User login
Four phase 3 studies highlighted at ASCO mark progress in GI cancers
CHICAGO – Findings from four recent, phase 3 gastrointestinal cancer studies mark a step forward toward “the answers we need” for patients with pancreatic, colorectal, or esophageal cancer, according to Andrew S. Epstein, MD.
In this video interview, Dr. Epstein summarizes and provides context for the findings, which were presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and highlighted during a press briefing there. Dr. Epstein, an ASCO Expert and a medical oncologist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, who was invited to discuss each of the studies at the briefing, said the UNICANCER-sponsored Prodige 7 trial addressed an important, long-unanswered question about the value of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) with surgery for colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
“This randomized study, very importantly, answered that longstanding question and showed us in a less-is-more type of way that the addition of the chemotherapy during surgery actually did not improve the overall survival of these patients,” he said, adding that, at 60 days, HIPEC actually had done more harm than good.
The findings are helpful, as HIPEC has been widely used without a solid data foundation, and now the use of an “additional toxic nonbeneficial treatment” can be avoided in a subset of patients.
Two studies regarding chemotherapy in patients with pancreatic cancer also provided important information about treatment. Preliminary data from one, the PREOPANC-1 trial, suggested that perioperative chemoradiotherapy significantly improves outcomes in resectable and borderline resectable patients, compared with immediate surgery; the other – the Prodige 24/CCTG PA.6 trial – demonstrated that adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX, a four-agent regimen, improved disease-free, metastasis-free, and overall survival, with treated patients living a median of 20 months longer and being cancer free for a median of 9 months longer than those who received gemcitabine therapy.
“We saw a very impressive, encouraging, statistically and clinically significant improvement,” he said regarding survival outcomes in Prodige 24. In patients with good performance status who can tolerate the regimen, mFOLFIRINOX “seems to be the way to go now,” he added, noting that patients receiving the regimen require close monitoring by a medical oncologist.
The fourth study, a prevention trial known as the ASPECT trial, showed that high-dose esomeprazole and low-dose aspirin taken for at least 7 years moderately reduces the risk of high-grade dysplasia and esophageal cancer, and may delay death from any cause in patients with Barrett’s esophagus.
“[It is] obviously of huge importance to be able to prevent a cancer before its onset. ... So with esophagus cancer, which also is a very difficult disease to treat in whatever stage it is, it would be a huge benefit to have a way in which to effectively prevent it,” Dr. Epstein said.
However, more information is needed about the actual benefits in terms of all-cause mortality and the contributors from aspirin versus the proton pump inhibitor versus both, he noted, adding that it is important for the public to know that the findings only apply to those with Barrett’s esophagus and shouldn’t be attempted with over-the-counter treatments as some treatments are associated with complications, and the proton pump inhibitor dose used in this study is not available over the counter.
“So I think it is an intriguing study which needs more clarity and more follow-up, as the author himself said,” he added.
In summing up the findings presented at the briefing, Dr. Epstein said that “collectively we see that the challenge of cancer remains significant and we need high-quality studies like the ones presented today in order to best present ...what the best therapies are for [patients].
“With good sound science like this we continue to inch closer to the answers we need,” he concluded.
Dr. Epstein reported having no disclosures.
CHICAGO – Findings from four recent, phase 3 gastrointestinal cancer studies mark a step forward toward “the answers we need” for patients with pancreatic, colorectal, or esophageal cancer, according to Andrew S. Epstein, MD.
In this video interview, Dr. Epstein summarizes and provides context for the findings, which were presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and highlighted during a press briefing there. Dr. Epstein, an ASCO Expert and a medical oncologist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, who was invited to discuss each of the studies at the briefing, said the UNICANCER-sponsored Prodige 7 trial addressed an important, long-unanswered question about the value of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) with surgery for colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
“This randomized study, very importantly, answered that longstanding question and showed us in a less-is-more type of way that the addition of the chemotherapy during surgery actually did not improve the overall survival of these patients,” he said, adding that, at 60 days, HIPEC actually had done more harm than good.
The findings are helpful, as HIPEC has been widely used without a solid data foundation, and now the use of an “additional toxic nonbeneficial treatment” can be avoided in a subset of patients.
Two studies regarding chemotherapy in patients with pancreatic cancer also provided important information about treatment. Preliminary data from one, the PREOPANC-1 trial, suggested that perioperative chemoradiotherapy significantly improves outcomes in resectable and borderline resectable patients, compared with immediate surgery; the other – the Prodige 24/CCTG PA.6 trial – demonstrated that adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX, a four-agent regimen, improved disease-free, metastasis-free, and overall survival, with treated patients living a median of 20 months longer and being cancer free for a median of 9 months longer than those who received gemcitabine therapy.
“We saw a very impressive, encouraging, statistically and clinically significant improvement,” he said regarding survival outcomes in Prodige 24. In patients with good performance status who can tolerate the regimen, mFOLFIRINOX “seems to be the way to go now,” he added, noting that patients receiving the regimen require close monitoring by a medical oncologist.
The fourth study, a prevention trial known as the ASPECT trial, showed that high-dose esomeprazole and low-dose aspirin taken for at least 7 years moderately reduces the risk of high-grade dysplasia and esophageal cancer, and may delay death from any cause in patients with Barrett’s esophagus.
“[It is] obviously of huge importance to be able to prevent a cancer before its onset. ... So with esophagus cancer, which also is a very difficult disease to treat in whatever stage it is, it would be a huge benefit to have a way in which to effectively prevent it,” Dr. Epstein said.
However, more information is needed about the actual benefits in terms of all-cause mortality and the contributors from aspirin versus the proton pump inhibitor versus both, he noted, adding that it is important for the public to know that the findings only apply to those with Barrett’s esophagus and shouldn’t be attempted with over-the-counter treatments as some treatments are associated with complications, and the proton pump inhibitor dose used in this study is not available over the counter.
“So I think it is an intriguing study which needs more clarity and more follow-up, as the author himself said,” he added.
In summing up the findings presented at the briefing, Dr. Epstein said that “collectively we see that the challenge of cancer remains significant and we need high-quality studies like the ones presented today in order to best present ...what the best therapies are for [patients].
“With good sound science like this we continue to inch closer to the answers we need,” he concluded.
Dr. Epstein reported having no disclosures.
CHICAGO – Findings from four recent, phase 3 gastrointestinal cancer studies mark a step forward toward “the answers we need” for patients with pancreatic, colorectal, or esophageal cancer, according to Andrew S. Epstein, MD.
