Citations

Mayo Clinic

Clear

96 citation(s) found for "Szabo, L".

Carfilzomib in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma patients with early or late relapse following prior therapy: A subgroup analysis of the randomized phase 3 ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR trials
Mateos, María‐Victoria , Goldschmidt, Hartmut , Miguel, Jesús F. San , DeCosta, Lucy, Zhou, Lifen , Obreja, Mihaela, Blædel, Julie, Szabó, Zsolt , Leleu, Xavier , Mıkhael, Joseph , San-Miguel, Jesus

Hematological Oncology | February 15, 2018 | Volume: 36 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 463-470

10.1002/hon.2499 | PMID 29446103 Get It

AbstractWe performed analyses of the randomized phase 3 ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR trials to investigate the efficacy of carfilzomib among subgroups of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma patients who had early or late disease relapse following initiation of the immediately prior therapy. In ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR, patients had received 1 to 3 prior lines of therapy. Patients in ASPIRE received carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) or lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd), and patients in ENDEAVOR received carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd) or bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd). Patients with relapse ≤1 year after initiating the most recent prior line of therapy were categorized as early relapsers, and patients with relapse after >1 year were categorized as late relapsers. The median progression‐free survival (PFS) in ASPIRE for early relapsers was 21.4 months for KRd vs 10.7 months for Rd (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.714; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.508–1.004; P = 0.0257), and for late relapsers was 29.7 months for KRd vs 18.2 months for Rd (HR: 0.675; 95% CI: 0.533–0.854; P = 0.0005). The overall response rate (ORR) for early relapsers was 83.2% for KRd vs 54.8% for Rd, and for late relapsers was 89.0% for KRd vs 69.7% for Rd. The median PFS in ENDEAVOR (Kd vs Vd) for early relapsers was 13.9 months vs 5.7 months (HR: 0.598; 95% CI: 0.423–0.846; P = 0.0017), and for late relapsers was 22.2 months vs 10.2 months (HR: 0.486; 95% CI: 0.382–0.620; P < 0.0001). The ORR (Kd vs Vd) for early relapsers was 63.4% vs 49.1% and for late relapsers was 81.8% vs 66.8%. In conclusion, patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who received carfilzomib‐containing regimens had improved PFS and ORR compared with control groups, regardless of whether they had an early or late relapse following the most recent prior therapy.
Mutational spectrum in a worldwide study of 29,700 families with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations
Friebel, Tara M. , Friedman, Eitan , Hamann, Ute, Huo, Dezheng , Kwong, Ava , Oláh, Edith , Olopade, Olufunmilayo I., Solano, Ángela R. , Teo, Soo‐Hwang , Thomassen, Mads , Weitzel, Jeffrey N. , Chan, TL, Couch, Fergus J., Goldgar, David E., Kruse, Torben A., Palmero, Edenir Inêz , Park, Sue K. , Torres, Diana , Rensburg, Elizabeth J. van , McGuffog, Lesley, Aalfs, Cora M. , Abugattas, Julio E. , Aittomäki, Kristiina, Andrews, Lesley , Andrulis, Irene L., Arason, Aðalgeir , Arun, Banu, Asseryanis, Ella, Auerbach, Leo, Azzollini, Jacopo , Balmañà, Judith , Barile, Monica, Barkardóttir, Rósa B. , Barrowdale, Daniel , Benı́tez, Javier , Berger, Andreas, Berger, Raanan , Blanco, Amie , Blazer, Kathleen R. , Blok, Marinus J. , Bonadona, Valérie , Bradbury, Angela R. , Brewer, Carole, Buecher, Bruno , Caldés, Trinidad, Caliebe, Almuth , Caligo, Maria A. , Caputo, Sandrine M. , Chiquette, Jocelyne , Claes, Kathleen , Collée, J. Margriet, Davidson, Rosemarie, Hoya, Miguel de la , Leeneer, Kim De , Pauw, Antoine De , Delnatte, Capucine, Ding, Yuan Chun , Ditsch, Nina , Dorfling, Cecilia M., Dworniczak, Bernd , Eason, Jacqueline , Easton, Douglas F. , Eeles, Rosalind A. , Ehrencrona, Hans , Ejlertsen, Bent , EMBRACE, Engel, Christoph , Engert, Stefanie, Evans, D. Gareth , Faivre, Laurence, Feliubadaló, Lídia , Ferrer, Sandra Fert, Foretová, Lenka , Fowler, Jeffrey M., Frost, Debra, Galvão, Henrique C.R. , Ganz, Patricia A. , Gauthier‐Villars, Marion , Gehrig, Andrea, Collaborators, GEMO Study, Gerdes, Anne‐Marie , Gesta, Paul , Giannini, Giuseppe , Giraud, Sophie , Glendon, Gord , Godwin, Andrew K., Greene, Mark H. , Gutierrez‐Barrera, Angelica M. , Hahnen, Eric , Hauke, Jan , HEBON, Henderson, Alex, Hogervorst, Frans B. L., Honisch, Ellen, Imyanitov, Evgeny N., Izatt, Louise , Izquierdo, Á. , Jakubowska, Anna , James, Paul A. , Janavičius, Ramūnas , Jensen, Uffe Birk , Vijai, Joseph , Kaczmarek, Katarzyna, Karlan, Beth Y., Kast, Karin, Investigators, kConFab, Kim, Sung-Won, Konstantopoulou, Irene , Korach, Jacob, Laitman, Yael , Lasset, Christine, Lázaro, Conxi , Lee, Annette, Lee, Min Hyuk , Lester, Jenny, Lesueur, Fabienne , Liljegren, Annelie, Lindor, Noralane M. , Longy, Michel, Loud, Jennifer T. , Lu, Karen H. , Lubiński, Jan , Macháčková, Eva , Manoukian, Siranoush , Mari, Véronique , Martínez-Bouzas, Cristina, Mátrai, Zoltán , Mebirouk, Noura, Meijers‐Heijboer, Hanne , Meindl, Alfons , Mensenkamp, Arjen R. , Mickys, Ugnius, Montagna, Marco , Moysich, Kirsten B., Mulligan, Anna Marie , Musinsky, Jacob, Ngeow, Joanne , Niederacher, Dieter , Nielsen, Henriette Roed, Nielsen, Finn C., Offit, Kenneth, Öfverholm, Anna , Ong, Kai‐Ren , Osório, Ana , Papp, J., Pasini, Barbara , Pedersen, Inge Søkilde , Peixoto, Ana , Peruga, Nina, Peterlongo, Paolo , Pohl, Esther, Pradhan, Nisha , Prajzendanc, Karolina , Prieur, Fabienne, Radice, Paolo , Ramus, Susan J. , Rantala, Johanna, Rashid, Muhammad Usman , Rhiem, Kerstin, Rodriguez, Gustavo C. , Rogers, Mark T., Rudaitis, Vilius , Schmidt, Ane Yde , Schmutzler, Rita K., Senter, Leigha , Shah, Payal D. , Side, Lucy, Simard, Jacques , Skytte, Anne‐Bine , Slavin, Thomas P. , Snape, Katie , Sobol, Hagay, Southey, Melissa C. , Sukiennicki, Grzegorz, Sutter, Christian , Tan, Yen Y. , Teixeira, Manuel R. , Terry, Mary Beth , Teulé, Àlex , Thomas, Abigail, Thull, Darcy L. , Tognazzo, Silvia , Toland, Amanda Ewart, Topka, Sabine , Trainer, Alison H. , Hout, Annemieke H. van der, Kolk, Lizet E. van der, Luijt, Rob B. van der , Heetvelde, Mattias Van , Varesco, Liliana, Varon‐Mateeva, Raymonda, Vega, Ana , Villarreal‐Garza, Cynthia , Wachenfeldt, Anna von , Walker, Lisa, Wang‐Gohrke, Shan , Wappenschmidt, Barbara, Yoon, Sook-Yee, Zanzottera, Cristina, Zidan, Jamal, Zorn, Kristin K. , Selkirk, Christina G. , Hulick, Peter J. , Chenevix‐Trench, Georgia , Antoniou, Antonis C. , Nathanson, Katherine L. , Durocher, Francine , Olopade, Olufunmilayo I. , Faivre, Laurence , Białkowska, Katarzyna , Caligo, Maria A , Hulick, Peter J , James, Paul , Lesueur, Fabienne , Peterlongo, Paolo , Ramus, Susan J , Teixeira, Manuel R , Teo, Soo H , van Rensburg, Elizabeth J , Moysich, Kirsten , Vega, Ana , de la Hoya, Miguel , Radice, Paolo , Weitzel, Jeffrey N , Claes, Kathleen B M , Azzollini, Jacopo , Eeles, Rosalind A , Ehrencrona, Hans , Evans, D Gareth , Joseph, Vijai , Konstantopoulou, Irene , Olopade, Olufunmilayo I , Southey, Melissa C , van der Luijt, Rob B , Jakubowska, Anna , Palmero, Edenir I , Torres, Diana , Nathanson, Katherine L , Arason, Adalgeir , Barrowdale, Daniel , Benitez, Javier , Engel, Christoph , Izquierdo, Angel , Lazaro, Conxi , Montagna, Marco , Simard, Jacques , Chenevix-Trench, Georgia , Senter, Leigha , Topka, Sabine , Rebbeck, Timothy R. , Couch, Fergus J. , Parsons, Michael T. , Leslie, Goska , Adlard, Julian , Agata, Simona , Arnold, Norbert , Bonanni, Bernardo , Buys, Saundra S. , Campbell, Ian , Chung, Wendy K. , Cook, Jackie A , Dı́ez, Orland , Domchek, Susan M. , Velázquez, Carolina , EMBRACE, Garber, Judy E. , Collaborators, GEMO Study, Gronwald, Jacek , HEBON, Hentschel, Julia , Hogervorst, Frans B.L., Isaacs, Claudine , John, Esther M. , Karlan, Beth Y. , Lasa, Adriana , Lasset, Christine , Liljegren, Annelie , Meindl, Alfons , Miller, Austin , Moysich, Kirsten B. , Neuhausen, Susan L. , Nevanlinna, Heli , Nguyen, Huu Phuc , Nussbaum, Robert L. , Papi, Laura , Pujol, Pascal , Rhiem, Kerstin , Robson, Mark E. , Sharma, Priyanka , Singer, Christian F. , Sobol, Hagay , Steele, Linda Roslyn , Steinemann, Doris , Szabo, Csilla I. , Tischkowitz, Marc D. , Toland, Amanda Ewart , Tung, Nadine , Asperen, Christi J. van , Varesco, Liliana , Varon-Mateeva, Raymonda, Wappenschmidt, Barbara , Weber, Bernhard H. F. , Yannoukakos, Drakoulis , Spurdle, Amanda B. , Faivre, Laurence , Rashid, Muhammad U , De Leeneer, Kim , Feliubadaló, Lidia , Hauke, Jan , Pasini, Barbara , Ngeow, Joanne , Manoukian, Siranoush , Lubinski, Jan , Terry, Mary Beth , Villarreal-Garza, Cynthia , Balmaña, Judith , Kwong, Ava

