Citations

AbstractBackgroundOptimal sequencing of systemic therapy in the management for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) remains poorly elucidated. The CHAARTED and STAMPEDE studies have proven that early chemotherapy in the hormone‐sensitive setting yields a greater net survival advantage than docetaxel for mCRPC. In a retrospective study, we attempt to investigate the two most common treatment sequences for mCRPC and investigate whether earlier chemotherapy for mCRPC is consequential to survival outcomes.MethodsWe identified 112 patients with mCRPC treated at the Mayo Clinic between 2011 and 2017. We identified two cohorts, 80 patients (group A) received full course docetaxel chemotherapy followed by second generation hormone therapy (2nd gen androgen deprivation therapy [ADT]; Abiraterone or Enzalutamide) and 32 patients (group B) treated with 2nd gen ADT followed by docetaxel. The primary endpoint evaluated was 3‐year cancer‐specific survival.ResultsMean prostate specific antigen at initiation of first treatment was 32.0 in group A and 21.7 in group B (P = .4). Bone metastases were more prevalent in group B (87% vs 58%, P = .01). All other clinicopathologic variables were statistically similar between group A and group B. Three‐year cancer‐specific survival was 87.4% vs 64.1% for group A and group B, respectively (P = .016). We report a univariate hazard ratio of 3.61 (95% CI, 1.74‐9.5, 0 P = .01). Three‐year overall survival was 82.4% and 60.8% for group A and group B, P = .01. These results held true when excluding patients with lymph node only metastasi.ConclusionOur data indicates that sequence of systemic therapy may influence outcomes for mCRPC and that docetaxel should be considered before 2nd generation ADT. Our results support the importance of earlier chemotherapy in the castration resistant state.

Abstract Background Little is known about how practicing Internal Medicine (IM) clinicians perceive diagnostic error, and whether perceptions are in agreement with the published literature. Methods A 16-question survey was administered across two IM practices: one a referral practice providing care for patients traveling for a second opinion and the other a traditional community-based primary care practice. Our aim was to identify individual- and system-level factors contributing to diagnostic error (primary outcome) and conditions at greatest risk of diagnostic error (secondary outcome). Results Sixty-five of 125 clinicians surveyed (51%) responded. The most commonly perceived individual factors contributing to diagnostic error included atypical patient presentations (83%), failure to consider other diagnoses (63%) and inadequate follow-up of test results (53%). The most commonly cited system-level factors included cognitive burden created by the volume of data in the electronic health record (EHR) (68%), lack of time to think (64%) and systems that do not support collaboration (40%). Conditions felt to be at greatest risk of diagnostic error included cancer (46%), pulmonary embolism (43%) and infection (37%). Conclusions Inadequate clinician time and sub-optimal patient and test follow-up are perceived by IM clinicians to be persistent contributors to diagnostic error. Clinician perceptions of conditions at greatest risk of diagnostic error may differ from the published literature.

AbstractObjectivesPrevious studies noted discordance of programmed death‐1 (PD‐1) and one of its ligands (PD‐L1) across patient‐matched primary and metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). There are inconsistencies if the primary or metastatic tumor has higher expression, and whether metastatic tumor expression is associated with patient outcome. Thus, we examined PD‐1 and PD‐L1 in patient‐matched tumors using a large number of ccRCC patients with long follow‐up.Materials and MethodsWe analyzed PD‐1 and PD‐L1 using immunohistochemistry in patient‐matched primary and metastatic tumors from 110 ccRCC patients. Concordance was assessed among longitudinal metastatic tumors, as well as across patient‐matched primary and metastatic tumors. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate the associations of metastatic tumor expression with cancer‐specific survival.ResultsWe observed inter‐metastatic tumor heterogeneity of PD‐1 in 25 (69%) of the 36 patients and of PD‐L1 in seven (19%) patients. Concordance between patient‐matched primary and metastatic tumors was 73% (Kappa = 0.16, 95% CI: −0.003‐0.32). Similarly, concordance of PD‐L1 between metastatic and patient‐matched primary tumors was 78% (Kappa = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.09‐0.46). Both markers demonstrated higher expression in primary vs metastatic tumors. Metastatic tumor expression of PD‐1 was significantly associated with metastatic location (P < .0001) and ccRCC‐specific survival (HR = 2.15, 95% CI: 1.06‐4.36, P = .035).ConclusionsThe expression of PD‐1 and PD‐L1 is discordant across patient‐matched ccRCC tumors, with higher expression in primary tumors. Higher PD‐1 expression was associated with metastatic location and lower cancer‐specific survival. If validated, these results highlight the importance of evaluating these biomarkers in metastatic tissue specifically.

Background and Aims Hepatocytes play a central role in storage and utilization of fat by the liver. Selective breakdown of lipid droplets (LDs) by autophagy (also called lipophagy) is a key process utilized to catabolize these lipids as an energy source. How the autophagic machinery is selectively targeted to LDs, where it mediates membrane engulfment and subsequent degradation, is unclear. Recently, we have reported that two distinct GTPases, the mechanoenzyme, dynamin2 (Dyn2), and the small regulatory Rab GTPase, Rab10, work independently at distinct steps of lipophagy in hepatocytes. Approach and Results In an attempt to understand how these proteins are regulated and recruited to autophagic organelles, we performed a nonbiased biochemical screen for Dyn2‐binding partners and found that Dyn2 actually binds Rab10 directly through a defined effector domain of Rab10 and the middle domain of Dyn2. These two GTPases can be observed to interact transiently on membrane tubules in hepatoma cells and along LD‐centric autophagic membranes. Most important, we found that a targeted disruption of this interaction leads to an inability of cells to trim tubulated cytoplasmic membranes, some of which extend from lipophagic organelles, resulting in LD accumulation. Conclusions This study identifies a functional, and direct, interaction between Dyn2 and a regulatory Rab GTPase that may play an important role in hepatocellular metabolism.

Introduction Selective reporting bias, inconsistency in the chosen outcomes between trials and irrelevance of the chosen outcomes for women, limit the efficiency and value of research for prevention and treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). One way to address these challenges is to develop core outcome sets (COSs). Methods and analysis The aim of this manuscript is to present a protocol for a study to develop COSs for GDM prevention and treatment. This is a three-phase project consisting of (1) a systematic review of the literature to create two lists of outcomes that have been reported in trials and systematic reviews of trials of interventions for the prevention and treatment of GDM, (2) a three-round, web-based e-Delphi survey with key stakeholders to prioritise these outcomes and (3) a consensus meeting to resolve any remaining disagreements and to agree on two COSs. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval to conduct this study was obtained from the ethics committee at Galway University Hospitals on 13 December 2018 (Reference: C.A.2078). We will disseminate our research findings through peer-reviewed, open access publications and present at international conferences to reach a wide range of knowledge users.