Citations

SummaryBackgroundReliable tools for patient selection are critical for clinical drug trials.AimTo evaluate a consensus‐based, standardised magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) protocol for selecting patients for inclusion in Crohn's disease (CD) multicenter clinical trials.MethodsThis study recruited 20 patients [Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) scores: <150 (n = 8); 150–220 (n = 4); 220–450 (n = 8)], to undergo ileocolonoscopy and two MREs (with and without colonic contrast) within a 14‐day period. Procedures were scored centrally using, Magnetic Resonance Index of Activity (MaRIA), and both Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity (CDEIS) and Simplified Endoscopic Score (SES‐CD).Results37 MREs were acquired. Both MREs were evaluable in 16 patients for calculation of test–retest and inter‐reader reliability scores. The MaRIA scores for the terminal ileum had excellent test–retest and inter‐reader reliability, with correlations >0.9. The proximal ileum showed strong within‐reader agreement (0.90–0.96), and fair between‐reader agreement (0.59–0.72). MRE procedures were tolerable. MaRIA scores correlated with CDEIS and SES‐CD (0.63 and 0.71), but not with CDAI (0.34). MRE identified 3 patients with intra‐abdominal complications, who would otherwise have been included in clinical trials. Furthermore, both MRE and ileocolonoscopy identified active bowel wall inflammation in 2 patients with CDAI <150, and none in 1 patient with CDAI > 220. Data quality was good/excellent in 85% of scans, and fair or better in 96%.ConclusionsMagnetic resonance enterography of high‐quality and reproducibility was feasible in a global multi‐ centre setting, with evidence for improved selectivity over CDAI and ileocolonoscopy in identifying appropriate CD patients for inclusion in therapeutic intervention trials.

Abstract We have developed the use of reovirus as a systemically delivered oncolytic agent in both pre-clinical models and in Phase I and II clinical trials. Reovirus has direct oncolytic activity against many human/murine tumor cells, partly because of disruption of the PKR-mediated anti-viral response in malignant cells. In addition however, we have shown that anti-tumor therapy is directly associated with immune activation by virus replication in tumors. The immune mechanisms of therapy include both innate immune activation against virally infected tumor cells, as well as the generation of adaptive anti tumor immune responses as a result of in vivo priming against tumor associated antigens released during that killing. Therefore, to exploit the immune components of reovirus anti-tumor therapy, we tested the combination of oncolytic therapy with systemic checkpoint inhibition. To do this, we used our murine, immune-competent, model and a protocol in which injection of reovirus into subcutaneous (s.c.) B16 melanomas generates moderate therapy following intra-tumoral injection of reovirus into 5d established subcutaneous B16 melanomas growing in C57Bl/6 mice. In this model, provision of systemic anti-PD-1 antibody along with i.t. reovirus, significantly enhanced survival compared to i.t. reovirus alone (p&lt;0.01) and led to &gt;40% of mice being cured long term. Immune analysis suggests that the enhanced therapeutic benefit of reovirus plus checkpoint inhibition is contributed by at least two factors. Thus, blockade of PD-1 significantly enhanced the ability of NK cells to recognize (TNF-α secretion), and kill, reovirus-infected target tumor cells. Second, antiPD-1 antibody led to a significant reduction in Treg activity in reovirus-treated mice, with the overall effect of increasing the adaptive CD8+ anti tumor T cell response. We also showed that timing of the checkpoint inhibitor antibody was significant in balancing toxicity with anti tumor therapy. These data suggest that combination of checkpoint inhibition therapy with reovirus oncolytic/immunotherapy represents a readily translatable method to enhance the therapeutic value of either alone. Citation Format: Shane Zaidi, Kevin Shim, Karishma Rajani, Rosa Diaz, Elizabeth Ilett, Timothy Kottke, Jill Thompson, Peter Selby, Kevin Harrington, Hardev Pandha, Alan Melcher, Matt Coffey, Richard Vile. Combination therapy of reovirus and checkpoint inhibition. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference: Tumor Immunology and Immunotherapy: A New Chapter; December 1-4, 2014; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Immunol Res 2015;3(10 Suppl):Abstract nr B88.