Human Mutation | February 15, 2018 | Volume: 39 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 593-620

10.1002/humu.23406 | PMID 29446198 Get It

Outcome measures in coeliac disease trials: the Tampere recommendations
Ludvigsson, Jonas F. , Ciacci, Carolina , Green, Peter H.R., Kaukinen, Katri , Korponay‐Szabó, Ilma R. , Kurppa, Kalle , Lundin, Knut Erik Aslaksen, Mäki, Markku , Popp, Alina , Reilly, Norelle R., Rodríguez‐Herrera, Alfonso , Sanders, David S. , Schuppan, Detlef, Sleet, Sarah, Voorhees, Kristin, Walker, Marjorie M. , Leffler, Daniel A. , Ciacci, Carolina , Green, Peter H.R. , Murray, Joseph A. , Taavela, Juha

Gut | February 13, 2018 | Volume: 67 | Issue: 8 | Pages: 1410-1424

10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314853 | PMID 29440464 Get It

Objective A gluten-free diet is the only treatment option of coeliac disease, but recently an increasing number of trials have begun to explore alternative treatment strategies. We aimed to review the literature on coeliac disease therapeutic trials and issue recommendations for outcome measures. Design Based on a literature review of 10 062 references, we (17 researchers and 2 patient representatives from 10 countries) reviewed the use and suitability of both clinical and non-clinical outcome measures. We then made expert-based recommendations for use of these outcomes in coeliac disease trials and identified areas where research is needed. Results We comment on the use of histology, serology, clinical outcome assessment (including patient-reported outcomes), quality of life and immunological tools including gluten immunogenic peptides for trials in coeliac disease. Conclusion Careful evaluation and reporting of outcome measures will increase transparency and comparability of coeliac disease therapeutic trials, and will benefit patients, healthcare and the pharmaceutical industry.
Abstract 4265: Risks of familial breast cancer associated with known and proposed breast cancer susceptibility genes
Slavin, Thomas P., Lilyquist, Jenna , Ravichandran, Vignesh , Maria, Ann, Moore, Raymond M. , Wubbenhorst, Brad, Wenz, Brandon M., D’Andrea, Kurt , Peterlongo, Paolo, Offit, Kenneth , Nathanson, Katherine L. , Peterlongo, Paolo , Maxwell, Kara N. , Vijai, Joseph , Neuhausen, Susan L. , Hart, Steven N. , Thomas, Tinu , Schrader, Kasmintan A. , Hu, Chunling , Domchek, Susan M. , Robson, Mark E. , Radice, Paolo , Ford, James M. , Garber, Judy E. , Szabo, Csilla I. , Couch, Fergus J. , Weitzel, Jeffrey N. , Peterlongo, Paolo , Nathanson, Katherine L , Ravichandran, Vignesh

Cancer Research | July 31, 2017 | Volume: 77 | Issue: 13_Supplement | Pages: 4265-4265

