.1 measurable disease. Tipifarnib is given at 900 mg orally twice daily on days 1-7 and 15-21 of 28-day cycles. Response assessments are conducted every 8 weeks. Results: As of August 30, 2017, 28 pts have been enrolled. Tipifarnib was generally well tolerated with myelosuppression, gastrointestinal disturbances (nausea, vomiting and diarrhea) and fatigue constituting the most common adverse events (≥30% of pts, all grades). Twenty four pts are currently evaluable for efficacy: 10 in Cohort 1 and 14 in Cohort 2. Stage 1 enrollment continues in Cohort 1. The primary objective was met for Cohort 2 prior to completing full enrollment, with 4 confirmed responses observed out of 14 evaluable pts. Notably, of the 6 pts in Cohort 2 with HNSCC currently evaluable for efficacy, 4 (67%) achieved a confirmed partial response. Three of these pts remain on treatment in cycles 3, 5, and 19, and one subject discontinued at Cycle 21. Two (33%) pts had disease stabilization as best response (4 cycles, ongoing and 7 cycles). Importantly, 4 of these pts were refractory to prior therapies, including regimens containing immunotherapy (pembrolizumab, nivolumab) or cetuximab +/- chemotherapy. None of the 6 HNSCC patients experienced an objective partial response on their last prior therapy. Conclusions: These data suggest that HRAS mutant HNSCC pts may be refractory to standard therapies but can derive prolonged clinical benefit from tipifarnib treatment. Based on the encouraging activity of tipifarnib in pts with HNSCC with HRAS mutations, enrollment continues in this cohort. Citation Format: Alan Ho, Nicole Chau, Deborah J. Wong, Maria E. Cabanillas, Jessica Bauman, Marcia S. Brose, Keith Bible, Valentina Boni, Irene Brana, Charles Ferte, Caroline Even, Francis Burrows, Linda Kessler, Vishnu Mishra, Kelly Magnuson, Catherine Scholz, Antonio Gualberto. Preliminary results from a phase 2 proof of concept trial of tipifarnib in tumors with HRAS mutations [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR-NCI-EORTC International Conference: Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics; 2017 Oct 26-30; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Mol Cancer Ther 2018;17(1 Suppl):Abstract nr LB-A10.

Objective: To characterize the risk of progression to nonserviceable hearing in patients with sporadic vestibular schwannomas (VS) who elect initial observation. Study Design: Retrospective case series. Setting: Two tertiary care centers. Patients: VS patients with serviceable hearing who underwent at least two audiograms and two MRI studies before intervention or loss to follow-up. Main outcome measure(s): Serviceable hearing, defined as the pure tone average ≤ 50 dB HL and word recognition score ≥ 50%. Results: Four-hundred sixty-six patients (median age of 57 yr and median tumor diameter of 7.3 mm) had serviceable hearing at presentation and were followed for a median of 2.3 years (IQR 1.0 – 4.0). Kaplan–Meier estimated rates of maintaining serviceable hearing (95% CI; number still at risk) at 1, 3, 5, 7, and 10 years following diagnosis were 94% (91–96; 357), 77% (73–82; 172), 66% (60–73; 81), 56% (49–65; 31), and 44% (33–59; 10), respectively. Each 10-dB increase in pure-tone averages at diagnosis was associated with a 2-fold increased likelihood of developing nonserviceable hearing (hazard ratio 2.07; p < 0.001). Each 10% decrease in word recognition score was associated with a 1.5-fold increased likelihood of developing nonserviceable hearing (hazard ratio 1.48; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Among patients with sporadic VS, good baseline word recognition score and low pure-tone average are jointly associated with maintenance of serviceable hearing. These data may be used to guide patient counseling and optimize management.

Purpose: Novel approaches are needed to enhance employee well-being and perhaps supervisors can be an effective agent for worksite health promotion. The aim of this study was to examine the supervisor’s perceived needs, barriers, and role for influencing employee well-being for incorporation into program development. Design: Semistructured, qualitative interviews of supervisors. Setting: Large, integrated academic health-care organization with over 30 000 employees and 2600 supervisors having access to comprehensive well-being programs and a successful well-being champion network comprised of 600 champions. Participants: Twenty supervisors representing clinical, research, and administrative units. Methods: Semistructured, one-on-one interviews were conducted and audio recorded. Analysis included content log development and open coding by a trained analyst to reveal key themes. More formalized content coding using specialized software for qualitative analyses was also conducted. Results: Supervisor responses were wide ranging regarding their perceived and desired role in promoting workplace well-being. Barriers from the supervisor perspective included high current workload, ambivalence about promoting wellness, lack of support from leadership, lack of flexibility and control at work, and difficulty accessing on-site resources. They perceived their potential role in well-being as remaining a positive role model and encouraging their staff in wellness activities. Conclusion: Although findings are generated from a small sample size, these qualitative data provide compelling and early insights into building a workplace well-being strategy leveraging an underutilized key stakeholder, the workplace supervisor.