Parental practices and perspectives on health and digital technology use information seeking for children aged 0-36 months.

BACKGROUND: Parents commonly seek information to support the health and well-being of their children. The increasing availability of health information online and social changes related to the COVID-19 pandemic may have changed what information is sought, from whom, where, and why. This qualitative study explored parents' practices and perspectives on seeking health and digital technology use information for their young children. METHODS: Twenty parents, living in Australia (7 rural, 3 remote, and 10 metropolitan), with children aged 0-36 months completed a semi-structured interview. RESULTS: Parents commonly turned to friends and family and online sources to access health information for their young children. For all types of health information, including digital technology use, themes were identified surrounding aspects of information sources participants valued and accessibility of health services. Perceived credibility and trustworthiness, relatability with other parents, ease of accessibility and convenience, and actionable, bite-sized information were valued. Reduced accessibility to health services due to COVID-19 and geographical location, and need for agency in managing their child's health influenced parents' choice of source of information. Few participants actively sought information about digital technology use for their young child, with the main focus on screen time. CONCLUSION: Interactions with family and friends and online sources are important to parents when accessing health information for their child. Parents valued information sources which they considered trustworthy, credible, and relatable, as well as easily accessible and convenient. SO WHAT?: Dissemination of health information reflecting these values may empower parents during this early stage of parenthood.

Clinical and molecular features of acquired resistance to immunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer.

Although immunotherapy with PD-(L)1 blockade is routine for lung cancer, little is known about acquired resistance. Among 1,201 patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with PD-(L)1 blockade, acquired resistance is common, occurring in >60% of initial responders. Acquired resistance shows differential expression of inflammation and interferon (IFN) signaling. Relapsed tumors can be separated by upregulated or stable expression of IFNγ response genes. Upregulation of IFNγ response genes is associated with putative routes of resistance characterized by signatures of persistent IFN signaling, immune dysfunction, and mutations in antigen presentation genes which can be recapitulated in multiple murine models of acquired resistance to PD-(L)1 blockade after in vitro IFNγ treatment. Acquired resistance to PD-(L)1 blockade in NSCLC is associated with an ongoing, but altered IFN response. The persistently inflamed, rather than excluded or deserted, tumor microenvironment of acquired resistance may inform therapeutic strategies to effectively reprogram and reverse acquired resistance.

Recruiting general practitioners and older patients with multimorbidity to randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Older patients with multimorbidity are under-represented in experimental research. OBJECTIVE: To explore the barriers and facilitators to general practitioner (GP) and older patient recruitment and retention in a cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT). METHOD: This descriptive study uses qualitative and quantitative data from a cluster RCT, designed to evaluate the effectiveness of a medicines optimization intervention. The SPPiRE cluster RCT enrolled 51 general practices and 404 patients aged ≥65 years and prescribed ≥15 medicines. Quantitative data were collected from all recruited practices and 32 additional practices who were enrolled, but unable to recruit sufficient participants. Qualitative data were collected from purposive samples of intervention GPs (18/26), patients (27/208), and researcher logs and analysed thematically using inductive coding. RESULTS: Enrolment rates for practices and patients were 37% and 25%, respectively. Barriers to GP recruitment were lack of resources and to patient recruitment were difficulty understanding trial material and concern about medicines being taken away. GPs' primary motivation was perceived importance of the research question, whereas patients' primary motivation was trust in their GP. All general practices were retained. Thirty-five patients (8.6%) were lost to follow-up for primary outcomes, mainly because they had died and 45% did not return patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). CONCLUSION: Patient retention for the primary outcome was high, as it was collected directly from patient records. Patient completion of PROM data was poor, reflecting difficulty in understanding trial material. Recruiting older patients with multimorbidity to clinical trials is possible but requires significant resource and planning. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN12752680.

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) often exclude older people with multiple medical conditions. The aim of this study was to explore how and why participants took part in a primary care based RCT that included 51 general practitioners (GPs) and 404 older patients prescribed ≥15 medicines. The RCT was designed to assess the usefulness of a supported medication review. The study team assessed information that was already collected as part of the RCT, to describe the process of inviting and enrolling GPs and older people. This included information on the numbers invited and enrolled and interviews from a smaller sample of GPs (18) and older people (27). The study successfully enrolled the required number of participants but it took 26 months more than planned. 37% of invited GPs and 25% of invited patients took part. GPs felt the research was important but they identified lack of time and resources as barriers to participation. Older people predominantly took part because they trusted their GP but some were wary of having medicines taken away and were put off by trial documentation. It is important that RCTs including older people with multiple medical conditions carefully plan recruitment and pay careful attention to trial documentation.