10.1158/1538-7445.am2017-4265 Get It

Abstract A better understanding of gene-specific risks for development of breast cancer will lead to improved screening, prevention, and therapeutic strategies for individuals identified to carry germline mutations. We performed targeted massively-parallel sequencing to identify mutations and large genomic rearrangements in 26 known or proposed breast cancer susceptibility genes in 2134 BRCA-negative women with familial breast cancer (FBC). A case-control analysis was performed comparing the frequency of internally classified mutations identified in FBC cases to that in non-Finnish European controls from the Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC) excluding samples from The Cancer Genome Atlas. Including large genomic rearrangements, mutations were identified in 8.2% of FBC cases compared to 6.2% of ExAC controls, including mutations in high-penetrance genes (0.6% in cases vs. 0.1% in controls), moderate-penetrance genes (3.7% vs 1.7%), and seven cases with two mutations (0.3%). The remainder of FBC cases and ExAC controls had mutations in proposed breast cancer genes (1.6% of cases vs 2.4% of controls), Lynch syndrome genes (0.5% vs. 0.5%) or were heterozygous MUTYH carriers (1.5% vs. 1.5%). Case-control analysis demonstrated significant associations with FBC for ATM, PALB2, and TP53 mutations (OR&gt;3.0, p&lt;10-4), BARD1 mutations (OR=3.2, p=0.012), and CHEK2 truncating mutations (OR=1.6, p=0.041). Our results therefore demonstrate that only approximately 4% of BRCA1/2 negative FBC patients have mutations in genes definitively associated with breast cancer at this time. Large case-control studies are needed to fully evaluate the breast cancer risks associated with moderate penetrance and proposed breast cancer susceptibility genes. Citation Format: Kara N. Maxwell, Thomas Paul Slavin, Jenna M. Lilyquist, Joseph Vijai, Susan L. Neuhausen, Steven N. Hart, Vignesh Ravichandran, Tinu Thomas, Ann Maria, Kasmintan A. Schrader, Raymond Moore, Chunling Hu, Brad Wubbenhorst, Brandon M. Wenz, Kurt D'Andrea, Susan M. Domchek, Mark E. Robson, Paulo Peterlongo, Paolo Radice, James M. Ford, Judy E. Garber, Csilla Szabo, Kenneth Offit, Katherine L. Nathanson, Fergus J. Couch, Jeffrey N. Weitzel. Risks of familial breast cancer associated with known and proposed breast cancer susceptibility genes [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 4265. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-4265
A phase 3 trial of IV immunoglobulin for Alzheimer disease
Relkin, Norman R., Thomas, Ronald G., Rissman, Robert A., Brewer, James B., Rafii, Michael S., Dyck, Christopher H. van, Jack, Clifford R., Sano, Mary, Knopman, David S., Raman, Rema, Szabo, Paul, Gelmont, David M., Fritsch, Sandor, Aisen, Paul S., Study, For