scholarly journals Biomarkers Progress and Therapeutic Implications in Malignant Mesothelioma

Mesothelioma ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordyn Feinstein ◽  
Muaiad Kittaneh
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Malignant Mesothelioma ◽  
Current Literature ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Predictive Biomarkers ◽  
Treatment Decisions ◽  
Supportive Evidence ◽  
Therapeutic Implications

We are witnessing enormous efforts to identify prognostic and predictive biomarkers to inform treatment decisions in malignant mesothelioma. In this chapter, we will review and discuss the current literature and supportive evidence for the progress in development and use of biomarkers in malignant mesothelioma. There are currently several clinical trials evaluating treatment options in mesothelioma, and this will be an up-to-date review of these trials from published literature.

scholarly journals New drug developments in metastatic gastric cancer

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 175628481880807 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron C. Tan ◽  
David L. Chan ◽  
Wasek Faisal ◽  
Nick Pavlakis
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Targeted Therapies ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Predictive Biomarkers ◽  
Metastatic Gastric Cancer ◽  
New Era

Metastatic gastric cancer is associated with a poor prognosis and novel treatment options are desperately needed. The development of targeted therapies heralded a new era for the management of metastatic gastric cancer, however results from clinical trials of numerous targeted agents have been mixed. The advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors has yielded similar promise and results from early trials are encouraging. This review provides an overview of the systemic treatment options evaluated in metastatic gastric cancer, with a focus on recent evidence from clinical trials for targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors. The failure to identify appropriate predictive biomarkers has hampered the success of many targeted therapies in gastric cancer, and a deeper understanding of specific molecular subtypes and genomic alterations may allow for more precision in the application of novel therapies. Identifying appropriate biomarkers for patient selection is essential for future clinical trials, for the most effective use of novel agents and in combination approaches to account for growing complexity of treatment options.

Is There a Precise Adjuvant Therapy for Esophagogastric Carcinoma?

2018 ◽  
pp. 280-291 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Cartwright ◽  
Florence K. Keane ◽  
Peter C. Enzinger ◽  
Theodore Hong ◽  
Ian Chau
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Predictive Biomarkers ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Global Consensus ◽  
Esophagogastric Cancer ◽  
Genetic Features ◽  
Related Mortality ◽  
Optimal Treatment Strategy

Esophagogastric cancer remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. The prognosis for patients with locally advanced disease is poor and the majority of patients with operable tumors treated with surgery alone will have recurrent disease. A multimodal approach to treatment with adjunctive chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy is therefore the standard of care for these patients. However, there is no global consensus on the optimal treatment strategy and international guidelines vary. National clinical trials inform local practice: neoadjuvant, perioperative, and adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy combinations are all possible treatment options in the management of resectable esophagogastric cancer. A number of clinical trials are ongoing, which seek to directly compare multimodal treatment options and hope to provide clarity in this area. Furthermore, increased understanding of the molecular and genetic features of esophagogastric cancer may help to guide management of operable disease by determining optimal patient selection through identification of predictive biomarkers of response and the application of novel targeted agents.

GI oncology molecular tumor board: Fostering collaboration and clinical education for personalized therapy.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11029-11029
Author(s):  
Joseph Elan Grossman ◽  
Andrea J. Bullock ◽  
Susana Angarita ◽  
Bruno Bockorny ◽  
Farshid Dayyani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Biological Effects ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Treatment Decisions ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Genomic Profiling ◽  
Genomic Alterations ◽  
Therapeutic Implications ◽  
Comprehensive Genomic Profiling ◽  
Molecular Tumor Board