Association between patient attitudes towards deprescribing and subsequent prescription changes.

Deprescribing is an essential component of safe prescribing, especially for people with higher levels of polypharmacy. Identifying individuals prepared to consider medicine changes may facilitate deprescribing-orientated reviews. We aimed to explore the relationship between revised patients' attitudes towards deprescribing (rPATD) scores and medication changes in older people prescribed ≥15 medicines. A secondary analysis of rPATD scores and prescription data from a cluster randomised controlled trial of a GP-delivered, deprescribing-orientated medication review was conducted. The association between number of medicines stopped, started and changed and baseline rPATD scores was assessed using Poisson regression, adjusting for patient age, gender, study group allocation, baseline number of medicines and effects of clustering. Participants (n = 404) had a mean age of 76.4 years and were prescribed a mean of 17.1 medicines at baseline. Willingness to stop a medicine was associated with higher rates of both deprescribing (IRR: 1.40; 95% CI: 1.06-1.84) and initiating medicines (IRR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.09-1.88). Satisfaction with current medicines was associated with a lower rate of deprescribing (IRR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.57-0.85). The rPATD questionnaire could be used as part of a deprescribing intervention to identify participants who may be prepared to engage in deprescribing, enabling more efficient use of clinician time during complex consultations.

Oral cancer awareness and education within the pharmacy profession.

The incidence of oral cancers are rising in the UK, with early detection a significant positive prognostic factor. The Covid-19 pandemic has negatively impacted patients access to dental services, reducing a potential avenue to diagnosis. Community pharmacists are well positioned to play an expanded role in supporting earlier detection. This study seeks to identify levels of awareness and knowledge of oral cancer amongst community pharmacists, to inform development of educational resources.A cross-sectional digital survey was distributed via social media between August and September 2021. Data were collected on participant's demographics, oral cancer awareness and educational resources relevant to oral cancer. The results obtained were analysed using descriptive statistics in IBM SPSS software.61 pharmacists completed the survey. The majority were female (n = 40; 65.6%) aged 18-30 (n = 33; 54.1%). Less than half of respondents reported feeling confident in recognising risk factors (37.7%; n = 23). A substantial minority (n = 8; 13.1%) incorrectly selected fluoride toothpaste use as a risk factor for oral cancer. Most respondents correctly suggested signposting patients with signs or symptoms of oral cancer to a General Medical or General Dental Practitioner (GDP) (n = 35; 57.3%, n = 46; 75.4%). 91.8% of respondents (n = 56) would welcome an educational resource to support professional development.This study demonstrates a need for further educational resources regarding oral cancer, specifically aimed at community pharmacists. Community Pharmacists have a crucial role in efforts to improve rates of early detection of oral cancers. Work should be completed to explore the establishment of direct referral pathways from community pharmacy to secondary care.

Medication changes and potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients with significant polypharmacy.

BACKGROUND: Number of medicines and medicines appropriateness are often used as outcome measures to evaluate the effectiveness of deprescribing interventions. AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate changes in prescribing, potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIP) and prescribing of low-value medicines in older people with multimorbidity and significant polypharmacy. METHOD: This study was a retrospective secondary analysis of prescription data from a cluster randomised controlled trial involving 404 participants aged ≥ 65 years and prescribed ≥ 15 repeat medicines from 51 different general practices. For this study, repeat medications at baseline and follow-up (~ 1 year later) were assigned Anatomical Therapeutic Classification (ATC) codes. Outcomes were the most commonly prescribed and potentially inappropriately prescribed drug groups, the most frequently discontinued or initiated drug groups and the number of changes per person between baseline and follow-up. RESULTS: There were 7051 medicines prescribed to 404 participants at baseline. There was a median of 17 medicines (IQR 15-19) at baseline and 16 (IQR 14-19) at follow-up. PIP represented 17.1% of prescriptions at baseline and 15.7% (n = 6777) at follow-up. There were reductions in the prescription of most drug groups with the largest reduction in antiplatelet prescriptions. Considering medication discontinuations, initiations and switches, there was a median of five medication changes per person (range 0-30, IQR 3-9) by follow-up. There were 95 low-value prescriptions at baseline reducing to 78 at follow-up. CONCLUSION: The number of medication changes per person was not reflected by summarising medication count at two time points, highlighting the complexity of prescribing for patients with polypharmacy. Frequent medication changes has potentially important implications for patients in terms of adherence and medication safety. TRIAL REGISTRY: The SPPiRE trial was registered prospectively on the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN12752680).

