Citations

Abstract Castleman disease (CD) describes a group of heterogeneous hematologic disorders with characteristic histopathological features. CD can present with unicentric or multicentric (MCD) regions of lymph node enlargement. Some cases of MCD are caused by human herpesvirus-8 (HHV-8), whereas others are HHV-8–negative/idiopathic (iMCD). Treatment of iMCD is challenging, and outcomes can be poor because no uniform treatment guidelines exist, few systematic studies have been conducted, and no agreed upon response criteria have been described. The purpose of this paper is to establish consensus, evidence-based treatment guidelines based on the severity of iMCD to improve outcomes. An international Working Group of 42 experts from 10 countries was convened by the Castleman Disease Collaborative Network to establish consensus guidelines for the management of iMCD based on published literature, review of treatment effectiveness for 344 cases, and expert opinion. The anti–interleukin-6 monoclonal antibody siltuximab (or tocilizumab, if siltuximab is not available) with or without corticosteroids is the preferred first-line therapy for iMCD. In the most severe cases, adjuvant combination chemotherapy is recommended. Additional agents are recommended, tailored by disease severity, as second- and third-line therapies for treatment failures. Response criteria were formulated to facilitate the evaluation of treatment failure or success. These guidelines should help treating physicians to stratify patients based on disease severity in order to select the best available therapeutic option. An international registry for patients with CD (ACCELERATE, #NCT02817997) was established in October 2016 to collect patient outcomes to increase the evidence base for selection of therapies in the future.

Abstract RNA sequencing detects estrogen receptor alpha gene (ESR1) fusion transcripts in estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer but their role in disease pathogenesis remains unclear. Herein we examined multiple in-frame and out-of-frame ESR1 fusions and found only two, both identified in advanced endocrine treatment resistant disease, encoded stable and functional in-frame fusion proteins. In both examples, ESR1-e6>YAP1 and ESR1-e6>PCDH11X, the N-terminal, DNA binding and dimerization motifs encoded by exons 2-6 were fused to C-terminal sequences from the partner gene. Functional properties included estrogen-independent growth, constitutive expression of ER target genes, anti-estrogen resistance, induction of cellular motility in vitro and the development of lung metastasis in vivo. Chromatin immunoprecipitation and RNA sequencing experiments showed both fusions uniquely activated a metastasis-associated transcriptional program. ESR1-e6>YAP1 and ESR1-e6>PCDH11X-induced growth remained sensitive to a CDK4/6 inhibitor, palbociclib, and a patient-derived xenograft (PDX) expressing the ESR1-e6>YAP1 fusion was also responsive. Transcriptionally active ESR1 fusions therefore trigger both endocrine therapy resistance and metastatic progression explaining the association with fatal disease progression, although CDK4/6 inhibitor treatment is predicted to be effective. Citation Format: Jonathan T. Lei, Jieya Shao, Jin Zhang, Michael Iglesia, Doug W. Chan, Jin Cao, Meenakshi Anurag, Purba Singh, Xiaping He, Yoshimasa Kosaka, Ryoichi Matsunuma, Robert Crowder, Jeremy Hoog, Chanpheng Phommaly, Rodrigo Goncalves, Susana Romalho, Raquel M. Peres, Nindo Punturi, Cheryl Schmidt, Alex Bartram, Eric Jou, W V. Lai, Oliver Hampton, Anna Rogers, Ethan Tobias, Poojan Parikh, Sherri R. Davies, Shunqiang Li, Cynthia X. Ma, Vera Suman, Kelly K. Hunt, Mark A. Watson, Katherine A. Hoadley, E A. Thompson, Xi Chen, Shyam M. Kavuri, Chad J. Creighton, Christopher A. Maher, Charles M. Perou, Svasti Haricharan, Matthew J. Ellis. Functional and therapeutic significance of ESR1 gene fusions in breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 5240.

