American Society of Clinical Oncology educational book / ASCO. American Society of Clinical Oncology. Meeting最新文献

The use of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor therapy is standard care in the management of patients with various malignancies including ovarian, breast, prostate, and pancreatic cancers. PARP inhibitors have been approved in different settings for patients with specific hereditary pathogenic variants, most notably homologous recombination repair pathways such as BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. The vast experience with PARP inhibitors (olaparib, niraparib, rucaparib) has been in the management of epithelial ovarian cancer. There have not been any head-to-head comparisons of PARP inhibitors in randomized trials, and we can only perform cross-comparison on the basis of the reported literature. The three approved PARP inhibitors share several common adverse effects because of a class effect including nausea, fatigue, and anemia, but there are notable differences likely because of variations in their poly-pharmacology and off-target effects. Finally, patients included in clinical trials are often younger with a good performance status and less comorbidities than the real-world population, and hence, the potential benefits and adverse effects may not be superimposable. In this review, we describe these differences and discuss strategies to mitigate and manage adverse side effects effectively.

Adjuvant systemic treatments for older patients with breast cancer require constant dose or schedule adjustments of standards established for younger ones. This is mainly due to frailty that increases according to age (40%-50% of signals in all comers after age 70 years) and remains difficult to spot or diagnose accurately and therefore is often overlooked. Older patients are at higher risk to develop side effects whether under chemotherapy, optimized endocrine treatment, or targeted therapies. Pharmacokinetic reflects poorly functional reserves that reduce with aging and is therefore misleading. The demonstration of significant long-term benefits provided by adjuvant treatments is challenged by life expectancy, driven by multimorbidity status that increases with age, competing with cancer outcome. When geriatric assessment is incorporated into the multidisciplinary team, treatment decision process shows 30%-50% changes, de-escalating initial age-agnostic treatment choices in two of three cases. Finally, expectations from treatment vary over the years: In older ones, although not being exclusive, there is a general shift of preference for protecting functionality, cognitive functions, and independence, as summarized in quality of life that many systemic adjuvant treatment may jeopardize. These provocative considerations show importance to pay more attention to expectations expressed by older patients to limit gaps between what is thought by health care professionals as right, often on the basis of dose intensity models strongly engrained in oncology and that older patients may assess counterintuitively differently. The most achieved molecular testing to identify high-risk luminal tumors should be combined with determinant geriatric factors to bring relevant global information in the adjuvant setting for older patients.

Immunotherapy has only had a modest impact on the treatment of advanced GI malignancies. Microsatellite-stable colorectal cancer and pancreatic adenocarcinoma, the most common GI tumors, have not benefited from treatment with standard immune checkpoint inhibitors. With this huge unmet need, multiple approaches are being tried to overcome barriers to better anticancer outcomes. This article reviews a number of novel approaches to immunotherapy for these tumors. These include the use of novel checkpoint inhibitors such as a modified anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 antibody and antibodies to lymphocyte-activation gene 3, T cell immunoreceptor with immunoglobulin and ITIM domains, T-cell immunoglobulin-3, CD47, and combinations with signal transduction inhibitors. We will discuss other trials that aim to elicit an antitumor T-cell response using cancer vaccines and oncolytic viruses. Finally, we review attempts to replicate in GI cancers the frequent and durable responses seen in hematologic malignancies with immune cell therapies.

In this review, we discuss the use of measurable residual disease (MRD) in AML, ALL, and chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Our aims were to review the different methodologies for MRD assessment; describe the clinical relevance and medical decision making on the basis of MRD; compare and contrast the usage of MRD across AML, ALL, and CML; and discuss what patients need to know about MRD as it relates to their disease status and treatment. Finally, we discuss ongoing challenges and future directions with the goal of optimizing MRD usage in leukemia management.