Patient and general practitioner experiences of implementing a medication review intervention in older people with multimorbidity: Process evaluation of the SPPiRE trial.

INTRODUCTION: The SPPiRE cluster randomized controlled trial found that a general practitioner (GP)-delivered medication review that incorporated screening for potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIP), a brown bag review and a patient priority assessment, resulted in a significant but small reduction in the number of medicines and no significant reduction in PIP. This process evaluation aims to explore the experiences of GPs and patients and the potential for system-wide implementation. METHODS: The trial included 51 general practices and 404 participants with multimorbidity aged ≥65 years, prescribed ≥15 medicines. The process evaluation used mixed methods and ran parallel to the trial. Quantitative data was collected from the SPPiRE intervention website and analysed descriptively. Qualitative data on medication changes were collected from intervention GPs (18/26) and a purposive sample of intervention patients (27/208) via semi-structured telephone interviews. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic analysis. Qualitative and quantitative data were integrated using a triangulation protocol. RESULTS: The analysis generated two themes, intervention implementation and mechanisms of action, and both were underpinned by the theme of context. Intervention delivery varied among practices and 45 patients (28%) had no review, primarily due to insufficient GP time. 80% of reviewed patients had ≥1 PIP identified, 59% had ≥1 problem identified during the brown bag review and 79% had ≥1 priority recorded. The brown bag review resulted in the most deprescription of medications. GPs and patients responded positively to the intervention but most GPs did not engage with the patient priority-setting process. GPs identified a lack of integration into practice software and resources as barriers to future implementation. CONCLUSION: The SPPiRE intervention had a small effect in reducing the number of medicines and this was primarily mediated through the brown bag review. The context of resource shortages and deep-seated views around medical decision-making influenced intervention implementation. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Qualitative data on the implementation of the medication review and their wider views on their medicines was collected from older people with multimorbidity through semi-structured telephone interviews. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The SPPiRE trial was registered prospectively on the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN12752680).

Mapping the adult human esophagus in vivo and in vitro.

Many esophageal diseases can arise during development or throughout life. Therefore, well-characterized in vitro models and detailed methods are essential for studying human esophageal development, homeostasis and disease. Here, we (1) create an atlas of the cell types observed in the normal adult human esophagus; (2) establish an ancestrally diverse biobank of in vitro esophagus tissue to interrogate homeostasis and injury; and (3) benchmark in vitro models using the adult human esophagus atlas. We created a single-cell RNA sequencing reference atlas using fresh adult esophagus biopsies and a continuously expanding biobank of patient-derived in vitro cultures (n=55 lines). We identify and validate several transcriptionally distinct cell classes in the native human adult esophagus, with four populations belonging to the epithelial layer, including basal, epibasal, early differentiating and terminally differentiated luminal cells. Benchmarking in vitro esophagus cultures to the in vivo reference using single-cell RNA sequencing shows that the basal stem cells are robustly maintained in vitro, and the diversity of epithelial cell types in culture is dependent on cell density. We also demonstrate that cultures can be grown in 2D or as 3D organoids, and these methods can be employed for modeling the complete epithelial layers, thereby enabling in vitro modeling of the human adult esophagus.

The multimorbidity collaborative medication review and decision making (MyComrade) study: a pilot cluster randomised trial in two healthcare systems.

