Citations

The treatment landscape of multiple myeloma (MM) has evolved considerably with the FDA-approval of at least 15 drugs over the past two decades. Together with the use of autologous stem cell transplantation, these novel therapies have resulted in significant survival benefit for patients with MM. In particular, our improved understanding of the BM and immune microenvironment has led to the development of highly effective immunotherapies that have demonstrated unprecedented response rates even in the multiple refractory disease setting. However, MM remains challenging to treat especially in a high-risk setting. A key mediator of therapeutic resistance in MM is the bone marrow (BM) microenvironment; a deeper understanding is necessary to facilitate the development of therapies that target MM in the context of the BM milieu to elicit deeper and more durable responses with the ultimate goal of long-term control or a cure of MM. In this review, we discuss our current understanding of the role the BM microenvironment plays in MM pathogenesis, with a focus on its immunosuppressive nature. We also review FDA-approved immunotherapies currently in clinical use and highlight promising immunotherapeutic approaches on the horizon.

Abstract IDH mutant gliomas depend on glutaminase for glutamate/glutathione generation from glutamine because R-2-hydroxyglutarate inhibits branched chain amino acid transaminase mediated glutamate biosynthesis. Telaglenastat (CB-839 HCl) is a potent glutaminase-1 specific inhibitor which depletes tumor glutamate in orthotopic IDH mutant glioma PDX models and extends survival in these orthotopic models when added to radiation/temozolomide. NCI-10218 (NCT03528642) is a phase I clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of telaglenastat administered orally concurrently with standard doses of radiation (50.4 Gy, grade 2; 59.4 Gy, grade 3) and temozolomide (75 mg/m2 orally daily) in patients (age 16+) with previously untreated IDH mutant grade 2/3 astrocytoma. Telaglenastat dose was escalated in cohorts (400-800 mg twice daily) based on a standard 3 + 3 design to determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). Toxicities were graded per CTCAE v5.0. An expansion cohort additionally incorporated a seven-day run-in of telaglenastat monotherapy at RP2D prior to radiation to evaluate the pharmacodynamic impact of telaglenastat on plasma and tumor metabolites. 23 patients with IDH mutant astrocytoma (WHO grade 2, n = 5; WHO grade 3, n = 18) were accrued between December 2018 and January 2022 (Dose Escalation: 16; Dose Expansion: 7). Median age was 32 years (range 23-69 years). 61% were male and 70% were ECOG 0. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Grade 3/4 adverse events (independent of attribution) included: lymphopenia (3), neutropenia (2), leukocytosis (2), alanine transaminase elevation (2), thrombocytopenia (1), leukopenia (1), maculopapular rash (1), hyperglycemia (1), hyponatremia (1). The RP2D of concurrent telaglenastat was defined as 800 mg twice daily. Following peak absorption on Day 15 at RP2D, the mean (%CV) terminal elimination half-life in the plasma was 4.2 (53.5%) hours (range 2.1-7.1 hours). The Cmax, Tmax, oral clearance, and AUC were 1496 ng/mL, 4.0 hr, 93.6 L/hr/m2, and 7430 ng/mL*hr, respectively.

Background: Medicare Advantage (MA) plans are popular among Medicare-eligible patients, but little is known about MA in lower-extremity total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The purpose of this study was to describe trends in MA utilization and analyze differences in patient characteristics and postoperative outcomes between patients undergoing primary TJA using traditional Medicare (TM) or MA plans. Methods: Patients ≥65 years of age who underwent primary total knee or total hip arthroplasty were identified using the Premier Healthcare Database. Patients were categorized into TM and MA cohorts. Data from 2004 to 2020 were used to describe trends in insurance coverage. Data from 2015 to 2020 were used to identify differences in patient characteristics and postoperative complications using ICD-10 codes. Multivariate analyses were performed using 2015 to 2020 data to account for potential confounders. Results: From 2004 to 2020, the proportion of patients with MA increased from 7.9% to 34.4%, while those with TM decreased from 83.7% to 54.0%. Of the 697,317 patients who underwent primary elective TJA from 2015 to 2020, 471,439 (67.6%) had TM coverage and 225,878 (32.4%) had MA coverage. The cohorts were similar in terms of age and sex. However, a higher proportion of Black patients (8.29% compared with 4.62%; p < 0.001) and a lower proportion of White patients (84.0% compared with 89.2%; p < 0.001) were enrolled in MA compared with TM. After controlling for confounders, patients with MA had higher odds of surgical site infection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04 to 1.47; p = 0.031), periprosthetic joint infection (aOR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.18; p = 0.006), stroke (aOR: 1.15; 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.31; p = 0.026), and acute kidney injury (aOR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.11; p < 0.001), but lower odds of urinary tract infection (aOR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.90 to 0.98; p = 0.003). Conclusions: From 2004 to 2020, the number of patients utilizing MA increased markedly such that 1 in 3 were covered by MA in 2020. From 2015 to 2020, patients who were non-White were more likely to have MA than TM, and the MA group had a higher rate of several postoperative complications compared with the TM group. As TM claims data inform health-care policy and clinical decisions, this change portends future challenges, including limitations in arthroplasty registry research, an increase in the administrative burden of surgeons, and a potential worsening of social disparities in health care.