11029 Background: In recent years, genomic profiling has become standard of care for several gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. In addition to standard of care indications, comprehensive genomic profiling has led to novel and expanded applications of targeted therapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy and facilitated identification of potential clinical trials. A GI molecular tumor board (MTB) was developed with a goal of improving understanding of the biological effects of genomic alterations and their therapeutic implications to enhance personalized therapy. Methods: Foundation Medicine (FM) collaborated with physicians in the GI oncology group of an academic medical center to develop a GI MTB starting March 2019. As of December 2019, 27 GI oncology cases were presented where FoundationOneCDx testing was performed and a clinical question was posed. Cases were discussed by faculty, fellows, research staff, and a clinical genomic scientist and oncologist from FM. Impacted signaling pathways and biomarkers were discussed for each case alongside clinical content so that physicians could consider therapeutic options and clinical trials. Presenting faculty were asked to complete a questionnaire for each case presented to assess the impact of the MTB discussion on clinician knowledge and patient-level treatment recommendations. Results: Of 27 questionnaires sent to 7 providers, 17 (63%) were completed. Respondents indicated that as a result of the MTB, the treatment plan was changed in 2 cases (12%), reinforced in 9 cases (53%) and in 6 cases (35%) there was no effect. On a Likert scale of 1-4 where 1 is “rare/poorly” and 4 is “great” mean scores were as follows: Did this MTB help you understand the biological effects of the main genomic alteration(s) reported in the case presented? 3.3. Did this MTB help you understand the possible therapeutic implications of the main genomic alterations in the case presented? 3.3. Did this MTB improve your understanding of the role of next generation sequencing and comprehensive genomic profiling in making treatment decisions? 3.4. Conclusions: The results of our questionnaire indicate that treatment decisions were changed in a minority of cases based on the MTB. In most cases, clinical decision making was reinforced and understanding of the biological effects of genomic alterations and their therapeutic implications were improved. Based on this feedback we will continue to refine and integrate the GI MTB into clinical care for patients with GI malignancies, and share our experience locally with other disease groups.

Immunotherapy and potential predictive biomarkers in the treatment of neuroendocrine neoplasia

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guanghui Xu ◽  
Yuhao Wang ◽  
Hushan Zhang ◽  
Xueke She ◽  
Jianjun Yang
Keyword(s):  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Predictive Biomarkers ◽  
The Body ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Ablative Therapies ◽  
Cancer Types ◽  
New Treatment ◽  
Well Differentiated

Neuroendocrine neoplasias (NENs) are a heterogeneous group of rare tumors scattered throughout the body. Surgery, locoregional or ablative therapies as well as maintenance treatments are applied in well-differentiated, low-grade NENs, whereas cytotoxic chemotherapy is usually applied in high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas. However, treatment options for patients with advanced or metastatic NENs are limited. Immunotherapy has provided new treatment approaches for many cancer types, including neuroendocrine tumors, but predictive biomarkers of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the treatment of NENs have not been fully reported. By reviewing the literature and international congress abstracts, we summarize the current knowledge of ICIs, potential predicative biomarkers in the treatment of NENs, implications and efficacy of ICIs as well as biomarkers for NENs of gastroenteropancreatic system, lung NENs and Merkel cell carcinoma in clinical practice.

scholarly journals Therapeutic clinical trials to combat COVID-19 pandemic in India: analysis from trial registry

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Angelika Batta ◽  
Raj Khirasaria ◽  
Vinod Kapoor ◽  
Deepansh Varshney
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
De Novo ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Drug Repurposing ◽  
Trial Registry ◽  
Therapeutic Treatment ◽  
Clinical Trial Registry ◽  
Clear Cut ◽  
Therapeutic Trials ◽  
Microsoft Office

AbstractObjectivesWith the emergence of Novel corona virus, hunt for finding a preventive and therapeutic treatment options has already begun at a rapid pace with faster clinical development programs. The present study was carried out to give an insight of therapeutic interventional trials registered under clinical trial registry of India (CTRI) for COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsAll trials registered under CTRI were evaluated using keyword “COVID” from its inception till 9th June 2020. Out of which, therapeutic interventional studies were chosen for further analysis. Following information was collected for each trial: type of therapeutic intervention (preventive/therapeutic), treatment given, no. of centers (single center/multicentric), type of institution (government/private), study design (randomized/single-blinded/double-blinded) and sponsors (Government/private). Microsoft Office Excel 2007 was used for tabulation and analysis.ResultsThe search yielded total of 205 trials, out of which, 127 (62%) trials were interventional trials. Out of these, 71 (56%) were AYUSH interventions, 36 (28.3%) tested drugs, 9 (7%) tested a nondrug intervention, rest were nutraceuticals and vaccines. About 66 (56%) were therapeutic trials. Majority were single-centered trials, i.e. 87 (73.7%). Trials were government funded in 57 (48.3%) studies. Majority were randomized controlled trials, i.e. 67 (56.8%). AYUSH preparations included AYUSH-64, Arsenic Album, SamshamaniVati etc.ConclusionsThe number of therapeutic interventional clinical trials was fair in India. A clear-cut need exists for an increase in both quantity and quality of clinical trials for COVID-19. Drug repurposing approach in all systems of medicine can facilitate prompt clinical decisions at lower costs than de novo drug development.

scholarly journals Immunotherapy Predictive Molecular Markers in Advanced Gastroesophageal Cancer: MSI and Beyond

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 1715
Author(s):  
Robin Park ◽  
Laercio Lopes ◽  
Anwaar Saeed
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Options ◽  
Unmet Need ◽  
Predictive Biomarkers ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Gastroesophageal Cancer ◽  
Programmed Death ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Tumor Mutational Burden ◽  
Large Phase ◽  
Programmed Death 1

Advanced gastroesophageal cancer (GEC) has a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. Immunotherapy including the anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1) antibodies pembrolizumab and nivolumab have been approved for use in various treatment settings in GEC. Additionally, frontline chemoimmunotherapy regimens have recently demonstrated promising efficacy in large phase III trials and have the potential to be added to the therapeutic armamentarium in the near future. There are currently several immunotherapy biomarkers that are validated for use in the clinical setting for GEC including programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression as well as the tumor agnostic biomarkers such as mismatch repair or microsatellite instability (MMR/MSI) and tumor mutational burden (TMB). However, apart from MMR/MSI, these biomarkers are imperfect because none are highly sensitive nor specific. Therefore, there is an unmet need for immunotherapy biomarker development. To this end, several biomarkers are currently being evaluated in ongoing trials with some showing promising predictive potential. Here, we summarize the landscape of immunotherapy predictive biomarkers that are currently being evaluated in GEC.

Predictive and prognostic biomarkers with therapeutic targets in colorectal cancer: A 2021 update on current development, evidence, and recommendation

2021 ◽  
pp. 107815522110055
Author(s):  
Clement Chung
Keyword(s):  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Therapeutic Targets ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Predictive Biomarkers ◽  
Tumor Location ◽  
Prognostic Biomarkers ◽  
Her2 Gene ◽  
Braf Mutations ◽  
Therapeutic Implications ◽  
Molecular Alterations

Although therapeutically actionable molecular alterations are widely distributed across many cancer types, only a handful of them show evidence of clinical utility and are recommended for routine clinical practice in the management of cancers of colon and rectum (CRC). This 2021 update aims to provide a succinct summary on the use of prognostic and/or predictive biomarkers (expanded RAS, BRAF, microsatellite-high [MSI-H] or deficient mismatch repair [dMMR], neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase [ NTRK] fusion genes, and human epidermal growth factor receptor type II [ HER2] gene amplification) associated with CRC. Therapeutic implications of each relevant predictive or prognostic biomarker for patients with CRC are described, along with discussion on new developments on (1) biomarker-driven therapies such as testing of BRAF, MLH1 promoter methylation and MMR germline genes in differentiating sporadic CRC or hereditary conditions such as Lynch syndrome; (2) first-line use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic CRC; (3) risk stratification and therapy selection based on primary tumor location (left-sided vs. right-sided colon cancer); (3) atypical BRAF mutations; (4) use of EGFR directed therapy in the perioperative oligometastatic disease setting; (5) re-challenge of EGFR directed therapy and (6) personalizing therapy of fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan based on new evidence in pharmacogenomic testing. Data are collected and analyzed from available systematic reviews and meta-analyses of treatments with known therapeutic targets in CRC, which may be associated with predictive and/or prognostic biomarkers. Discussions are presented in an application-based format, with goal to empower pharmacists or other clinicians to gain awareness and understanding in biomarker-driven cancer therapy issues.

scholarly journals Variation in treatment preferences of pulmonary exacerbations among Australian and New Zealand cystic fibrosis physicians

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e000956
Author(s):  
Grace Currie ◽  
Anna Tai ◽  
Tom Snelling ◽  
André Schultz
Keyword(s):  
Cystic Fibrosis ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Early Response ◽  
Treatment Preferences ◽  
Dornase Alfa ◽  
Clinical Scenarios ◽  
Professional Opinion ◽  
Pulmonary Exacerbations