Abstract Reovirus is a systemically delivered oncolytic agent with evidence of activity in both pre-clinical models and in early phase clinical trials. Reovirus has direct oncolytic activity against many human/murine tumor cells, as well as activating anti-tumor innate and adaptive immunity. Having previously shown that intravenously delivered reovirus selectively accesses colorectal cancer metastatic to the liver in patients, in this study we explored the potential of systemic reovirus for the treatment of both primary and secondary brain tumors. We first showed that intravenous reovirus can be detected in tumors implanted into the brains of immunocompetent mice. We then tested our current most potent reovirus-based therapy (systemic reovirus plus granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor [GMCSF] in reovirus pre-immune mice), and showed effective therapy in immunocompetent murine models of primary glioma, and of both directly reovirus sensitive, and insensitive, models of melanoma brain metastases. We also found that addition of reovirus/GMCSF to clinical ‘standard of care’ (radiotherapy and temozolamide chemotherapy) significantly enhances survival. In parallel to these pre-clinical experiments, we have initiated an open-label, non-randomized study of intravenous reovirus administered to patients prior to planned surgery for recurrent high grade glioma or metastatic brain tumors, to test whether the data showing access of the agent to tumors in the brains in mice, also applies to humans. In total, 10 patients will be treated with a single infusion of 1x1010 TCID50 of reovirus, of which 9 have completed the study to date. The primary objective is the presence of reovirus in the resected tumors as assessed by immunohistochemistry, RNA in-situ hybridization and retrieval of infectious virions. Early analysis of the first 3 patients, comprising one glioblastoma multiforme, one grade 3 oligodendroglioma and one colorectal brain metastasis, has shown that all 3 resected tumors contained reovirus RNA and protein. There was also evidence for productive reovirus infection in 2 of the tumors. Within all patients to date, the only grade 3-4 adverse reaction has been neutropaenia in 1 patient. Further tissue analysis is ongoing, as is testing of blood samples from these patients to further charactize how reovirus is carried in the blood and protected from neutralizing antibodies. This clinical study shows, for the first time that an oncolytic virus, reovirus, infects and replicates in brain tumors following intravenous administration. Together with pre-clinical data showing the efficacy of systemic reovirus in combination with GMCSF/radiation/temozolamide, these findings support the future development of trials and combination studies using reovirus in patients with high grade gliomas and brain metastases. Citation Format: Adel Jebar, Liz Ilett, Tim Kottke, Emma West, Karen Scott, Simon Thomson, Matt Coffey, Gerard Nuovo, Susan Short, Richard Vile, Alan Melcher. Systemic oncolytic reovirus for the treatment of primary and secondary brain tumors. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference: Tumor Immunology and Immunotherapy: A New Chapter; December 1-4, 2014; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Immunol Res 2015;3(10 Suppl):Abstract nr A49.

ABSTRACT This article describes research criteria and probability methodology for the diagnosis of prodromal PD. Prodromal disease refers to the stage wherein early symptoms or signs of PD neurodegeneration are present, but classic clinical diagnosis based on fully evolved motor parkinsonism is not yet possible. Given the lack of clear neuroprotective/disease‐modifying therapy for prodromal PD, these criteria were developed for research purposes only. The criteria are based upon the likelihood of prodromal disease being present with probable prodromal PD defined as ≥80% certainty. Certainty estimates rely upon calculation of an individual's risk of having prodromal PD, using a Bayesian naïve classifier. In this methodology, a previous probability of prodromal disease is delineated based upon age. Then, the probability of prodromal PD is calculated by adding diagnostic information, expressed as likelihood ratios. This diagnostic information combines estimates of background risk (from environmental risk factors and genetic findings) and results of diagnostic marker testing. In order to be included, diagnostic markers had to have prospective evidence documenting ability to predict clinical PD. They include motor and nonmotor clinical symptoms, clinical signs, and ancillary diagnostic tests. These criteria represent a first step in the formal delineation of early stages of PD and will require constant updating as more information becomes available. © 2015 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society

AbstractThis document presents the Movement Disorder Society Clinical Diagnostic Criteria for Parkinson's disease (PD). The Movement Disorder Society PD Criteria are intended for use in clinical research but also may be used to guide clinical diagnosis. The benchmark for these criteria is expert clinical diagnosis; the criteria aim to systematize the diagnostic process, to make it reproducible across centers and applicable by clinicians with less expertise in PD diagnosis. Although motor abnormalities remain central, increasing recognition has been given to nonmotor manifestations; these are incorporated into both the current criteria and particularly into separate criteria for prodromal PD. Similar to previous criteria, the Movement Disorder Society PD Criteria retain motor parkinsonism as the core feature of the disease, defined as bradykinesia plus rest tremor or rigidity. Explicit instructions for defining these cardinal features are included. After documentation of parkinsonism, determination of PD as the cause of parkinsonism relies on three categories of diagnostic features: absolute exclusion criteria (which rule out PD), red flags (which must be counterbalanced by additional supportive criteria to allow diagnosis of PD), and supportive criteria (positive features that increase confidence of the PD diagnosis). Two levels of certainty are delineated: clinically established PD (maximizing specificity at the expense of reduced sensitivity) and probable PD (which balances sensitivity and specificity). The Movement Disorder Society criteria retain elements proven valuable in previous criteria and omit aspects that are no longer justified, thereby encapsulating diagnosis according to current knowledge. As understanding of PD expands, the Movement Disorder Society criteria will need continuous revision to accommodate these advances. © 2015 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society