the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative, Study, Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative, Ahern, Geoffrey, Yaari, Roy, Sabbagh, Marwan, Mirza, Nadeem, Bernick, Charles, Bell, Karen, Turner, R. Scott, Obisesan, Thomas, Chertkow, Howard, Zabar, Yuval, Knopman, David, Mintzer, Jacobo, Grossman, Hillel, Sadowski, Martin, Wu, Chuang-Kuo, Quinn, Joseph, Borrie, Michael, Petrie, William, Ott, Brian, Keegan, Andrew, Grossberg, George, Sabbagh, Marwan, Bari, Moammed, Cohen, Sharon, Richter, Ralph, Lerner, Alan, Mulnard, Ruth, Potkin, Steven, Rafii, Michael, Brockington, John, Hsiung, Robin, Schultz, Susan, Burns, Jeffrey, Jicha, Gregory, Burke, William, Arnold, Steven, Porsteinsson, Anton, Smith, Amanda, Schneider, Lon, Quiceno, Mary, Zamrini, Edward, Asthana, Sanjay, Burgat, FT, Duara, Ranjan, Dyck, Christopher van, Jack, Clifford R. , Hsiung, Ging‐Yuek Robin , Jicha, Gregory A. , Sadowski, Martin , van Dyck, Christopher H, Relkin, Norman R., Thomas, Ronald G., Rissman, Robert A., Brewer, James B., Rafii, Michael S., Dyck, Christopher H. van, Sano, Mary, Knopman, David S., Raman, Rema, Szabo, Paul, Gelmont, David M., Fritsch, Sandor, Aisen, Paul S., Study, For the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative, Study, Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative, Ahern, Geoffrey, Yaari, Roy, Sabbagh, Marwan, Mirza, Nadeem, Bernick, Charles, Bell, Karen, Turner, R. Scott, Obisesan, Thomas, Chertkow, Howard, Zabar, Yuval, Knopman, David, Mintzer, Jacobo, Grossman, Hillel, Wu, Chuang-Kuo, Quinn, Joseph, Borrie, Michael, Petrie, William, Ott, Brian, Keegan, Andrew, Grossberg, George, Sabbagh, Marwan, Bari, Moammed, Cohen, Sharon, Richter, Ralph, Lerner, Alan, Mulnard, Ruth, Potkin, Steven, Rafii, Michael, Brockington, John, Schultz, Susan, Burns, Jeffrey, Burke, William, Arnold, Steven, Porsteinsson, Anton, Smith, Amanda, Schneider, Lon, Quiceno, Mary, Zamrini, Edward, Asthana, Sanjay, Burgat, FT, Duara, Ranjan, Dyck, Christopher van, Jack, Clifford R , Hsiung, Gink-Yuek , Jicha, Gregory A

Neurology | April 6, 2017 | Volume: 88 | Issue: 18 | Pages: 1768-1775

10.1212/wnl.0000000000003904 | PMID 28381506 Get It

Workshop on imaging science development for cancer prevention and preemption
Kelloff, Gary J. , Sullivan, Daniel C. , Baker, Houston, Clarke, Lawrence, Nordstrom, Robert J. , Tatum, James L. , Dorfman, Gary S., Berg, Christine D. , Birrer, Michael J. , Tempero, Margaret A. , Higley, Howard R., Petty, Brenda Gumbs, Sigman, Caroline C. , Ginsberg, Gregory G. , Dannenberg, Andrew J. , Hawk, Ernest T. , Messing, Edward M. , Grossman, H. Barton, Griebel, Donna, Henson, Donald E., Fabian, Carol J. , Zujewski, Jo Anne , Hayes, Wendy, Klein, Eric A. , Ocak, İclal , Tempany, Clare M. , Shtern, Faina, Parnes, Howard L. , Gómez, Jorge , Srivastava, Sudhir , Lam, Stephen , Seibel, Eric J. , Massion, Pierre P. , McLennan, Geoffrey, Burt, Randall W., Hoffman, John M. , El‐Deiry, Wafik S. , Papadimitrakopoulou, Vali, Veltri, Robert W., Solomon, Diane, Viner, Jaye L., Stratton, Steven P. , Rajadhyaksha, Milind , Dhawan, Atam P. , Jacobs, Paula , Pomper, Martin G. , Maley, Carlo C. , Sharma, Prateek , Wax, Adam , Harisinghani, Mukesh G. , Bigio, Irving J. , Ferrara, Katherine W. , Fantini, Sergio , Schnall, Mitchell D. , Zujewski, Jo Anne , Marzo, Angelo M. De , Ketterling, Jeffrey A. , Szabó, Éva , Cleary, Kevin , Suh, Robert D. , Pfeiffer, Ruth M. , Roy, Hemant K. , Wang, Thomas J. , Limburg, Paul J. , Hittelman, Walter N. , MacAulay, Calum E. , Jerónimo, José , Richards‐Kortum, Rebecca , Johnson, Karen A. , Klein, Eric A

