Citations

Abstract Purpose: Trebananib is a first-in-class antiangiogenic peptibody (peptide–Fc fusion protein) that inhibits Angiopoietin 1 and 2. A pediatric phase 1 trial was performed to define trebananib dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), and pharmacokinetics (PK). Experimental Design: Trebananib was administered by weekly infusion. Three dose levels (10, 15, or 30 mg/kg/dose) were evaluated using a rolling-six design. Part 2 evaluated a cohort of subjects with primary central nervous system (CNS) tumors. Pharmacokinetic sampling and analysis of peripheral blood biomarkers was performed during the first 4 weeks. Response was evaluated after 8 weeks. Correlative studies included angiogenic protein expression and DCE-MRI. Results: Thirty-seven subjects were enrolled (31 evaluable for toxicity) with median age 12 years (range, 2 to 21). Two of 19 evaluable non-CNS subjects developed DLT at the 30 mg/kg dose level, including venous thrombosis and pleural effusion. In the CNS cohort, 3/12 subjects developed DLT, including decreased platelet count, transient ischemic attack, and cerebral edema with headache and hydrocephalus. Other grade 3 or 4 toxicities included lymphopenia (n = 4), anemia, thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, vomiting, and hypertension (n = 1 each). Response included stable disease in 7 subjects, no partial or complete responses. Two subjects continued study treatment with prolonged stable disease for 18 cycles (neuroblastoma) and 26 cycles (anaplastic astrocytoma). Pharmacokinetics appeared linear over 3 dose levels. Correlative studies demonstrated increased PlGF and sVCAM-1, but no change in endoglin or perfusion by DCE-MRI. Conclusions: Trebananib was well tolerated in pediatric patients with recurrent or refractory solid or CNS tumors. RP2D is 30 mg/kg. Clin Cancer Res; 23(20); 6062–9. ©2017 AACR.

AbstractLarge-scale genotyping studies have identified over 70 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with breast cancer (BC) risk. However, knowledge regarding genetic risk factors associated with the prognosis is limited. The aim of this study was therefore to investigate the prognostic effect of nine known breast cancer risk SNPs. BC patients (n = 1687) randomly sampled in an adjuvant, randomized phase III trial (SUCCESS A study) were genotyped for nine BC risk SNPs: rs17468277(CASP8), rs2981582(FGFR2), rs13281615(8q24), rs3817198(LSP1), rs889312(MAP3K1), rs3803662(TOX3), rs13387042(2q35), rs4973768(SLC4A7), rs6504950(COX11). Cox proportional hazards models were used to test the SNPsʼ association with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Additional analyses were carried out for molecular subgroups. rs3817198 in LSP1 (lymphocyte-specific protein 1) was the only SNP that significantly influenced OS (p = 0.01) and PFS (p < 0.01) in the likelihood ratio test comparing the genetic survival model with the clinical survival model. In the molecular subgroups, triple-negative patients with two minor alleles in rs3817198 had a much better prognosis relative to OS (adjusted HR 0.03; 95% CI 0.002 – 0.279) and PFS (HR 0.09; 95% CI 0.02 – 0.36) than patients with the common alleles. The same effect on PFS was shown for patients with luminal A tumors (HR 0.19; 95% CI 0.05 – 0.84), whereas patients with luminal B tumors had a poorer PFS with two minor alleles (HR 2.13; 95% CI 1.02 – 4.40). The variant in rs3817198 has a prognostic effect particularly in the subgroup of patients with triple-negative BC, suggesting a possible link with immunomodulation and BC.