In this video interview, Dr. Epstein summarizes and provides context for the findings, which were presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and highlighted during a press briefing there. Dr. Epstein, an ASCO Expert and a medical oncologist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, who was invited to discuss each of the studies at the briefing, said the UNICANCER-sponsored Prodige 7 trial addressed an important, long-unanswered question about the value of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) with surgery for colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
“This randomized study, very importantly, answered that longstanding question and showed us in a less-is-more type of way that the addition of the chemotherapy during surgery actually did not improve the overall survival of these patients,” he said, adding that, at 60 days, HIPEC actually had done more harm than good.
The findings are helpful, as HIPEC has been widely used without a solid data foundation, and now the use of an “additional toxic nonbeneficial treatment” can be avoided in a subset of patients.
Two studies regarding chemotherapy in patients with pancreatic cancer also provided important information about treatment. Preliminary data from one, the PREOPANC-1 trial, suggested that perioperative chemoradiotherapy significantly improves outcomes in resectable and borderline resectable patients, compared with immediate surgery; the other – the Prodige 24/CCTG PA.6 trial – demonstrated that adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX, a four-agent regimen, improved disease-free, metastasis-free, and overall survival, with treated patients living a median of 20 months longer and being cancer free for a median of 9 months longer than those who received gemcitabine therapy.
“We saw a very impressive, encouraging, statistically and clinically significant improvement,” he said regarding survival outcomes in Prodige 24. In patients with good performance status who can tolerate the regimen, mFOLFIRINOX “seems to be the way to go now,” he added, noting that patients receiving the regimen require close monitoring by a medical oncologist.
The fourth study, a prevention trial known as the ASPECT trial, showed that high-dose esomeprazole and low-dose aspirin taken for at least 7 years moderately reduces the risk of high-grade dysplasia and esophageal cancer, and may delay death from any cause in patients with Barrett’s esophagus.
“[It is] obviously of huge importance to be able to prevent a cancer before its onset. ... So with esophagus cancer, which also is a very difficult disease to treat in whatever stage it is, it would be a huge benefit to have a way in which to effectively prevent it,” Dr. Epstein said.
However, more information is needed about the actual benefits in terms of all-cause mortality and the contributors from aspirin versus the proton pump inhibitor versus both, he noted, adding that it is important for the public to know that the findings only apply to those with Barrett’s esophagus and shouldn’t be attempted with over-the-counter treatments as some treatments are associated with complications, and the proton pump inhibitor dose used in this study is not available over the counter.
“So I think it is an intriguing study which needs more clarity and more follow-up, as the author himself said,” he added.
In summing up the findings presented at the briefing, Dr. Epstein said that “collectively we see that the challenge of cancer remains significant and we need high-quality studies like the ones presented today in order to best present ...what the best therapies are for [patients].
“With good sound science like this we continue to inch closer to the answers we need,” he concluded.
Dr. Epstein reported having no disclosures.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM ASCO 2018
Semaglutide drops HbA1c, weight, across ethnicities
BOSTON – studied in a series of clinical trials; the efficacy did not come at the cost of frequent hypoglycemia or other serious adverse events, according to a pooled subgroup analysis of the SUSTAIN trials.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
The trials investigated the safety and efficacy of semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist, in the treatment of T2DM. Cyrus V. Desouza, MBBS, presented results of a post hoc analysis of racial and ethnic subgroups, drawing on SUSTAIN trials 1-5 and 7 (SUSTAIN 6 had a different design, focusing on cardiovascular outcomes).
“The trials incorporated patients on the whole spectrum of diabetes, starting from people who are newly diagnosed ... all the way to patients who were on a combination of oral antidiabetic drugs plus insulin,” Dr. Desouza explained in an interview at the annual scientific & clinical congress of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists.
The mean time since diagnosis in the SUSTAIN trials varied from 4.2 years in SUSTAIN 1 to 13.3 years in SUSTAIN 5. Dr. Desouza and his colleagues pooled data from the six trials to conduct the subgroup analyses.
Patients in the intervention arms of all trials received once weekly subcutaneous semaglutide, at a dose of either 0.5 mg or 1.0 mg, according to Dr. Desouza, professor of diabetes, endocrinology, and metabolism and Schultz Professor of Diabetes Research, Diabetes, Endocrinology, and Metabolism at the University of Nebraska, Lincoln.
In all, data from 3,066 patients were available. In the racial analysis, 982 low- and 1,328 high-dose semaglutide recipients were white, 243 and 232 were Asian, 82 and 124 were African American, and 25 and 50 identified as “other,” respectively.
An analysis by ethnicity found that 208 low- and 324 high-dose recipients were Hispanic.
At baseline in all trials, mean hemoglobin A1c levels were similar, ranging from 8% to 8.4%; weights at baseline were a mean 89.6 kg to 96.2 kg across the trials.
The range of reductions in HbA1c was similar across racial and ethnic groups. “If you look at the proportion of patients who actually achieved an A1c below 7[%], it’s pretty impressive – it’s between 70% to 80%.” Between 50% and 60% of patients reached an HbA1c less than 6.5%, said Dr. Desouza.
Looking at the data another way, 62.2%-72.4% of patients saw an HbA1c reduction of at least 1% on low-dose semaglutide; the range across ethnicities was 74.2%-87.1% on high-dose semaglutide. Dr. Desouza said that the sample sizes weren’t large enough to calculate statistical significance for these subgroup differences.
“But I think what is impressive is that over 50% of patients in all the races and ethnicities were able to achieve a 5% body weight loss, which is metabolically significant in terms of improving outcomes,” he said. “I think that’s a really important fact.” A smaller proportion – around 20% – lost at least 10% of body weight, mostly on high-dose semaglutide.
Severe hypoglycemia, as defined by American Diabetes Association classification, was very rare across trials, except that 4.7% of African Americans saw this adverse event on high-dose semaglutide. Incidence in other subgroups, at either dose, ranged from 0% to 2.4%.
Otherwise, the medication was generally well tolerated, though gastrointestinal side effects were seen. “Asian people have a little higher GI side effects – up to 50% of Asians did develop GI side effects, and between 10% and 13% of Asians had to stop medication due to side effects,” said Dr. Desouza. “So I think that would be the one caveat in terms of tolerance that we did learn.”
The SUSTAIN trials were sponsored by Novo Nordisk. Dr. Desouza has received consulting fees for Novo Nordisk and has received grant support from several other pharmaceutical companies. Two coauthors are Novo Nordisk employees.