BackgroundDespite advances in cystic fibrosis (CF) management and survival, the optimal treatment of pulmonary exacerbations remains unclear. Understanding the variability in treatment approaches among physicians might help prioritise clinical uncertainties to address through clinical trials.MethodsPhysicians from Australia and New Zealand who care for people with CF were invited to participate in a web survey of treatment preferences for CF pulmonary exacerbations. Six typical clinical scenarios were presented; three to paediatric and another three to adult physicians. For each scenario, physicians were asked to choose treatment options and provide reasons for their choices.ResultsForty-nine CF physicians (31 paediatric and 18 adult medicine) participated; more than half reported 10+ years of experience. There was considerable variation in primary antibiotic selection; none was preferred by more than half of respondents in any scenario. For secondary antibiotic therapy, respondents consistently preferred intravenous tobramycin and a third antibiotic was rarely prescribed, except in one scenario describing an adult patient. Hypertonic saline nebulisation and twice daily chest physiotherapy was preferred in most scenarios while dornase alfa use was more variable. Most CF physicians (>80%) preferred to change therapy if there was no early response. Professional opinion was the most common reason for antibiotic choice.ConclusionsVariation exists among CF physicians in their preferred choice of primary antibiotic and use of dornase alfa. These preferences are driven by professional opinion, possibly reflecting a lack of evidence to base policy recommendations. Evidence from high-quality clinical trials is needed to inform physician decision making.

scholarly journals Neuroinflammation and the Kynurenine Pathway in CNS Disease: Molecular Mechanisms and Therapeutic Implications

Cells ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 1548
Author(s):  
Mustafa N. Mithaiwala ◽  
Danielle Santana-Coelho ◽  
Grace A. Porter ◽  
Jason C. O’Connor
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Mechanisms ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Kynurenine Pathway ◽  
Economic Problem ◽  
Cns Disease ◽  
Therapeutic Implications ◽  
Efficacious Treatment ◽  
The Central Nervous System ◽  
Significant Health

Diseases of the central nervous system (CNS) remain a significant health, social and economic problem around the globe. The development of therapeutic strategies for CNS conditions has suffered due to a poor understanding of the underlying pathologies that manifest them. Understanding common etiological origins at the cellular and molecular level is essential to enhance the development of efficacious and targeted treatment options. Over the years, neuroinflammation has been posited as a common link between multiple neurological, neurodegenerative and neuropsychiatric disorders. Processes that precipitate neuroinflammatory conditions including genetics, infections, physical injury and psychosocial factors, like stress and trauma, closely link dysregulation in kynurenine pathway (KP) of tryptophan metabolism as a possible pathophysiological factor that ‘fuel the fire’ in CNS diseases. In this study, we aim to review emerging evidence that provide mechanistic insights between different CNS disorders, neuroinflammation and the KP. We provide a thorough overview of the different branches of the KP pertinent to CNS disease pathology that have therapeutic implications for the development of selected and efficacious treatment strategies.

scholarly journals Comparison of an oncology clinical decision-support system’s recommendations with actual treatment decisions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suthida Suwanvecho ◽  
Harit Suwanrusme ◽  
Tanawat Jirakulaporn ◽  
Surasit Issarachai ◽  
Nimit Taechakraichana ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Treatment Decisions ◽  
Therapeutic Options ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
The Us ◽  
Rectal Cancers

Abstract Objective IBM(R) Watson for Oncology (WfO) is a clinical decision-support system (CDSS) that provides evidence-informed therapeutic options to cancer-treating clinicians. A panel of experienced oncologists compared CDSS treatment options to treatment decisions made by clinicians to characterize the quality of CDSS therapeutic options and decisions made in practice. Methods This study included patients treated between 1/2017 and 7/2018 for breast, colon, lung, and rectal cancers at Bumrungrad International Hospital (BIH), Thailand. Treatments selected by clinicians were paired with therapeutic options presented by the CDSS and coded to mask the origin of options presented. The panel rated the acceptability of each treatment in the pair by consensus, with acceptability defined as compliant with BIH’s institutional practices. Descriptive statistics characterized the study population and treatment-decision evaluations by cancer type and stage. Results Nearly 60% (187) of 313 treatment pairs for breast, lung, colon, and rectal cancers were identical or equally acceptable, with 70% (219) of WfO therapeutic options identical to, or acceptable alternatives to, BIH therapy. In 30% of cases (94), 1 or both treatment options were rated as unacceptable. Of 32 cases where both WfO and BIH options were acceptable, WfO was preferred in 18 cases and BIH in 14 cases. Colorectal cancers exhibited the highest proportion of identical or equally acceptable treatments; stage IV cancers demonstrated the lowest. Conclusion This study demonstrates that a system designed in the US to support, rather than replace, cancer-treating clinicians provides therapeutic options which are generally consistent with recommendations from oncologists outside the US.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document