Objective: To describe the spectrum of autonomic dysfunction in a uniformly evaluated cohort of patients with Sjögren syndrome. Methods: A series of 13 patients underwent a comprehensive evaluation for suspected autonomic impairment, including a neurological examination, autonomic testing, and laboratory studies. A diagnosis of Sjögren syndrome was established as the cause of autonomic dysfunction in all. Clinical features, findings on autonomic testing, and laboratory results are described. Results: All patients in this series reported postural lightheadedness and syncope or near-syncope. Autonomic testing confirmed the presence of orthostatic hypotension on tilt-table testing in 5 patients and an excessive postural tachycardia and/or hypertensive response in 8 patients. Only 2 of the patients with orthostatic hypotension had a significant sensory neuropathy. Symptoms suggestive of gastrointestinal and genitourinary impairment were seen in nearly all patients, with abnormal motility testing (most frequently esophageal dysmotility) in 5 of 6 patients who underwent formal testing. Patients in this series treated with immune-modulating therapy experienced significant improvement. Conclusions: A diagnosis of Sjögren syndrome should be aggressively pursued in patients with signs and symptoms suggestive of autonomic nervous system impairment. Although the spectrum of adrenergic failure is variable, ranging from orthostatic hypotension to an excessive postural tachycardia, most patients do have symptoms of more generalized autonomic failure. Patients who were treated with immune-modulating therapy did improve.

AbstractBackgroundPatients and clinicians do not often agree on whether a decision has been made about cancer care. This could be explained by factors related to communication quality and/or the type of decision being made.MethodsWe used a self‐developed coding scheme to code a random sample of 128 encounters in which patients and clinicians either agreed (n=64) or disagreed (n=64) that a cancer care decision was made and tested for associations between concordance and key communication behaviours. We also identified and characterized cancer care decisions by topic and level of patient involvement and looked for trends.ResultsWe identified 378 cancer care decisions across 128 encounters. Explicit decisions were most commonly made about topics wherein decision control could be easily delegated to a clear and present expert (eg either the patient or the clinician). Related to this, level of patient involvement varied significantly by decision topic. Explicit decisions were rarely made in an observable way about social, non‐clinical or self‐management related topics, although patients and clinicians both reported having made a cancer care decision in encounters where no decisions were observed. We found no association between communication behaviours and concordance in our sample.ConclusionsWhat counts as a “decision” in cancer care may be constructed within disparate social roles that leave many agendas unaddressed and decisions unmade. Changing the content of conversations to encourage explicit decisions about self‐management and life context‐related topics may have greater value in enabling shared understanding than promoting communication behaviours among already high‐performing communicators.

AbstractHCC is rare in the pediatric population, but is the second most common liver malignancy in children. Survival rates for primary unresectable HCC have been dismal. The objective of this study was to describe our experience with a multimodal approach for the management of unresectable HCC in two adolescent patients and to review the literature. Both patients are currently alive with no recurrence at 51 and 29 months post‐transplant. Multimodality treatment involving chemotherapy with doxorubicin, cisplatin, and sorafenib; TACE; timely liver transplantation; and post‐transplant therapy with sorafenib and mTOR inhibitors may help improve outcomes and prolong survival in pediatric patients with unresectable HCC.

Objective: To evaluate the relationship between donor sex and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence after living donor liver transplantation. Background: HCC shows a male predominance in incidence and recurrence after tumor resection due to sex differences in hepatic sex hormone receptors. There have been no studies evaluating the importance of donor sex on post-transplant HCC recurrence. Methods: Of 384 recipients of livers, from living donors, for HCC: 104/120 who received grafts from female donors were matched with 246/264 who received grafts from male donors using propensity score matching, with an unfixed matching ratio based on factors like tumor biology. Survival analysis was performed with death as a competing risk event. The primary outcome was overall HCC recurrence. Results: The median follow-up time was 39 months. Before matching, recurrence probability at 1/2/5 years after transplantation was 6.1/9.7/12.7% in recipients with female donors and 11.7/19.2/25.3% in recipients with male donors. Recurrence risk was significantly higher with male donors in univariable analysis (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.04 [1.15–3.60], P = 0.014) and multivariable analysis (HR=2.10 [1.20–3.67], P = 0.018). In the matched analysis, recurrence risk was also higher with male donors (HR=1.92 [1.05–3.52], P = 0.034): both in intrahepatic recurrence (HR=1.92 [1.05–3.51], P = 0.034) and extrahepatic recurrence (HR=1.93 [1.05–3.52], P = 0.033). Multivariable analysis confirmed the significance of donor sex (HR=2.08 [1.11–3.91], P = 0.023). Interestingly, the significance was lost when donor age was >40 years. Two external cohorts validated the significance of donor sex. Conclusions: Donor sex appears to be an important graft factor modulating HCC recurrence after living donor liver transplantation.