SOURCE: Desouza C et al. AACE 2018, Abstract 298
BOSTON – studied in a series of clinical trials; the efficacy did not come at the cost of frequent hypoglycemia or other serious adverse events, according to a pooled subgroup analysis of the SUSTAIN trials.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
The trials investigated the safety and efficacy of semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist, in the treatment of T2DM. Cyrus V. Desouza, MBBS, presented results of a post hoc analysis of racial and ethnic subgroups, drawing on SUSTAIN trials 1-5 and 7 (SUSTAIN 6 had a different design, focusing on cardiovascular outcomes).
“The trials incorporated patients on the whole spectrum of diabetes, starting from people who are newly diagnosed ... all the way to patients who were on a combination of oral antidiabetic drugs plus insulin,” Dr. Desouza explained in an interview at the annual scientific & clinical congress of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists.
The mean time since diagnosis in the SUSTAIN trials varied from 4.2 years in SUSTAIN 1 to 13.3 years in SUSTAIN 5. Dr. Desouza and his colleagues pooled data from the six trials to conduct the subgroup analyses.
Patients in the intervention arms of all trials received once weekly subcutaneous semaglutide, at a dose of either 0.5 mg or 1.0 mg, according to Dr. Desouza, professor of diabetes, endocrinology, and metabolism and Schultz Professor of Diabetes Research, Diabetes, Endocrinology, and Metabolism at the University of Nebraska, Lincoln.
In all, data from 3,066 patients were available. In the racial analysis, 982 low- and 1,328 high-dose semaglutide recipients were white, 243 and 232 were Asian, 82 and 124 were African American, and 25 and 50 identified as “other,” respectively.
An analysis by ethnicity found that 208 low- and 324 high-dose recipients were Hispanic.
At baseline in all trials, mean hemoglobin A1c levels were similar, ranging from 8% to 8.4%; weights at baseline were a mean 89.6 kg to 96.2 kg across the trials.
The range of reductions in HbA1c was similar across racial and ethnic groups. “If you look at the proportion of patients who actually achieved an A1c below 7[%], it’s pretty impressive – it’s between 70% to 80%.” Between 50% and 60% of patients reached an HbA1c less than 6.5%, said Dr. Desouza.
Looking at the data another way, 62.2%-72.4% of patients saw an HbA1c reduction of at least 1% on low-dose semaglutide; the range across ethnicities was 74.2%-87.1% on high-dose semaglutide. Dr. Desouza said that the sample sizes weren’t large enough to calculate statistical significance for these subgroup differences.
“But I think what is impressive is that over 50% of patients in all the races and ethnicities were able to achieve a 5% body weight loss, which is metabolically significant in terms of improving outcomes,” he said. “I think that’s a really important fact.” A smaller proportion – around 20% – lost at least 10% of body weight, mostly on high-dose semaglutide.
Severe hypoglycemia, as defined by American Diabetes Association classification, was very rare across trials, except that 4.7% of African Americans saw this adverse event on high-dose semaglutide. Incidence in other subgroups, at either dose, ranged from 0% to 2.4%.
Otherwise, the medication was generally well tolerated, though gastrointestinal side effects were seen. “Asian people have a little higher GI side effects – up to 50% of Asians did develop GI side effects, and between 10% and 13% of Asians had to stop medication due to side effects,” said Dr. Desouza. “So I think that would be the one caveat in terms of tolerance that we did learn.”
The SUSTAIN trials were sponsored by Novo Nordisk. Dr. Desouza has received consulting fees for Novo Nordisk and has received grant support from several other pharmaceutical companies. Two coauthors are Novo Nordisk employees.
SOURCE: Desouza C et al. AACE 2018, Abstract 298
BOSTON – studied in a series of clinical trials; the efficacy did not come at the cost of frequent hypoglycemia or other serious adverse events, according to a pooled subgroup analysis of the SUSTAIN trials.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
The trials investigated the safety and efficacy of semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist, in the treatment of T2DM. Cyrus V. Desouza, MBBS, presented results of a post hoc analysis of racial and ethnic subgroups, drawing on SUSTAIN trials 1-5 and 7 (SUSTAIN 6 had a different design, focusing on cardiovascular outcomes).
“The trials incorporated patients on the whole spectrum of diabetes, starting from people who are newly diagnosed ... all the way to patients who were on a combination of oral antidiabetic drugs plus insulin,” Dr. Desouza explained in an interview at the annual scientific & clinical congress of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists.
The mean time since diagnosis in the SUSTAIN trials varied from 4.2 years in SUSTAIN 1 to 13.3 years in SUSTAIN 5. Dr. Desouza and his colleagues pooled data from the six trials to conduct the subgroup analyses.
Patients in the intervention arms of all trials received once weekly subcutaneous semaglutide, at a dose of either 0.5 mg or 1.0 mg, according to Dr. Desouza, professor of diabetes, endocrinology, and metabolism and Schultz Professor of Diabetes Research, Diabetes, Endocrinology, and Metabolism at the University of Nebraska, Lincoln.
In all, data from 3,066 patients were available. In the racial analysis, 982 low- and 1,328 high-dose semaglutide recipients were white, 243 and 232 were Asian, 82 and 124 were African American, and 25 and 50 identified as “other,” respectively.
An analysis by ethnicity found that 208 low- and 324 high-dose recipients were Hispanic.
At baseline in all trials, mean hemoglobin A1c levels were similar, ranging from 8% to 8.4%; weights at baseline were a mean 89.6 kg to 96.2 kg across the trials.
The range of reductions in HbA1c was similar across racial and ethnic groups. “If you look at the proportion of patients who actually achieved an A1c below 7[%], it’s pretty impressive – it’s between 70% to 80%.” Between 50% and 60% of patients reached an HbA1c less than 6.5%, said Dr. Desouza.
Looking at the data another way, 62.2%-72.4% of patients saw an HbA1c reduction of at least 1% on low-dose semaglutide; the range across ethnicities was 74.2%-87.1% on high-dose semaglutide. Dr. Desouza said that the sample sizes weren’t large enough to calculate statistical significance for these subgroup differences.
“But I think what is impressive is that over 50% of patients in all the races and ethnicities were able to achieve a 5% body weight loss, which is metabolically significant in terms of improving outcomes,” he said. “I think that’s a really important fact.” A smaller proportion – around 20% – lost at least 10% of body weight, mostly on high-dose semaglutide.