Cancer Biomarkers | January 31, 2017 | Volume: 3 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 1-33

10.3233/cbm-2007-3101 | PMID 17655039 Get It

A Randomized Phase IIb Trial of myo -Inositol in Smokers with Bronchial Dysplasia
Lam, Stephen , Mandrekar, Sumithra J. , Gesthalter, Yaron , Ziegler, Katie L. Allen, Seisler, Drew K., Midthun, David E. , Mao, Jenny T., Aubry, Marie Christine, McWilliams, Annette , Shaipanich, Tawimas , Liu, Gang , Johnson, Evan, Bild, Andrea H. , Lenburg, Marc E. , Mayo, John R. , Yi, Joanne, Tazelaar, Henry D. , Harmsen, William S. , Smith, Judith, Beane, Jennifer , Szabó, Éva , Johnson, W. Evan , Allen Ziegler, Katie L, Yi, Joanne Eunhee, Tazelaar, Henry, Limburg, Paul J. , Sin, Don D , Johnson, Evan, Ionescu, Diana N. , Tazelaar, Henry D. , Spira, Avrum , Szabo, Eva

Cancer Prevention Research | September 22, 2016 | Volume: 9 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 906-914

10.1158/1940-6207.capr-15-0254 | PMID 27658890 Get It

Abstract Previous preclinical studies and a phase I clinical trial suggested that myo-inositol may be a safe and effective lung cancer chemopreventive agent. We conducted a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled phase IIb study to determine the chemopreventive effects of myo-inositol in smokers with bronchial dysplasia. Smokers with ≥1 site of dysplasia identified by autofluorescence bronchoscopy-directed biopsy were randomly assigned to receive oral placebo or myo-inositol, 9 g once a day for 2 weeks, and then twice a day for 6 months. The primary endpoint was change in dysplasia rate after 6 months of intervention on a per-participant basis. Other trial endpoints reported herein include Ki-67 labeling index, blood and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BAL) levels of proinflammatory, oxidant/antioxidant biomarkers, and an airway epithelial gene expression signature for PI3K activity. Seventy-four (n = 38 myo-inositol and n = 36 placebo) participants with a baseline and 6-month bronchoscopy were included in all efficacy analyses. The complete response and the progressive disease rates were 26.3% versus 13.9% and 47.4% versus 33.3%, respectively, in the myo-inositol and placebo arms (P = 0.76). Compared with placebo, myo-inositol intervention significantly reduced IL6 levels in BAL over 6 months (P = 0.03). Among those with a complete response in the myo-inositol arm, there was a significant decrease in a gene expression signature reflective of PI3K activation within the cytologically normal bronchial airway epithelium (P = 0.002). The heterogeneous response to myo-inositol suggests a targeted therapy approach based on molecular alterations is needed in future clinical trials to determine the efficacy of myo-inositol as a chemopreventive agent. Cancer Prev Res; 9(12); 906–14. ©2016 AACR.
Abstract 5220: Evaluation of ACMG guideline classified variants in 180 cancer and incidental non-cancer genes in families with breast/ovarian cancer
Wubbenhorst, Bradley , Moore, Raymond M. , Guidugli, Lucia, Wenz, Brandon M., Slavin, Thomas P., Offit, Kenneth , Nathanson, Katherine L. , Maxwell, Kara N. , Hart, Steven N. , Vijai, Joseph , Schrader, Kasmintan A. , Thomas, Tinu , Ravichandran, Vignesh , Hu, Chunling , Domchek, Susan M. , Robson, Mark E. , Szabo, Csilla I. , Neuhausen, Susan L. , Weitzel, Jeffrey N. , Couch, Fergus J. , Nathanson, Katherine L

Cancer Research | July 26, 2016 | Volume: 76 | Issue: 14_Supplement | Pages: 5220-5220

10.1158/1538-7445.am2016-5220 Get It

Abstract Sequencing tests assaying panels of genes or whole exomes are widely available for cancer risk evaluation. However, methods for classification of variants resulting from this testing are not well studied. We evaluated the ability of American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) guidelines to define the rate of mutations and variants of uncertain significance (VUS) in 180 medically relevant genes, including all ACMG designated reportable cancer and non-cancer genes, in individuals who met guidelines for hereditary cancer risk evaluation. We performed whole exome sequencing in 404 individuals in 257 families and classified 1640 variants from these genes. Potentially clinically actionable (likely-pathogenic/pathogenic, LP/P) versus nonactionable (VUS/likely-benign/benign) calls were 92% and 88% concordant with locus specific databases and Clinvar, respectively. LP/P mutations were identified in 11 of 25 breast cancer susceptibility genes in 27 BRCA1/2 negative families (11%). Evaluation of 84 additional autosomal dominant cancer susceptibility genes identified LP/P mutations in only four additional families (1.7%), suggesting they do not influence risk in this cohort. However, individuals from nine of 257 families (3.5%) had incidental LP/P mutations in 32 non-cancer disease genes, and 7% of individuals were monoallelic carriers of an LP/P mutation in 39 autosomal recessive cancer syndrome genes. Furthermore, 90% of individuals had at least one VUS. In summary, these data support the clinical utility of ACMG variant classification guidelines. In addition, evaluation of extended panels of cancer genes in breast/ovarian cancer families leads to only an incremental clinical benefit but substantially increases the complexity of the results. Citation Format: Kara N. Maxwell, Steven N. Hart, Joseph Vijai, Kasmintan A. Schrader, Tinu Thomas, Bradley Wubbenhorst, Vignesh Ravichandran, Raymond M. Moore, Chunling Hu, Lucia Guidugli, Brandon Wenz, Thomas P. Slavin, Susan M. Domchek, Mark E. Robson, Csilla Szabo, Susan L. Neuhausen, Jeffrey N. Weitzel, Kenneth Offit, Fergus J. Couch, Katherine L. Nathanson. Evaluation of ACMG guideline classified variants in 180 cancer and incidental non-cancer genes in families with breast/ovarian cancer. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 107th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2016 Apr 16-20; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(14 Suppl):Abstract nr 5220.
Abstract 4662: Framework for clinical evaluation of chemopreventive agents: Defining criteria for future assessment
Alberts, David S., Walsh, Naomi , Brown, Powel H. , Limburg, Paul J. , Sherman, Mark E. , Szabó, Éva

Cancer Research | August 5, 2015 | Volume: 75 | Issue: 15_Supplement | Pages: 4662-4662