In the era of precision medicine, genomic interrogation for identification of both germline and somatic genetic alterations has become increasingly important. While such germline testing was usually undertaken via a phenotype-driven single-gene approach, with the advent of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies, the widespread utilization of multigene panels, often agnostic of cancer phenotype, has become a commonplace in many different cancer types. At the same time, somatic tumor testing in oncology performed for the purpose of guiding therapeutic decisions for targeted therapies has also rapidly expanded, recently starting to incorporate not just patients with recurrent or metastatic cancer but even patients with early-stage disease. An integrated approach may be the best approach for the optimal management of patients with different cancers. The lack of complete congruence between germline and somatic NGS tests does not minimize the power or importance of either, but highlights the need to understand their limitations so as not to overlook an important finding or omission. NGS tests built to more uniformly and comprehensively evaluate both the germline and tumor simultaneously are urgently required and are in development. In this article, we discuss approaches to somatic and germline analyses in patients with cancer and the knowledge gained from integration of tumor-normal sequencing. We also detail strategies for the incorporation of genomic analysis into oncology care delivery models and the important emergence of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase and other DNA Damage Response inhibitors in the clinic for patients with cancer with germline and somatic BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.

What does the future of cancer immunotherapy look like and how do we get there? Find out where we've been and where we're headed in A Report on Resistance: The Road to personalized immunotherapy.

Significant progress in our understanding of cancer cachexia has occurred in recent years. Despite these advances, no pharmacologic agent has achieved US Food and Drug Administration approval for this common and highly morbid syndrome. Fortunately, improved understanding of the molecular basis of cancer cachexia has led to novel targeted approaches that are in varying stages of drug development. This article reviews two major thematic areas that are driving these pharmacologic strategies, including those targeting signal mediators at the level of the CNS and skeletal muscle. Additionally, pharmacologic strategies are being tested in combination with targeted nutrients, nutrition therapy, and exercise to treat cancer cachexia. To this end, we highlight recently published and ongoing trials evaluating cancer cachexia therapies in these specific areas.

Despite recent advancement of treatment strategies in multiple myeloma (MM), patients with relapsed/refractory MM disease, particularly after triple-class refractoriness, continue to have poor prognosis. Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR-T) cells were developed and applied to improve outcomes in this setting, and two products, idecabtagene vicleucel and ciltacabtagene autoleucel, both targeting B-cell maturation antigen, have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration in the United States and European Medicines Agency in Europe. Both have shown unprecedented clinical outcomes with high response rate and prolonged progression-free survival and overall survival in this patient population with grim prognosis. Currently, further investigations are ongoing for CAR-T targeting different tumor antigens such as G protein-coupled receptor, class C, group 5, member D or with different combinations of intracellular signaling domains, as well as fourth-generation CAR-T with antigen-unrestricted inducible cytokines. Although CAR-T therapies hold hopes and enthusiasm from the myeloma community, several hurdles remain before these treatments become available for all patients in need. These barriers include CAR-T-cell manufacturing availability, access to administering centers, financial cost, caregivers' availability, and socioeconomic and racial disparities. Expanding clinical trial eligibility criteria and real-world data collection and analysis is crucial to understand the efficacy and safety of CAR-T in the patient cohort who tends to be excluded from current trials.

Myeloid malignancies are a manifestation of clonal expansion of hematopoietic cells driven by somatic genetic alterations that may arise in a potential background of deleterious germline variants. As next-generation sequencing technology has become more accessible, real-world experience has allowed integration of molecular genomic data with morphology, immunophenotype, and conventional cytogenetics to refine our understanding of myeloid malignancies. This has prompted revisions in the classification and the prognostication schema of myeloid malignancies and germline predisposition to hematologic malignancies. This review provides an overview of significant changes in the recently published classifications of AML and myelodysplastic syndrome, emerging prognostic scoring, and the role of germline deleterious variants in predisposing to MDS and AML.

Joy in medicine, or the loss of it, is a popular topic of conversation, even more so since the pandemic. Burnout in oncology is common and diminishes the satisfaction of practicing medicine. One of the challenges clinicians face is the way in which modern clinical practice takes us away from what we find most meaningful in our work: time with patients. Strategies like being kind, expressing gratitude, and using effective communication skills can establish more connection with our colleagues and our patients, and, in turn, result in a more joyful work environment. Creating space for more moments of feeling deep interconnectedness with patients and colleagues can rekindle feelings of joy in oncology practice. This article reviews the concepts of joy in medicine, the term sacred moments, and outlines practical strategies and communication skills that are effective in enhancing the patient-provider relationship.