Severe hypoglycemia, as defined by American Diabetes Association classification, was very rare across trials, except that 4.7% of African Americans saw this adverse event on high-dose semaglutide. Incidence in other subgroups, at either dose, ranged from 0% to 2.4%.
Otherwise, the medication was generally well tolerated, though gastrointestinal side effects were seen. “Asian people have a little higher GI side effects – up to 50% of Asians did develop GI side effects, and between 10% and 13% of Asians had to stop medication due to side effects,” said Dr. Desouza. “So I think that would be the one caveat in terms of tolerance that we did learn.”
The SUSTAIN trials were sponsored by Novo Nordisk. Dr. Desouza has received consulting fees for Novo Nordisk and has received grant support from several other pharmaceutical companies. Two coauthors are Novo Nordisk employees.
SOURCE: Desouza C et al. AACE 2018, Abstract 298
REPORTING FROM AACE 2018
Web portal does not reduce phone encounters or office visits for IBD patients
WASHINGTON – Inflammatory bowel disease patients may love web-based portals that allow them to interact with their doctors and records, but it does not seem to reduce their trips to the doctor.
“There was actually no decrease in office visits or phone encounters with patients that are utilizing MyChart [a web-based patient portal],” said Alexander Hristov, MD, a resident at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, in a video interview at the annual Digestive Disease Week®. “So in fact, the patients that had MyChart use were also the patients that were calling in more frequently and visiting the clinic more frequently, which is interesting because we did not see that there was an offset for emergency room visits or hospitalizations.”
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Out of the 616 total patients with either Crohn’s disease (355 patients) or ulcerative colitis (261 patients) analyzed in the study, 28% used MyChart. MyChart users also had higher number of prednisone prescriptions, compared with nonusers (51.9% vs. 40.8%, P = .01). There was no difference between MyChart users and nonusers for emergency room visits (P = .11) or hospitalizations (P = .16).
Interestingly, most messages sent via MyChart were for administrative reasons (54%), with both symptoms (28%) and education (18%) lagging behind.
Even though patients seem to like the portal, there is no billable time set aside for physicians to add the data for patients to access or respond to patient comments and requests through the portal. Unless MyChart can be shown to improve outcomes in some way, it is only an added burden for physicians.
Dr. Hristov mentioned that further work should be done to understand how web-based portals like MyChart can help both doctors and patients utilize this technology.
“We want to see the actual, measurable clinical outcomes of MyChart use,” he said. “So we want to set up a protocol where we can actually have measurable statistics looking at disease activity, inflammatory markers, and is there an impact that we are having on the patients disease course.”
Dr. Hristov had no financial disclosures to report.
SOURCE: Hristov A et al. Gastroenterology. 2018 May. doi: 0.1016/S0016-5085(18)32737-9.
WASHINGTON – Inflammatory bowel disease patients may love web-based portals that allow them to interact with their doctors and records, but it does not seem to reduce their trips to the doctor.
“There was actually no decrease in office visits or phone encounters with patients that are utilizing MyChart [a web-based patient portal],” said Alexander Hristov, MD, a resident at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, in a video interview at the annual Digestive Disease Week®. “So in fact, the patients that had MyChart use were also the patients that were calling in more frequently and visiting the clinic more frequently, which is interesting because we did not see that there was an offset for emergency room visits or hospitalizations.”
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Out of the 616 total patients with either Crohn’s disease (355 patients) or ulcerative colitis (261 patients) analyzed in the study, 28% used MyChart. MyChart users also had higher number of prednisone prescriptions, compared with nonusers (51.9% vs. 40.8%, P = .01). There was no difference between MyChart users and nonusers for emergency room visits (P = .11) or hospitalizations (P = .16).
Interestingly, most messages sent via MyChart were for administrative reasons (54%), with both symptoms (28%) and education (18%) lagging behind.
Even though patients seem to like the portal, there is no billable time set aside for physicians to add the data for patients to access or respond to patient comments and requests through the portal. Unless MyChart can be shown to improve outcomes in some way, it is only an added burden for physicians.
Dr. Hristov mentioned that further work should be done to understand how web-based portals like MyChart can help both doctors and patients utilize this technology.
“We want to see the actual, measurable clinical outcomes of MyChart use,” he said. “So we want to set up a protocol where we can actually have measurable statistics looking at disease activity, inflammatory markers, and is there an impact that we are having on the patients disease course.”
Dr. Hristov had no financial disclosures to report.
SOURCE: Hristov A et al. Gastroenterology. 2018 May. doi: 0.1016/S0016-5085(18)32737-9.
WASHINGTON – Inflammatory bowel disease patients may love web-based portals that allow them to interact with their doctors and records, but it does not seem to reduce their trips to the doctor.
“There was actually no decrease in office visits or phone encounters with patients that are utilizing MyChart [a web-based patient portal],” said Alexander Hristov, MD, a resident at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, in a video interview at the annual Digestive Disease Week®. “So in fact, the patients that had MyChart use were also the patients that were calling in more frequently and visiting the clinic more frequently, which is interesting because we did not see that there was an offset for emergency room visits or hospitalizations.”
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Out of the 616 total patients with either Crohn’s disease (355 patients) or ulcerative colitis (261 patients) analyzed in the study, 28% used MyChart. MyChart users also had higher number of prednisone prescriptions, compared with nonusers (51.9% vs. 40.8%, P = .01). There was no difference between MyChart users and nonusers for emergency room visits (P = .11) or hospitalizations (P = .16).
Interestingly, most messages sent via MyChart were for administrative reasons (54%), with both symptoms (28%) and education (18%) lagging behind.
Even though patients seem to like the portal, there is no billable time set aside for physicians to add the data for patients to access or respond to patient comments and requests through the portal. Unless MyChart can be shown to improve outcomes in some way, it is only an added burden for physicians.
Dr. Hristov mentioned that further work should be done to understand how web-based portals like MyChart can help both doctors and patients utilize this technology.
“We want to see the actual, measurable clinical outcomes of MyChart use,” he said. “So we want to set up a protocol where we can actually have measurable statistics looking at disease activity, inflammatory markers, and is there an impact that we are having on the patients disease course.”
Dr. Hristov had no financial disclosures to report.
SOURCE: Hristov A et al. Gastroenterology. 2018 May. doi: 0.1016/S0016-5085(18)32737-9.
REPORTING FROM DDW 2018
Key clinical point: Inflammatory bowel disease patients had more office visits and phone calls with physicians, and had worse outcomes.