10.1158/1538-7445.am2015-4662 Get It

Abstract Background Although a number of cancer chemopreventive agents have now been evaluated in phase II and phase III clinical trials that assess their efficacy and tolerability in both high risk and general populations, few have shown clear efficacy and uptake of approved agents has been disappointingly low. Therefore, chemopreventive agents should undergo rigorous screening prior to clinical trial evaluation in order to improve the selection of suitable agents for testing in large, expensive multi-center phase III trials. The aim of this study is to develop a descriptive method for prioritizing candidate agents for further development. Methods This framework was developed through a systematic literature review of Pubmed/Medline, Embase and The Cochrane Library. A semi-quantitative assessment focusing on efficacy and toxicity/tolerability was established based on expert input. Data from clinical trials, cancer epidemiological, observational and preclinical studies, including in vivo and in vitro basic research, was used to retrospectively evaluate the clinical application and effectiveness of cancer chemopreventive agents. Two chemopreventive agents with either a positive (aromatase inhibitors (AIs) for breast cancer) or negative (selenium for lung cancer) phase III clinical trial outcome were subsequently evaluated to determine the usefulness of the framework. Results Chemopreventive agents must reduce or reverse the process of carcinogenesis in normal or pre-malignant tissue with minimal toxicity. Evaluation of efficacy included data from preclinical and animal models, epidemiological studies, and clinical trials (both early phase trials in the organ of interest as well as secondary endpoints from other relevant studies). Agent suitability evaluation included assessment of toxicities, tolerability, and agent specific attributes (PK/PD, bioavailability, dosing, etc.). Examination of selenium and AI historical data in these categories revealed strong concordance with phase III outcomes. The detailed descriptive evaluation of the agents will be presented. Conclusion This framework provides a descriptive paradigm for cancer chemopreventive agent evaluation through systematic and rigorous interrogation. Thorough, standardized evaluation of all available preclinical, epidemiological, and clinical data should be strongly encouraged to better inform the investments required for clinical trials. Citation Format: Naomi Walsh, David S. Alberts, Powel Brown, Paul Limburg, Mark Sherman, Eva Szabo. Framework for clinical evaluation of chemopreventive agents: Defining criteria for future assessment. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 106th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2015 Apr 18-22; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(15 Suppl):Abstract nr 4662. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2015-4662
Abstract 1291: High and moderate penetrance germline mutations in a number of genes are responsible for a small proportion of familial breast cancer risk in BRCAx families
Guidugli, Lucia, Schrader, Kasmintan A. , Wubbenhorst, Bradley , Nathanson, Katherine L. , Offit, Kenneth , Maxwell, Kara N. , Hart, Steven N. , Vijai, Joseph , Thomas, Tinu , Wang, Xianshu , Klein, Robert J. , Domchek, Susan M. , Szabo, Csilla I. , Neuhausen, Susan L. , Weitzel, Jeffrey N. , Couch, Fergus J. , Schrader, Intan , Nathanson, Katherine L

Cancer Research | May 1, 2015 | Volume: 74 | Issue: 19_Supplement | Pages: 1291-1291

10.1158/1538-7445.am2014-1291 Get It

Abstract BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) testing is uninformative in approximately 80% of families with clinical features of inherited susceptibility to breast cancer. Early identification of the individuals at risk in BRCAx families may lead to enhanced screening and prevention strategies, and potentially improved overall survival as has been seen for carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations. A proportion of these families are likely explained by mutations in other high penetrance and moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes. Although multi-gene panels are now commercially available for clinical testing, only limited information is available on the spectrum of mutations in breast cancer susceptibility genes in specific subgroups of high-risk breast cancer patients. We performed whole exome sequencing in 278 BRCA1/2 negative individuals with high-risk familial breast cancer, defined as a proband and at least two first or second degree relatives with breast cancer. Samples included 232 individuals from 97 families and 49 unrelated individuals, for a total of 146 independent cases. Data were analyzed for identification of all variants in 18 known high and moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes, in addition to BRCA1 and BRCA2. Two of the 97 families and one of the 49 singletons (2% of independent cases) were found to have deleterious mutations in high penetrance genes, namely TP53 (2) and CDH1 (1). In addition, nine of 146 independent cases (6%) were found to have deleterious mutations in the other predisposition genes. Mutations in ATM and CHEK2 accounted for seven of the ten moderate penetrance mutations identified; additionally one family had a mutation in BLM, one in MRE11A, and one in PALB2. Furthermore, 15 of 146 independent cases (10%) were found to have variants of unknown significance (VUS) in one of eight genes. There were no deleterious mutations or VUS in eight of the 18 genes. Our data show that significant genetic heterogeneity exists in BRCAx families. Large-scale collaborative efforts will be required to attain sufficient power to understand how to appropriately apply these results clinically in cancer risk evaluation. Citation Format: Kara N. Maxwell, Lucia Guidugli, Kasmintan Schrader, Steven Hart, Vijai Joseph, Tinu Thomas, Xianshu Wang, Bradley Wubbenhorst, Robert Klein, Susan M. Domchek, Csilla Szabo, Susan Neuhausen, Jeffrey Weitzel, Katherine L. Nathanson, Kenneth Offit, Fergus Couch. High and moderate penetrance germline mutations in a number of genes are responsible for a small proportion of familial breast cancer risk in BRCAx families. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 105th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2014 Apr 5-9; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2014;74(19 Suppl):Abstract nr 1291. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2014-1291