AbstractBackgroundThe growing adoption of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)‐guided radiation therapy (RT) platforms and a focus on MRI‐only RT workflows have brought the technical challenge of synthetic computed tomography (sCT) reconstruction to the forefront. Unpaired‐data deep learning‐based approaches to the problem offer the attractive characteristic of not requiring paired training data, but the gap between paired‐ and unpaired‐data results can be limiting.PurposeWe present two distinct approaches aimed at improving unpaired‐data sCT reconstruction results: a cascade ensemble that combines multiple models and a personalized training strategy originally designed for the paired‐data setting.MethodsComparisons are made between the following models: (1) the paired‐data fully convolutional DenseNet (FCDN), (2) the FCDN with the Intentional Deep Overfit Learning (IDOL) personalized training strategy, (3) the unpaired‐data CycleGAN, (4) the CycleGAN with the IDOL training strategy, and (5) the CycleGAN as an intermediate model in a cascade ensemble approach. Evaluation of the various models over 25 total patients is carried out using a five‐fold cross‐validation scheme, with the patient‐specific IDOL models being trained for the five patients of fold 3, chosen at random.ResultsIn both the paired‐ and unpaired‐data settings, adopting the IDOL training strategy led to improvements in the mean absolute error (MAE) between true CT images and sCT outputs within the body contour (mean improvement, paired‐ and unpaired‐data approaches, respectively: 38%, 9%) and in regions of bone (52%, 5%), the peak signal‐to‐noise ratio (PSNR; 15%, 7%), and the structural similarity index (SSIM; 6%, <1%). The ensemble approach offered additional benefits over the IDOL approach in all three metrics (mean improvement over unpaired‐data approach in fold 3; MAE: 20%; bone MAE: 16%; PSNR: 10%; SSIM: 2%), and differences in body MAE between the ensemble approach and the paired‐data approach are statistically insignificant.ConclusionsWe have demonstrated that both a cascade ensemble approach and a personalized training strategy designed initially for the paired‐data setting offer significant improvements in image quality metrics for the unpaired‐data sCT reconstruction task. Closing the gap between paired‐ and unpaired‐data approaches is a step toward fully enabling these powerful and attractive unpaired‐data frameworks.

Abstract Background Financial toxicity is emerging as an important patient-centered outcome and is understudied in prostate cancer patients. We sought to understand the association between financial burden and treatment regret in men with localized prostate cancer to better evaluate the role of financial discussions in patient counseling. Methods Utilizing the Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation dataset, we identified all men accrued between 2011 and 2012 who underwent surgery, radiation, or active surveillance for localized prostate cancer. Financial burden and treatment regret were assessed at 3- and 5-year follow-up. The association between financial burden and regret was assessed using multivariable longitudinal logistic regression controlling for demographic and disease characteristics, treatment, functional outcomes, and patient expectations. Results Of the 2924 eligible patients, regret and financial burden assessments for 3- and/or 5-year follow-up were available for 81% (n = 2359). After adjustment for relevant covariates, financial burden from “finances in general” was associated with treatment regret at 3 years (odds ratio [OR] = 2.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.33 to 4.57; P = .004); however, this association was no longer statistically significant at 5-year follow-up (OR = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.56 to 2.54; P = .7). Conclusions In this population-based sample of men with localized prostate cancer, we observed associations between financial burden and treatment regret. Our findings suggest indirect treatment costs, especially during the first 3 years after diagnosis, may impact patients more profoundly than direct costs and are important for inclusion in shared decision making.

Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most malignant neoplasms worldwide, accounting for about 770,000 deaths in 2020. The incidence of gastric cancer bone metastasis (GC-BM) is low, about 0.9–13.4%, and GC patients develop GC-BM because of a suitable bone microenvironment. Osteoblasts, osteoclasts, and tumor cells interact with each other, secreting cytokines such as PTHrP, RANK-L, IL-6, and other growth factors that disrupt the normal bone balance and promote tumor growth. The functions and numbers of immune cells in the bone microenvironment are continuously inhibited, resulting in bone balance disorder due to the cytokines released from destroyed bone and growing tumor cells. Patients with GC-BM are generally younger than 65 years old and they often present with a later stage of the disease, as well as more aggressive tumors. They usually have shorter overall survival (OS) because of the occurrence of skeletal-related events (SREs) and undetected bone destruction due to the untimely bone inspection. Current treatments of GC-BM focus mainly on gastric cancer and SRE-related treatment. This article reviews the clinical features, possible molecular pathogeneses, and the most commonly used diagnostic methods and treatments of bone metastasis in gastric cancer.