Major finding: MyChart patients averaged 7.2 office visits and 19.2 phone encounters, compared with 5.6 office visits and 13.7 phone encounters in nonusers.
Study details: A review of patient electronic health records from Jan. 1, 2012, to December 31, 2015.
Disclosures: Dr. Hristov had no relevant financial disclosures to report.
Source: Hristov A et al Gastroenterology. 2018 May. doi: 10.1016/S0016-5085(18)32737-9.
VIDEO: Hepatitis C eradication cuts nonliver cancer rate
WASHINGTON – Treatment of hepatitis C infection with a direct-acting antiviral drug strongly linked with a rapid, 14% drop in the incidence of all nonhepatic cancers, based on analysis of data from more than 30,000 U.S. patients.
The data also showed Michael B. Charlton, MD, said at the annual Digestive Disease Week.®
compared with infected patients who had been treated with an interferon-based regimen during the period immediately preceding the availability of DAAs in late 2013. This included a 45% cut in lung cancers, a 49% cut in bladder cancer, a 62% relative risk reduction in leukemia, and a 29% drop in prostate cancer,The relative reductions in nonhepatic cancer incidence appeared soon after DAA treatment. The data Dr. Charlton reported reflected a median follow-up of 1 year for DAA-treated patients and 2.6 years for the hepatitis C–infected patients who had received interferon and did not get a DAA. A major difference between these two regimens is their efficacy, with DAA regimens producing sustained virologic response rates of 90% or better, while the interferon regimens produced substantially lower eradication rates.
“The most obvious hypothesis” to explain the observed effects is that “hepatitis C is a potent carcinogen,” possibly acting by inhibiting immune surveillance for new cancers in infected people, Dr. Charlton said in a video interview.
The study he reported used insurance-claims data from more than 146 million U.S. residents during 2007-2017 in the IQVIA PharMetrics Plus database, which included more than 367,000 adults infected with hepatitis C. Dr. Charlton and his associates pulled from this claims data on 10,989 of the infected patients who received interferon during January 2007-May 2011 (and followed through November 2013), and 22,894 infected patients treated with any type of DAA during December 2013 through March 2017. They used these two discrete time windows to completely separate the patients who received a DAA from those who did not.
The primary analysis calculated a hazard ratio for the development of any nonhepatic cancer after adjustment for a number of demographic and clinical covariates including age, smoking history, and weight, and also applied propensity-score weighting to the data. The Kaplan-Meier analysis of the data showed clear separation of the cancer-free survival curves of the two subgroups by 6 months of follow-up, and then showed steady further separation over time suggesting an ongoing carcinogenic effect from continued hepatitis C infection in patients who had received the less effective antiviral regimen. The analysis was able to reveal this effect because it had data from many thousands of treated hepatitis C patients, far more than had been enrolled in the pivotal trials for the DAAs, noted Dr. Charlton, professor and director of the Center for Liver Diseases at the University of Chicago.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 3.5 million Americans have a chronic hepatitis C infection. Dr. Charlton believed the number today might be more like 1-2 million remaining chronic U.S. cases because of the strong impact of DAA treatment. These chronic infections largely remain because hepatitis C is mostly silent and many clinicians fail to act on screening recommendations. The new findings provide even greater incentive for more rigorous screening and treatment, Dr. Charlton suggested.
“As if you needed another reason to get rid of hepatitis C, lowering your cancer risk is now added to the list,” he said.
WASHINGTON – Treatment of hepatitis C infection with a direct-acting antiviral drug strongly linked with a rapid, 14% drop in the incidence of all nonhepatic cancers, based on analysis of data from more than 30,000 U.S. patients.
The data also showed Michael B. Charlton, MD, said at the annual Digestive Disease Week.®
compared with infected patients who had been treated with an interferon-based regimen during the period immediately preceding the availability of DAAs in late 2013. This included a 45% cut in lung cancers, a 49% cut in bladder cancer, a 62% relative risk reduction in leukemia, and a 29% drop in prostate cancer,The relative reductions in nonhepatic cancer incidence appeared soon after DAA treatment. The data Dr. Charlton reported reflected a median follow-up of 1 year for DAA-treated patients and 2.6 years for the hepatitis C–infected patients who had received interferon and did not get a DAA. A major difference between these two regimens is their efficacy, with DAA regimens producing sustained virologic response rates of 90% or better, while the interferon regimens produced substantially lower eradication rates.
“The most obvious hypothesis” to explain the observed effects is that “hepatitis C is a potent carcinogen,” possibly acting by inhibiting immune surveillance for new cancers in infected people, Dr. Charlton said in a video interview.
The study he reported used insurance-claims data from more than 146 million U.S. residents during 2007-2017 in the IQVIA PharMetrics Plus database, which included more than 367,000 adults infected with hepatitis C. Dr. Charlton and his associates pulled from this claims data on 10,989 of the infected patients who received interferon during January 2007-May 2011 (and followed through November 2013), and 22,894 infected patients treated with any type of DAA during December 2013 through March 2017. They used these two discrete time windows to completely separate the patients who received a DAA from those who did not.
The primary analysis calculated a hazard ratio for the development of any nonhepatic cancer after adjustment for a number of demographic and clinical covariates including age, smoking history, and weight, and also applied propensity-score weighting to the data. The Kaplan-Meier analysis of the data showed clear separation of the cancer-free survival curves of the two subgroups by 6 months of follow-up, and then showed steady further separation over time suggesting an ongoing carcinogenic effect from continued hepatitis C infection in patients who had received the less effective antiviral regimen. The analysis was able to reveal this effect because it had data from many thousands of treated hepatitis C patients, far more than had been enrolled in the pivotal trials for the DAAs, noted Dr. Charlton, professor and director of the Center for Liver Diseases at the University of Chicago.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 3.5 million Americans have a chronic hepatitis C infection. Dr. Charlton believed the number today might be more like 1-2 million remaining chronic U.S. cases because of the strong impact of DAA treatment. These chronic infections largely remain because hepatitis C is mostly silent and many clinicians fail to act on screening recommendations. The new findings provide even greater incentive for more rigorous screening and treatment, Dr. Charlton suggested.
“As if you needed another reason to get rid of hepatitis C, lowering your cancer risk is now added to the list,” he said.
WASHINGTON – Treatment of hepatitis C infection with a direct-acting antiviral drug strongly linked with a rapid, 14% drop in the incidence of all nonhepatic cancers, based on analysis of data from more than 30,000 U.S. patients.
The data also showed Michael B. Charlton, MD, said at the annual Digestive Disease Week.®
compared with infected patients who had been treated with an interferon-based regimen during the period immediately preceding the availability of DAAs in late 2013. This included a 45% cut in lung cancers, a 49% cut in bladder cancer, a 62% relative risk reduction in leukemia, and a 29% drop in prostate cancer,The relative reductions in nonhepatic cancer incidence appeared soon after DAA treatment. The data Dr. Charlton reported reflected a median follow-up of 1 year for DAA-treated patients and 2.6 years for the hepatitis C–infected patients who had received interferon and did not get a DAA. A major difference between these two regimens is their efficacy, with DAA regimens producing sustained virologic response rates of 90% or better, while the interferon regimens produced substantially lower eradication rates.
“The most obvious hypothesis” to explain the observed effects is that “hepatitis C is a potent carcinogen,” possibly acting by inhibiting immune surveillance for new cancers in infected people, Dr. Charlton said in a video interview.
The study he reported used insurance-claims data from more than 146 million U.S. residents during 2007-2017 in the IQVIA PharMetrics Plus database, which included more than 367,000 adults infected with hepatitis C. Dr. Charlton and his associates pulled from this claims data on 10,989 of the infected patients who received interferon during January 2007-May 2011 (and followed through November 2013), and 22,894 infected patients treated with any type of DAA during December 2013 through March 2017. They used these two discrete time windows to completely separate the patients who received a DAA from those who did not.
The primary analysis calculated a hazard ratio for the development of any nonhepatic cancer after adjustment for a number of demographic and clinical covariates including age, smoking history, and weight, and also applied propensity-score weighting to the data. The Kaplan-Meier analysis of the data showed clear separation of the cancer-free survival curves of the two subgroups by 6 months of follow-up, and then showed steady further separation over time suggesting an ongoing carcinogenic effect from continued hepatitis C infection in patients who had received the less effective antiviral regimen. The analysis was able to reveal this effect because it had data from many thousands of treated hepatitis C patients, far more than had been enrolled in the pivotal trials for the DAAs, noted Dr. Charlton, professor and director of the Center for Liver Diseases at the University of Chicago.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 3.5 million Americans have a chronic hepatitis C infection. Dr. Charlton believed the number today might be more like 1-2 million remaining chronic U.S. cases because of the strong impact of DAA treatment. These chronic infections largely remain because hepatitis C is mostly silent and many clinicians fail to act on screening recommendations. The new findings provide even greater incentive for more rigorous screening and treatment, Dr. Charlton suggested.
“As if you needed another reason to get rid of hepatitis C, lowering your cancer risk is now added to the list,” he said.
REPORTING FROM DDW 2018
Key clinical point: Eradicating hepatitis C with direct-acting antivirals significantly cut the incidence of many nonliver cancers.
Major finding: Direct-acting antiviral treatment linked with a 14% drop in nonhepatic cancers, compared with patients not getting this treatment.
Study details: Analysis of 33,883 Americans treated for hepatitis C during 2007-2017 in an insurance claims database.
Disclosures: The study was funded by Gilead, a company that markets direct-acting antiviral drugs for hepatitis C virus. Dr. Charlton has been a consultant to and has received research funding from Gilead and several other companies that market drugs from this class.
Atopic Dermatitis and Peanut Allergy Prevention: New Guidelines
A Peek at Our June 2018 Issue
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Dr. William J. Gradishar shares breast cancer take-aways from ASCO 2018
CHICAGO – William J. Gradishar, MD, discussed the clinical impact of breast cancer research presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
In a video interview, Dr. Gradishar, the Betsy Bramsen Professor of Breast Oncology at Northwestern University, Chicago, said TAILORx was a “big win” in that it has no doubt diminished the number of women with early-stage breast cancer who will require chemotherapy. However, although the trial has provided some clarity, it also has left some questions open, particularly for patients under 50 years of age, he said.
Dr. Gradishar also discussed the results of combination trials of targeted therapy with either endocrine therapy or chemotherapy. In discussing SANDPIPER, which evaluated whether a phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitor could enhance the effect of anti-hormonal therapy, he said that although it was a positive trial, “from a clinician’s standpoint, it’s probably not sufficient in my mind to get really excited about.”
CHICAGO – William J. Gradishar, MD, discussed the clinical impact of breast cancer research presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
In a video interview, Dr. Gradishar, the Betsy Bramsen Professor of Breast Oncology at Northwestern University, Chicago, said TAILORx was a “big win” in that it has no doubt diminished the number of women with early-stage breast cancer who will require chemotherapy. However, although the trial has provided some clarity, it also has left some questions open, particularly for patients under 50 years of age, he said.
Dr. Gradishar also discussed the results of combination trials of targeted therapy with either endocrine therapy or chemotherapy. In discussing SANDPIPER, which evaluated whether a phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitor could enhance the effect of anti-hormonal therapy, he said that although it was a positive trial, “from a clinician’s standpoint, it’s probably not sufficient in my mind to get really excited about.”
CHICAGO – William J. Gradishar, MD, discussed the clinical impact of breast cancer research presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
In a video interview, Dr. Gradishar, the Betsy Bramsen Professor of Breast Oncology at Northwestern University, Chicago, said TAILORx was a “big win” in that it has no doubt diminished the number of women with early-stage breast cancer who will require chemotherapy. However, although the trial has provided some clarity, it also has left some questions open, particularly for patients under 50 years of age, he said.
Dr. Gradishar also discussed the results of combination trials of targeted therapy with either endocrine therapy or chemotherapy. In discussing SANDPIPER, which evaluated whether a phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitor could enhance the effect of anti-hormonal therapy, he said that although it was a positive trial, “from a clinician’s standpoint, it’s probably not sufficient in my mind to get really excited about.”
REPORTING FROM ASCO 2018
What do the genes GDF15 and IGFBP7 mean for the future of hyperemesis gravidarum treatment?
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR PRACTICE?
Genes GDF15 and IGFBP7 have been associated with hyperemesis gravidarum
The association may allow for future techniques in the prediction, prevention, and treatment of hyperemesis gravidarum
IMPACT study: Matched targeted therapy improves survival in advanced cancer
CHICAGO – according to findings from a retrospective analysis of molecularly profiled patients.