BACKGROUND: While international guidelines recommend medication reviews as part of the management of multimorbidity, evidence on how to implement reviews in practice in primary care is lacking. The MyComrade (MultimorbiditY Collaborative Medication Review And Decision Making) intervention is an evidence-based, theoretically informed novel intervention which aims to support the conduct of medication reviews for patients with multimorbidity in primary care. AIM: The pilot study aimed to assess the feasibility of a definitive trial of the MyComrade intervention across two healthcare systems (Republic of Ireland (ROI) and Northern Ireland (NI)). DESIGN: A pilot cluster-randomised controlled trial was conducted (clustered at general practice level), using specific progression criteria and a process evaluation framework. SETTING: General practices in the ROI and NI. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible practices were those in defined geographical areas who had GP's and Practice Based Pharmacists (PBP's) (in NI) willing to conduct medication reviews. Eligible patients were those aged 18 years and over, with multi morbidity and on ten or more medications. INTERVENTION: The MyComrade intervention is an evidence-based, theoretically informed novel intervention which aims to support the conduct of medication reviews for patients with multimorbidity in primary care, using a planned collaborative approach guided by an agreed checklist, within a specified timeframe. OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility outcomes, using pre-determined progression criteria, assessed practice and patient recruitment and retention and intervention acceptability and fidelity. Anonymised patient-related quantitative data, from practice medical records and patient questionnaires were collected at baseline, 4 and 8 months, to inform potential outcome measures for a definitive trial. These included (i) practice outcomes-completion of medication reviews; (ii) patient outcomes-treatment burden and quality of life; (iii) prescribing outcomes-number and changes of prescribed medications and incidents of potentially inappropriate prescribing; and (iv) economic cost analysis. The framework Decision-making after Pilot and feasibility Trials (ADePT) in conjunction with a priori progression criteria and process evaluation was used to guide the collection and analysis of quantitative and qualitative data. RESULTS: The recruitment of practices (n = 15) and patients (n = 121, mean age 73 years and 51% female), representing 94% and 38% of a priori targets respectively, was more complex and took longer than anticipated; impacted by the global COVID-19 pandemic. Retention rates of 100% of practices and 85% of patients were achieved. Both practice staff and patients found the intervention acceptable and reported strong fidelity to the My Comrade intervention components. Some practice staff highlighted concerns such as poor communication of the reviews to patients, dissatisfaction regarding incentivisation and in ROI the sustainability of two GPs collaboratively conducting the medication reviews. Assessing outcomes from the collected data was found feasible and appropriate for a definitive trial. Two progression criteria met the 'Go' criterion (practice and patient retention), two met the 'Amend' criterion (practice recruitment and intervention implementation) and one indicated a 'Stop - unless changes possible' (patient recruitment). CONCLUSION: The MyComrade intervention was found to be feasible to conduct within two different healthcare systems. Recruitment of participants requires significant time and effort given the nature of this population and the pairing of GP and pharmacist may be more sustainable to implement in routine practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registry: ISRCTN, ISRCTN80017020 ; date of confirmation 4/11/2019; retrospectively registered.

Mucolytic bacteria license pathobionts to acquire host-derived nutrients during dietary nutrient restriction.

Pathobionts employ unique metabolic adaptation mechanisms to maximize their growth in disease conditions. Adherent-invasive Escherichia coli (AIEC), a pathobiont enriched in the gut mucosa of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), utilizes diet-derived L-serine to adapt to the inflamed gut. Therefore, the restriction of dietary L-serine starves AIEC and limits its fitness advantage. Here, we find that AIEC can overcome this nutrient limitation by switching the nutrient source from the diet to the host cells in the presence of mucolytic bacteria. During diet-derived L-serine restriction, the mucolytic symbiont Akkermansia muciniphila promotes the encroachment of AIEC to the epithelial niche by degrading the mucus layer. In the epithelial niche, AIEC acquires L-serine from the colonic epithelium and thus proliferates. Our work suggests that the indirect metabolic network between pathobionts and commensal symbionts enables pathobionts to overcome nutritional restriction and thrive in the gut.

The MultimorbiditY COllaborative Medication Review And DEcision Making (MyComrade) study: a protocol for a cross-border pilot cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: While international guidelines recommend medication reviews as part of the management of multimorbidity, evidence on how to implement reviews in practice in primary care is lacking. The MultimorbiditY Collaborative Medication Review And Decision Making (MyComrade) intervention is an evidence-based, theoretically informed novel intervention which aims to support the conduct of medication reviews for patients with multimorbidity in primary care. Our aim in this pilot study is to evaluate the feasibility of a trial of the intervention with unique modifications accounting for contextual variations in two neighbouring health systems (Republic of Ireland (ROI) and Northern Ireland (NI)). METHODS: A pilot cluster randomised controlled trial will be conducted, using a mixed-methods process evaluation to investigate the feasibility of a trial of the MyComrade intervention based on pre-defined progression criteria. A total of 16 practices will be recruited (eight in ROI; eight in NI), and four practices in each jurisdiction will be randomly allocated to intervention or control. