Citations

Abstract Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is often diagnosed too late for effective therapy. The classic strategy for early detection biomarker advancement consists of initial retrospective phases of discovery and validation with tissue samples taken from individuals diagnosed with disease, compared with controls. Using this approach, we previously reported the discovery of a blood biomarker panel consisting of thrombospondin-2 (THBS2) and CA19-9 that together could discriminate resectable stage I and IIa PDAC as well as stages III and IV PDAC, with c-statistic values in the range of 0.96 to 0.97 in two phase II studies. We now report that in two studies of blood samples prospectively collected from 1 to 15 years prior to a PDAC diagnosis (Mayo Clinic and PLCO cohorts), THBS2 and/or CA19-9 failed to discriminate cases from healthy controls at the AUC = 0.8 needed. We conclude that PDAC progression may be heterogeneous and for some individuals can be more rapid than generally appreciated. It is important that PDAC early-detection studies incorporate high-risk, prospective prediagnostic cohorts into discovery and validation studies. Prevention Relevance: A blood biomarker panel of THBS2 and CA19-9 detects early stages of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma at diagnosis, but not when tested across a population up to 1 year earlier. Our findings suggest serial sampling over time, using prospectively collected samples for biomarker discovery, and more frequent screening of high-risk individuals.

Abstract Background: I-SPY2 is a multicenter, phase 2 trial using response-adaptive randomization within molecular subtypes defined by receptor status and MammaPrint risk to evaluate novel agents as neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer. The primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR, ypT0/is ypN0)). DNA repair deficiency in cancer cells can lead to immunogenic neoantigens, activation of the STING pathway, and PARP inhibition can also upregulate PD-L1 expression. Based on these rationales we tested the combination of durvalumab (anti-PDL1), olaparib (PARP inhibitor) and paclitaxel in I-SPY2. Methods: Women with tumors ≥ 2.5 cm were eligible for screening. Only HER2 negative (HER2-) patients were eligible for this treatment, hormone receptor positive (HR+) patients had to have MammaPrint high molecular profile. Treatment included durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks x 3, olaparib 100 mg twice daily through weeks 1-11 concurrent with paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 weekly x 12 (DOP) followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) x 4. The control arm was weekly paclitaxel x 12 followed by AC x 4. All patients undergo serial MRI imaging and imaging response at 3 & 12 weeks combined with accumulating pCR data are used to estimate, and continuously update, predicted pCR rate for the trial arm. Regimens “graduation with success” when the Bayesian predictive probability of success in a 300-patient phase 3 neoadjuvant trial in the appropriate biomarker groups reaches > 85%. Results: A total of 73 patients received DOP treatment including 21 HR- tumors (i.e. triple-negative breast cancer, TNBC) and 52 HR+ tumors between May 2018 - June 2019. The control group included 299 patients with HER2- tumors. The DOP arm graduated in June 2019, 13 months after enrollment had started, for all HER2- negative and the HR+/HER2- cohorts with > 0.85% predictive probabilities of success. 72 patient completed surgery and evaluable for pCR, the final predicted probabilities of success in a future phase III trial to demonstrate higher pCR rate with DOP compared to control are 81% for all HER2- cancers (estimated pCR rate 37%), 80% for TNBC (estimated pCR rate 47%) and 74.5% for HR+/HER2- patients (estimated pCR rate 28%). Association between pCR and germline BRCA status and immune gene expression including PDL1 will be presented at the meeting. No unexpected toxicities were seen, but 10 patients (14%) had possibly immune or olaparib related grade 2/3 AEs (3 pneumonitis, 2 adrenal insufficiency, 1 colitis, 1 pancreatitis, 2 elevated LFT, 1 skin toxicity, 2 hypothyroidism, 1 hyperthyroidism, 1 esophagitis). Conclusion: I-SPY2 demonstrated a significant improvement in pCR with durvalumab and olaparib included with paclitaxel compared to chemotherapy alone in women with stage II/III high-risk, HER2-negative breast cancer, improvement was seen in both the HR+ and TNBC subsets. Citation Format: Lajos Pusztai, Hyo S. Han, Christina Yau, Denise Wolf, Anne M. Wallace, Rebecca Shatsky, Teresa Helsten, Judy C. Boughey, Tufia Haddad, Erica Stringer-Reasor, Carla Falkson, A. Jo Chien, Rita Mukhtar, Anthony Elias, Borges Virginia, Rita Nanda, Douglas Yee, Kevin Kalinsky, Kathy S. Albain, Aixa Soyano Muller, Kathleen Kemmer, Amy S. Clark, Claudine Isaacs, Alexandra Thomas, Nola Hylton, W. Fraser Symmans, Jane Perlmutter, Michelle Melisko, Hope S. Rugo, Richard Schwab, Amy Wilson, Amy Wilson, Ruby Singhrao, Smita Asare, Laura J. van't Veer, Angela M. DeMichele, Ashish Sanil, Donald A. Berry, Laura J. Esserman, Trial Consortium I-SPY 2. Evaluation of durvalumab in combination with olaparib and paclitaxel in high-risk HER2 negative stage II/III breast cancer: Results from the I-SPY 2 TRIAL [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020; 2020 Apr 27-28 and Jun 22-24. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(16 Suppl):Abstract nr CT011.

SummaryIntroductionTo better inform the field of obesity medicine, we set out to describe the current use of pharmacotherapy meant to improve patient weight status among a group of clinicians connected through the Paediatric Obesity Weight Evaluation Registry (POWER), as well as reasons behind clinicians' use or non‐use of the medications.MethodsPaediatric weight management (PWM) programs participating in POWER were asked to complete a program profile survey in 2014 (n = 30) and 2017 (n = 33); questions about pharmacotherapy use were included. Descriptive statistics were used to identify: (a) the proportion of PWM programs offering obesity pharmacotherapy; (b) the medications most commonly prescribed; and (c) reasons among non‐prescribers for not offering pharmacotherapy.ResultsThe 2014 and 2017 surveys were completed by 29 PWM programs (97%) and 30 PWM programs (91%), respectively. Twenty‐one programs completed both surveys. In 2014, 10 (34%) programs reported offering pharmacologic agents specifically for weight control, whereas in 2017, 16 (53%) reported offering pharmacotherapy for a primary indication of weight loss. Metformin was reported as the most commonly used agent in 2014, and topiramate in 2017. Largest reported increases in use over time were for topiramate and phentermine.DiscussionOur survey results demonstrate that a majority of this group of PWM programs offered pharmacotherapy to promote weight loss in patients with complications or associated medical conditions. There was a trend indicating increasing use over time, despite the significant gap regarding pharmacotherapy use in the literature.ConclusionsThese data suggest the need for (a) additional robust paediatric drug trials to further develop the evidence base guiding use or non‐use of pharmacotherapy in paediatric weight management, and (b) increased understanding of both facilitators and barriers to prescribing anti‐obesity pharmacotherapy for youth with obesity.

Abstract Purpose: Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is frequently associated with inactivation of the von Hippel–Lindau tumor suppressor, resulting in activation of HIF-1α and HIF-2α. The current paradigm, established using mechanistic cell-based studies, supports a tumor promoting role for HIF-2α, and a tumor suppressor role for HIF-1α. However, few studies have comprehensively examined the clinical relevance of this paradigm. Furthermore, the hypoxia-associated factor (HAF), which regulates the HIFs, has not been comprehensively evaluated in ccRCC. Experimental Design: To assess the involvement of HAF/HIFs in ccRCC, we analyzed their relationship to tumor grade/stage/outcome using tissue from 380 patients, and validated these associations using tissue from 72 additional patients and a further 57 patients treated with antiangiogenic therapy for associations with response. Further characterization was performed using single-cell mRNA sequencing (scRNA-seq), RNA-in situ hybridization (RNA-ISH), and IHC. Results: HIF-1α was primarily expressed in tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs), whereas HIF-2α and HAF were expressed primarily in tumor cells. TAM-associated HIF-1α was significantly associated with high tumor grade and increased metastasis and was independently associated with decreased overall survival. Furthermore, elevated TAM HIF-1α was significantly associated with resistance to antiangiogenic therapy. In contrast, high HAF or HIF-2α were associated with low grade, decreased metastasis, and increased overall survival. scRNA-seq, RNA-ISH, and Western blotting confirmed the expression of HIF-1α in M2-polarized CD163-expressing TAMs. Conclusions: These findings highlight a potential role of TAM HIF-1α in ccRCC progression and support the reevaluation of HIF-1α as a therapeutic target and marker of disease progression.

Background and objectives Shared decision making in patients with glomerular disease remains challenging because outcomes important to patients remain largely unknown. We aimed to identify and prioritize outcomes important to patients and caregivers and to describe reasons for their choices. Design, setting, participants, & measurements We purposively sampled adult patients with glomerular disease and their caregivers from Australia, Hong Kong, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Participants identified, discussed, and ranked outcomes in focus groups using the nominal group technique; a relative importance score (between zero and one) was calculated. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically. Results Across 16 focus groups, 134 participants (range, 19–85 years old; 51% women), including 101 patients and 33 caregivers, identified 58 outcomes. The ten highest-ranked outcomes were kidney function (importance score of 0.42), mortality (0.29), need for dialysis or transplant (0.22), life participation (0.18), fatigue (0.17), anxiety (0.13), family impact (0.12), infection and immunity (0.12), ability to work (0.11), and BP (0.11). Three themes explained the reasons for these rankings: constraining day-to-day experience, impaired agency and control over health, and threats to future health and family. Conclusions Patients with glomerular disease and their caregivers highly prioritize kidney health and survival, but they also prioritize life participation, fatigue, anxiety, and family impact.