Abstract Background The treatment of metastatic melanoma has been revolutionized by developments in targeted therapy and immunotherapy. BRAF/MEK inhibitors, blockade of cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed death (PD-1/L1) receptor have shown durable anti-melanoma effects. The optimal sequence strategy of targeted therapy and immunotherapy in metastatic BRAF-mutated melanoma patients (pts) is unknown and no treatment guidelines exist. Therefore, we report a single-institution experience of different treatment approaches using targeted therapy and immunotherapy and its impact on outcomes. Methods Pts with BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma treated with targeted therapy and immunotherapy from 2012 to2017 were analyzed. Six groups were identified based on treatment strategy: (1) 1st line BRAF/MEK inhibitors followed by 2nd line immunotherapy; (1.1) 1st line BRAF/MEK inhibitors followed by 2nd line immunotherapy in combination with BRAF/MEK inhibitors (triple therapy);(1.2) same as group 1 followed by triple therapy as 3rd line; (2) 1st line immunotherapy followed by 2nd line BRAF/MEK inhibitors; (2.1) 1st line immunotherapy followed by 2nd line triple therapy; (2.2) same as group2 followed by triple therapy as 3rd line. All time-to-event analysis was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Wilcoxon test. Results Forty four pts were included. The median age at diagnosis was 49 years (range 21-73), 24 (54%) pts were females and 19 (43%) developed brain metastases during their disease course. BRAF V600 mutation was seen in all pts except in 1 pt with p.N581S mutation. The preferred 1st line targeted therapy was dabrafenib/trametinib used in 17 (94%) out of 18 pts, while ipilimumab was the preferred 1st immunotherapy used in 11 (42%) out of 26 pts. For 2nd line therapy, DT was used in 19 (90%) out of 21 pts, while pembrolizumab was used in 16 (69%) out of 23 pts. For 3rd line, DT was used in 5 (83%) out of 6 pts, while pembrolizumab was used in 6 (100%) out of 6 pts. DT was usually the first choice for patients with high burden disease or brain metastases. The most common approach strategy was immunotherapy followed by targeted therapy (group 2), the median duration of treatment was 11 and 19 weeks respectively; for pts started on targeted therapy followed by immunotherapy (group 1), the median duration of treatment was 17 and 14 weeks respectively. (Table 1) Time-to-next therapy (TTNT) following 1st line treatment was similar in pts treated with targeted therapy (median 23 weeks [95% CI: 15-31]) or immunotherapy (median 26 weeks [95% CI: 10-33], p=0.94). Following 2nd line treatment, the TTNT for pts treated with targeted therapy was 18 weeks (95% CI: 4-38), immunotherapy 18 weeks (95% CI: 13-19) and triple therapy 22 weeks (95% CI: 13-41), p=0.48. A trend towards better overall survival (OS) from frontline therapy was seen in pts who received immunotherapy (1st line) followed by targeted therapy (2nd line) (median 7 years [95% CI: 2.7-7.08]) compared to those who received targeted therapy (1st line) followed by immunotherapy (2nd line) (median 2.3 years [95% CI: 1.3-NR], p=0.09. Interestingly, patients who received salvage chemotherapy had significant longer OS in those treated initially with immunotherapy (median 7 years [95% CI: 3.2-7.08]) (n=6) compared to patients started on targeted therapy (median 2 years [95% CI: 0.6-2.4], p=0.03) (n=5). Conclusion A trend towards longer OS was seen in pts treated with 1st line immunotherapy followed by 2nd line targeted therapy with a median therapy time of 11 and 19 weeks respectively. No difference in TTNT was seen with the use immunotherapy, targeted therapy or triple therapy when used as 1st or 2nd line. The significant longer OS benefit with f 1st line immunotherapy was only seen in patients who received chemotherapy later in their treatment course. Table 1.Treatment Characteristics by GroupMedian duration of therapy in weeksGroup(n)1st line therapy(median)2nd line therapy(median)3rd line therapy(median)Totalmedian (range)Chemotherapy (n)1(n=9)Targeted therapy(17)Immunotherapy (14)N/A52 (13-134)51.1(n=7)Targeted therapy(25)Triple therapy (19)Any*(43)69 (22-118)11.2(n=2)Targeted therapy(60)Immunotherapy (16)Triple therapy (21)96 (81-111)12(n=18)Immunotherapy(11)Targeted therapy(19)Any*(24)48 (16-120)52.1(n=4)Immunotherapy(17)Triple therapy (16)Any*(9)41 (25-69)02.2(n=4)Immunotherapy(19)Targeted therapy(16)Triple therapy (19)61 (54-73)1* include any treatment regimen such as immunotherapy, targeted therapy or chemotherapy Citation Format: Jesus Vera-Aguilera, Jonas Paludo, Narjust Duma, Marcella Tschautscher, Cecilia Yu, Svetomir Markovic. A clinical insight into therapeutic sequence in advanced melanoma [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-A32.

