Citations

Background— Effects were compared in patients in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial of 2 mechanistically different strategies for treatment of hyperglycemia, insulin-sensitizing and insulin-providing strategies, on biomarker profiles reflecting the balance between fibrinolysis and thrombosis and the intensity of inflammation implicated in diabetic vasculopathy. Methods and Results— A total of 2368 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and clinically stable, angiographically documented coronary artery disease were randomized to treatment with 1 of the 2 strategies and followed for an average of 5 years. Plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 antigen and activity, tissue plasminogen activator antigen, fibrinogen, D-dimer, C-reactive protein, insulin, and hemoglobin A 1c were assayed in blood samples acquired at baseline and at 12 regular intervals throughout the follow-up interval. Higher baseline D-dimer, fibrinogen, and C-reactive protein portended a poor prognosis in patients in both groups. In contrast to the insulin-providing strategy, the insulin-sensitizing strategy led to (1) lower plasma insulin; (2) lower plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 antigen and activity and lower tissue plasminogen activator antigen (known to track with plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1); and (3) lower C-reactive protein and fibrinogen at all intervals after baseline ( P <0.001 for each). Conclusions— The insulin-sensitizing treatment strategy led to changes in biomarker profiles indicative of decreased insulin resistance, an altered balance between thrombosis and fibrinolysis favoring fibrinolysis, and diminished intensity of the systemic inflammatory state, factors that have been associated with cardiovascular risk. Clinical Trial Registration— http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00006305.

The Florida Initiative for Quality Cancer Care has identified how multiple aspects of breast cancer care can be improved.

Abstract Systemic therapy has led to a median survival time for patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) almost fourfold longer than that expected with best supportive care, an outcome achieved through combining chemotherapeutic and targeted biologic agents. Although the latter can include anti–epidermal growth factor receptor antibodies, such as cetuximab and panitumumab, we now have strong evidence that patients whose tumors harbor mutated KRAS will not benefit from this class of agent. Acceptance of the reliability and importance of the KRAS data took several years to evolve, however, for a variety of reasons. The timeline from the presentation and publication of small, retrospective phase II studies to widespread acceptance of the KRAS predictive value and changes in behavior—specifically, modifications of ongoing national trials in advanced/metastatic CRC, changes in national guidelines and practice patterns, and adjustments to the labeled indications for the monoclonal antibodies—was lengthy. In this commentary, we discuss whether or not the process of data disclosure regarding KRAS status and treatment of advanced CRC patients was effective in permitting timely decisions regarding ongoing publicly funded clinical trials and whether or not such decisions were rational and ethical. The overall goals are to highlight lessons learned regarding early disclosure of clinical trial results, as well as vetting and adoption of new scientific data, and to propose modifications for handling similar situations in the future.

Abstract In this article we define vaccinomics as the integration of immunogenetics and immunogenomics with systems biology and immune profiling. Vaccinomics is based on the use of cutting edge, high-dimensional (so called “omics”) assays and novel bioinformatics approaches to the development of next-generation vaccines and the expansion of our capabilities in individualized medicine. Vaccinomics will allow us to move beyond the empiric “isolate, inactivate, and inject” approach characterizing past vaccine development efforts, and toward a more detailed molecular and systemic understanding of the carefully choreographed series of biological processes involved in developing viral vaccine-induced “immunity.” This enhanced understanding will then be applied to overcome the obstacles to the creation of effective vaccines to protect against pathogens, particularly hypervariable viruses, with the greatest current impact on public health. Here we provide an overview of how vaccinomics will inform vaccine science, the development of new vaccines and/or clinically relevant biomarkers or surrogates of protection, vaccine response heterogeneity, and our understanding of immunosenescence.

Background and Purpose —Thoracic aortic plaque identified by transesophageal echocardiography heightens the risk of stroke associated with atrial fibrillation (AF). We sought to identify the prevalence, predictors, and implications of aortic plaque in patients with nonvalvular AF. Methods —Thoracic aortic plaque was prospectively sought in 770 persons with AF with the use of transesophageal echocardiography and classified as simple or complex on the basis of thickness ≥4 mm, ulceration, or mobility. Clinical and echocardiographic features of thromboembolism were correlated by multivariate analysis. Results —Aortic plaque was detected in 57% of the cohort, and complex plaque was detected in 25%. Both were found more frequently in the descending than in the proximal aorta. Potentially etiologic patient characteristics independently associated with complex plaque included advanced age, history of hypertension, diabetes, and past or present tobacco use. Comorbidities associated with aortic plaque were prior thromboembolism, increased pulse pressure, ischemic heart disease, stenosis or sclerosis of the aortic valve, mitral annular calcification (>10%), elevated serum creatinine concentration, spontaneous echo contrast in the left atrium or appendage, and left atrial appendage thrombus. The prevalence of complex plaque in patients aged <70 years with <10% mitral annular calcification, without ischemic heart disease, or without pulse pressure ≥65 mm Hg was 4% (95% CI, 1% to 6%). Conclusions —Aortic plaque is prevalent in patients with AF and is associated with atherosclerosis risk factors and with left atrial stasis or thrombosis, which are themselves independent stroke risk factors. Since the predominant location of complex plaque was in the descending aorta, the role of aortic plaque as a source of embolism in AF is uncertain.