Of 3,743 patients tested as part of IMPACT (Initiative for Molecular Profiling and Advanced Cancer Therapy), 1,307 (34.9%) had at least one targetable molecular alteration. Of those, 711 (54.4%) received either matched targeted therapy that was being tested in a clinical trial or – in a small number of cases – therapy with an approved treatment used off label, and 596 (45.6%) received nonmatched therapy, Apostolia-Maria Tsimberidou, MD, reported during a press briefing at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
The objective response rates in 697 evaluable matched therapy patients was 16.2% versus 5.4% in 571 evaluable nonmatched patients, and stable disease for at least 6 months occurred in 18.7% and 14.7% of patients, respectively, for an overall disease control rate of 34.9% versus 20.1%, said Dr. Tsimberidou, a professor at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Median progression-free survival in those who received matched versus nonmatched therapy was 4.0 months and 2.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.67), and median overall survival was 9.3 and 7.3 months, respectively (HR, 0.72), she said.
The 3-year overall survival rate was 15% versus 7%, respectively, and 10-year survival was 6% and 1%, respectively.
Patients included in IMPACT had a mean age of 57 years, and 39% were men. They were heavily pretreated (mean number of prior therapies was 4); only 2.8% of patients had no prior treatment. Cancers included gastrointestinal (24.2%), gynecologic (19.4%), breast (13.5%), melanoma (11.9%) and lung (8.7%).
In this video interview, Dr. Tsimberidou describes the rationale, methodology, and findings of IMPACT, including the use of a prognostic scoring system developed as part of the study to predict overall survival based on baseline characteristics, such as baseline p13K/AKT/mTOR pathway molecular alterations, which were shown on multivariate analysis in IMPACT to predict shorter overall survival versus other alterations. Other predictors of shorter survival included liver metastases, elevated lactate dehydrogenase levels, poor functional status, low albumin levels, elevated platelet counts, and age of 60 years or older.
“We [also] wanted to see if adding the intervention ... would hold significance in this multivariate model, and we found that ... nonmatched therapy was associated with adverse survival; it was an independent factor associated with worse survival,” she said. “Therefore, matched targeted therapy is associated with longer survival.”
In the randomized, phase 2 trial IMPACT 2, progression-free survival will be compared in patients with and without matched targeted therapy, and the prognostic scoring system developed as part of IMPACT to predict overall survival based on baseline characteristics will be further evaluated, she said.
During a discussion of the findings during the press briefing, ASCO Expert Catherine M. Diefenbach, MD, said the type of precision medicine studied in IMPACT is “the wave of the future.
“Large scale efforts such as ASCO’s TAPUR or the NCI-MATCH trial will bring these efforts to many, many more patients, and hopefully usher in a new way of treating advanced cancer patients that will improve overall survival for many more patients,” said Dr. Diefenbach, of New York University.
Dr. Tsimberidou reported a consulting or advisory role with Roche, as well as research funding to her institution from EMD Serono, Baxter, Foundation Medicine, ONYX, Bayer, Boston Biomedical, Placon, IMMATICS, Karus Therapeutics, and StemCells.
SOURCE: Tsimberidou AM et al. ASCO 2018, Abstract LBA 2553.
CHICAGO – according to findings from a retrospective analysis of molecularly profiled patients.
Of 3,743 patients tested as part of IMPACT (Initiative for Molecular Profiling and Advanced Cancer Therapy), 1,307 (34.9%) had at least one targetable molecular alteration. Of those, 711 (54.4%) received either matched targeted therapy that was being tested in a clinical trial or – in a small number of cases – therapy with an approved treatment used off label, and 596 (45.6%) received nonmatched therapy, Apostolia-Maria Tsimberidou, MD, reported during a press briefing at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
The objective response rates in 697 evaluable matched therapy patients was 16.2% versus 5.4% in 571 evaluable nonmatched patients, and stable disease for at least 6 months occurred in 18.7% and 14.7% of patients, respectively, for an overall disease control rate of 34.9% versus 20.1%, said Dr. Tsimberidou, a professor at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Median progression-free survival in those who received matched versus nonmatched therapy was 4.0 months and 2.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.67), and median overall survival was 9.3 and 7.3 months, respectively (HR, 0.72), she said.
The 3-year overall survival rate was 15% versus 7%, respectively, and 10-year survival was 6% and 1%, respectively.
Patients included in IMPACT had a mean age of 57 years, and 39% were men. They were heavily pretreated (mean number of prior therapies was 4); only 2.8% of patients had no prior treatment. Cancers included gastrointestinal (24.2%), gynecologic (19.4%), breast (13.5%), melanoma (11.9%) and lung (8.7%).
In this video interview, Dr. Tsimberidou describes the rationale, methodology, and findings of IMPACT, including the use of a prognostic scoring system developed as part of the study to predict overall survival based on baseline characteristics, such as baseline p13K/AKT/mTOR pathway molecular alterations, which were shown on multivariate analysis in IMPACT to predict shorter overall survival versus other alterations. Other predictors of shorter survival included liver metastases, elevated lactate dehydrogenase levels, poor functional status, low albumin levels, elevated platelet counts, and age of 60 years or older.
“We [also] wanted to see if adding the intervention ... would hold significance in this multivariate model, and we found that ... nonmatched therapy was associated with adverse survival; it was an independent factor associated with worse survival,” she said. “Therefore, matched targeted therapy is associated with longer survival.”
In the randomized, phase 2 trial IMPACT 2, progression-free survival will be compared in patients with and without matched targeted therapy, and the prognostic scoring system developed as part of IMPACT to predict overall survival based on baseline characteristics will be further evaluated, she said.
During a discussion of the findings during the press briefing, ASCO Expert Catherine M. Diefenbach, MD, said the type of precision medicine studied in IMPACT is “the wave of the future.
“Large scale efforts such as ASCO’s TAPUR or the NCI-MATCH trial will bring these efforts to many, many more patients, and hopefully usher in a new way of treating advanced cancer patients that will improve overall survival for many more patients,” said Dr. Diefenbach, of New York University.
Dr. Tsimberidou reported a consulting or advisory role with Roche, as well as research funding to her institution from EMD Serono, Baxter, Foundation Medicine, ONYX, Bayer, Boston Biomedical, Placon, IMMATICS, Karus Therapeutics, and StemCells.
SOURCE: Tsimberidou AM et al. ASCO 2018, Abstract LBA 2553.
CHICAGO – according to findings from a retrospective analysis of molecularly profiled patients.
Of 3,743 patients tested as part of IMPACT (Initiative for Molecular Profiling and Advanced Cancer Therapy), 1,307 (34.9%) had at least one targetable molecular alteration. Of those, 711 (54.4%) received either matched targeted therapy that was being tested in a clinical trial or – in a small number of cases – therapy with an approved treatment used off label, and 596 (45.6%) received nonmatched therapy, Apostolia-Maria Tsimberidou, MD, reported during a press briefing at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
The objective response rates in 697 evaluable matched therapy patients was 16.2% versus 5.4% in 571 evaluable nonmatched patients, and stable disease for at least 6 months occurred in 18.7% and 14.7% of patients, respectively, for an overall disease control rate of 34.9% versus 20.1%, said Dr. Tsimberidou, a professor at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Median progression-free survival in those who received matched versus nonmatched therapy was 4.0 months and 2.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.67), and median overall survival was 9.3 and 7.3 months, respectively (HR, 0.72), she said.
The 3-year overall survival rate was 15% versus 7%, respectively, and 10-year survival was 6% and 1%, respectively.
Patients included in IMPACT had a mean age of 57 years, and 39% were men. They were heavily pretreated (mean number of prior therapies was 4); only 2.8% of patients had no prior treatment. Cancers included gastrointestinal (24.2%), gynecologic (19.4%), breast (13.5%), melanoma (11.9%) and lung (8.7%).
In this video interview, Dr. Tsimberidou describes the rationale, methodology, and findings of IMPACT, including the use of a prognostic scoring system developed as part of the study to predict overall survival based on baseline characteristics, such as baseline p13K/AKT/mTOR pathway molecular alterations, which were shown on multivariate analysis in IMPACT to predict shorter overall survival versus other alterations. Other predictors of shorter survival included liver metastases, elevated lactate dehydrogenase levels, poor functional status, low albumin levels, elevated platelet counts, and age of 60 years or older.
“We [also] wanted to see if adding the intervention ... would hold significance in this multivariate model, and we found that ... nonmatched therapy was associated with adverse survival; it was an independent factor associated with worse survival,” she said. “Therefore, matched targeted therapy is associated with longer survival.”
In the randomized, phase 2 trial IMPACT 2, progression-free survival will be compared in patients with and without matched targeted therapy, and the prognostic scoring system developed as part of IMPACT to predict overall survival based on baseline characteristics will be further evaluated, she said.
During a discussion of the findings during the press briefing, ASCO Expert Catherine M. Diefenbach, MD, said the type of precision medicine studied in IMPACT is “the wave of the future.
“Large scale efforts such as ASCO’s TAPUR or the NCI-MATCH trial will bring these efforts to many, many more patients, and hopefully usher in a new way of treating advanced cancer patients that will improve overall survival for many more patients,” said Dr. Diefenbach, of New York University.
Dr. Tsimberidou reported a consulting or advisory role with Roche, as well as research funding to her institution from EMD Serono, Baxter, Foundation Medicine, ONYX, Bayer, Boston Biomedical, Placon, IMMATICS, Karus Therapeutics, and StemCells.
SOURCE: Tsimberidou AM et al. ASCO 2018, Abstract LBA 2553.
REPORTING FROM ASCO 2018
Key clinical point: Matched targeted therapy improved survival in patients with advanced cancer.
Major finding: The 3-yearoverall survival rate with matched versus nonmatched therapy was 15% and 7%, respectively.
Study details: A retrospective analysis (IMPACT) of 3,743 molecularly profiled advanced cancer patients.
Disclosures: Dr. Tsimberidou reported a consulting or advisory role with Roche, as well as research funding to her institution from EMD Serono, Baxter, Foundation Medicine, ONYX Medical, Bayer, Boston Biomedical, Placon, IMMATICS, Karus Therapeutics, and StemCells.
Source: Tsimberidou AM et al. ASCO 2018, Abstract LBA 2553.
Maintenance chemo boosts survival for youth with high-risk rhabdomyosarcoma
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
CHICAGO – Maintenance chemotherapy is life-prolonging for youth with high-risk rhabdomyosarcoma, finds a trial of 371 patients aged 0 to 21 years who had completed standard intensive therapy.
The 5-year rate of overall survival was 86.5% for those who received maintenance therapy with the combination of low-dose intravenous vinorelbine and oral cyclophosphamide, compared with 73.7% for those who did not, translating to a near halving of the risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.52; P = .0111). The regimen was well tolerated.
In an interview at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, lead study author Gianni Bisogno, MD, PhD, discussed the risk-benefit profile of maintenance chemotherapy and the practice-changing nature of the new data. Dr. Bisogno, a professor at the University Hospital of Padova in Italy and chair of the European Paediatric Soft tissue Sarcoma Study Group, also described plans for a new trial that will explore alternate maintenance schedules and collaboration with colleagues in North America to further improve pediatric rhabdomyosarcoma outcomes.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
CHICAGO – Maintenance chemotherapy is life-prolonging for youth with high-risk rhabdomyosarcoma, finds a trial of 371 patients aged 0 to 21 years who had completed standard intensive therapy.
The 5-year rate of overall survival was 86.5% for those who received maintenance therapy with the combination of low-dose intravenous vinorelbine and oral cyclophosphamide, compared with 73.7% for those who did not, translating to a near halving of the risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.52; P = .0111). The regimen was well tolerated.
In an interview at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, lead study author Gianni Bisogno, MD, PhD, discussed the risk-benefit profile of maintenance chemotherapy and the practice-changing nature of the new data. Dr. Bisogno, a professor at the University Hospital of Padova in Italy and chair of the European Paediatric Soft tissue Sarcoma Study Group, also described plans for a new trial that will explore alternate maintenance schedules and collaboration with colleagues in North America to further improve pediatric rhabdomyosarcoma outcomes.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
CHICAGO – Maintenance chemotherapy is life-prolonging for youth with high-risk rhabdomyosarcoma, finds a trial of 371 patients aged 0 to 21 years who had completed standard intensive therapy.
The 5-year rate of overall survival was 86.5% for those who received maintenance therapy with the combination of low-dose intravenous vinorelbine and oral cyclophosphamide, compared with 73.7% for those who did not, translating to a near halving of the risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.52; P = .0111). The regimen was well tolerated.
In an interview at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, lead study author Gianni Bisogno, MD, PhD, discussed the risk-benefit profile of maintenance chemotherapy and the practice-changing nature of the new data. Dr. Bisogno, a professor at the University Hospital of Padova in Italy and chair of the European Paediatric Soft tissue Sarcoma Study Group, also described plans for a new trial that will explore alternate maintenance schedules and collaboration with colleagues in North America to further improve pediatric rhabdomyosarcoma outcomes.
REPORTING FROM ASCO 2018