Background and ObjectivesTo describe the patterns of failure in patients with in‐transit (IT) melanoma undergoing surgical excision.MethodsA retrospective review of patients who underwent their first IT lesion(s) resection between May 2005 and September 2014. Cumulative incidence of local failure (new lesion within 2 cm of IT resection) was estimated. Associations between clinicopathologic characteristics, local failure, and any recurrence were analyzed.ResultsOne hundred and thirty patients presented to our institution with IT disease over the study period and met the inclusion criteria. The 2‐year cumulative incidence of local failure was 19.5%. Twenty‐four patients developed disease within 2 cm of the resected IT disease; however, only eight were isolated local events. Cumulative incidence of local failure and of any disease differed with respect to less than 1 year disease‐free interval (DFI) from primary melanoma to first IT event, and having greater than 1 IT lesion at presentation. Incidence of local failure was not found to differ with respect to gross margin greater than 5 mm, after adjusting for DFI and greater than 1 IT lesions.ConclusionsPatients with greater than 1 IT lesion and a DFI less than 1 year are at a higher risk of failure after surgical excision of a first IT event. Very few failures were isolated local disease within 2 cm of the IT resection scar, regardless of IT excision margin.

Single-cell sequencing is a powerful technology that provides the capability of analyzing a single cell within a population. This technology is mostly coupled with microfluidic systems for controlled cell manipulation and precise fluid handling to shed light on the genomes of a wide range of cells. So far, single-cell sequencing has been focused mostly on human cells due to the ease of lysing the cells for genome amplification. The major challenges that bacterial species pose to genome amplification from single cells include the rigid bacterial cell walls and the need for an effective lysis protocol compatible with microfluidic platforms. In this work, we present a lysis protocol that can be used to extract genomic DNA from both gram-positive and gram-negative species without interfering with the amplification chemistry. Corynebacterium glutamicum was chosen as a typical gram-positive model and Nostoc sp. as a gram-negative model due to major challenges reported in previous studies. Our protocol is based on thermal and chemical lysis. We consider 80% of single-cell replicates that lead to >5 ng DNA after amplification as successful attempts. The protocol was directly applied to Gloeocapsa sp. and the single cells of the eukaryotic Sphaerocystis sp. and achieved a 100% success rate.

Lenalidomide is a derivative of thalidomide and belongs to the class of drugs known as the immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs). The IMiDs have played a large role in improving the survival outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma. In particular, lenalidomide is currently standard of care in the newly diagnosed setting, in the maintenance setting post-autologous stem cell transplant, as well as in the relapsed/refractory setting. While the combination of lenalidomide and various proteasome inhibitors has proven particularly effective, there are emerging data demonstrating the effectiveness of lenalidomide in combination with other important classes of drugs including the monoclonal antibodies. Recent studies have provided insight into the molecular target of lenalidomide and the other IMiDs, although there is still much to be learned regarding the mechanisms by which lenalidomide affects the myeloma cell and the immune system. Here we review the molecular mechanisms of action, side effects, and the results of the clinical trials which have led to the widespread incorporation of lenalidomide into the myeloma therapeutic armamentarium.

Abstract Lessons Learned Everolimus does not have sufficient activity to justify its use as single agent in metastatic melanoma. Patients treated with 10 mg per day dose were most likely to require dose reductions. Everolimus appeared to reduce the numbers of regulatory T cells in approximately half of the treated patients; unfortunately, these effects were not correlated with clinical outcomes. Background Everolimus (RAD-001) is an orally active rapamycin analogue shown in preclinical data to produce cytostatic cell inhibition, which may be potentially beneficial in treating melanoma. We conducted a phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of everolimus in patients with unresectable metastatic melanoma (MM). Methods This study included two cohorts; cohort 1 received 30 mg of everolimus by mouth (PO) weekly, and cohort 2 was dosed with 10 mg of everolimus PO daily. The endpoints of the study were safety, 16-week progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and measures of immunomodulatory/antiangiogenic properties with therapy. Tumor samples before therapy and at week 8 of treatment were analyzed. Peripheral blood plasma or mononuclear cell isolates collected prior to therapy and at weeks 8 and 16 and at time of tumor progression were analyzed for vascular endothelial growth factor and regulatory T-cell (Treg) measurements. Results A total of 53 patients were enrolled in cohort 1 (n = 24) and cohort 2 (n = 29). Only 2 patients of the first 20 patients enrolled in cohort 2 had treatment responses (25%; 95% confidence interval, 8.6%–49.1%); this result did not allow full accrual to cohort 2, as the study was terminated for futility. Median OS was 12.2 months for cohort 1 versus 8.1 months in cohort 2; no PFS advantage was seen in either group (2.1 months vs. 1.8 months). Dose-limiting toxicities included grade 4 myocardial ischemia (3.4%); grade 3 fatigue, mucositis, and hyperglycemia (10.3%); and anorexia and anemia (6.9%). Everolimus significantly reduced the number of Tregs in approximately half of the treated patients; however, these effects were not correlated with clinical outcomes. Conclusion Everolimus does not have sufficient single-agent activity in MM; however, we have identified evidence of biological activity to provide a potential rationale for future combination studies.