PurposeColorectal cancer predominantly occurs in the elderly, but approximately 5% of patients are 50 years old or younger. We sought to determine whether young age is prognostic, or whether it influences efficacy/toxicity of chemotherapy, in patients with advanced disease.MethodsWe analyzed individual data on 6,284 patients from nine phase III trials of advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC) that used fluorouracil-based single-agent and combination chemotherapy. End points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), response rate (RR), and grade 3 or worse adverse events. Stratified Cox and adjusted logistic-regression models were used to test for age effects and age-treatment interactions.ResultsA total of 793 patients (13%) were younger than 50 years old; 188 of these patients (3% of total patients) were younger than 40 years old. Grade 3 or worse nausea (10% v 7%; P = .01) was more common, and severe diarrhea (11% v 14%; P = .001) and neutropenia (23% v 26%; P < .001) were less common in young (younger than 50 years) than in older (older than 50 years) patients. Age was prognostic for PFS, with poorer outcomes occurring in those younger than 50 years (median, 6.0 v 7.5 months; hazard ratio, 1.10; P = .02), but it did not affect RR or OS. In the subset of monotherapy versus combination chemotherapy trials, the relative benefits of multiagent chemotherapy were similar for young and older patients. Results were comparable when utilizing an age cut point of 40 years.ConclusionYoung age is modestly associated with poorer PFS but not OS or RR in treated patients with aCRC, and young patients have more nausea but less diarrhea and neutropenia with chemotherapy in general. Young versus older patients derive the same benefits from combination chemotherapy. Absent results of a clinical trial, standard combination chemotherapy approaches are appropriate for young patients with aCRC.

Abstract Learning Objectives After completing this course, the reader will be able to: Explain the difference in survival prediction between response criteria (WHO) when used as a two-level variable (CR/PR vs. other) and as a three-level variable (CR/PR vs. SD vs. PD).Describe the limited benefit of using actual tumor measurements over traditional criteria (as a three-level variable) in predicting survival in colorectal cancer. This article is available for continuing medical education credit at CME.TheOncologist.com Purpose. We explored the prognostic value of actual tumor measurements (TM) versus World Health Organization (WHO) criteria as three-level (responder, stable, and progression) and two-level (responder and non-responder) variables at 12 and 24 weeks as predictors of survival in Intergroup Trial N9741, a phase III trial in metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Methods. All patients with measurable disease (N = 1,188) were included. The percentage changes in TM from baseline to 12 and 24 weeks were calculated. The prognostic values of TM versus WHO criteria (as three- and two-level variables) at 12 and 24 weeks were compared, using Cox models for overall survival (OS) in a landmark analysis, adjusting for baseline tumor size, performance status, and treatment arm. Results. Tumor status at 12 weeks by WHO criteria (three or two levels) or actual TM were all strongly associated with OS. Actual TM provided no meaningful additional benefit compared with the three-level WHO criteria. Tumor status at 24 weeks was also strongly associated with survival, but added no additional prognostic value compared with the 12-week assessment. At 12 weeks, actual TM improved prognostic characterization of patients with WHO status of response, but provided no additional value in patients with stable disease or progression. Conclusions. In N9741, the use of actual TM, or following tumor status beyond 12 weeks, did not improve survival prediction compared with a single three-level response assessment at 12 weeks, suggesting that 12-week tumor status could be an appropriate phase II trial endpoint in metastatic CRC.

Background— The Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial (CREST) found a higher risk of stroke after carotid artery stenting and a higher risk of myocardial infarction (MI) after carotid endarterectomy. Methods and Results— Cardiac biomarkers and ECGs were performed before and 6 to 8 hours after either procedure and if there was clinical evidence of ischemia. In CREST, MI was defined as biomarker elevation plus either chest pain or ECG evidence of ischemia. An additional category of biomarker elevation with neither chest pain nor ECG abnormality was prespecified (biomarker+ only). Crude mortality and risk-adjusted mortality for MI and biomarker+ only were assessed during follow-up. Among 2502 patients, 14 MIs occurred in carotid artery stenting and 28 MIs in carotid endarterectomy (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.26 to 0.94; P =0.032) with a median biomarker ratio of 40 times the upper limit of normal. An additional 8 carotid artery stenting and 12 carotid endarterectomy patients had biomarker+ only (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.27 to 1.61; P =0.36), and their median biomarker ratio was 14 times the upper limit of normal. Compared with patients without biomarker elevation, mortality was higher over 4 years for those with MI (hazard ratio, 3.40; 95% confidence interval, 1.67 to 6.92) or biomarker+ only (hazard ratio, 3.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.46 to 8.68). After adjustment for baseline risk factors, both MI and biomarker+ only remained independently associated with increased mortality. Conclusions— In patients randomized to carotid endarterectomy versus carotid artery stenting, both MI and biomarker+ only were more common with carotid endarterectomy. Although the levels of biomarker elevation were modest, both events were independently associated with increased future mortality and remain an important consideration in choosing the mode of carotid revascularization or medical therapy. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00004732.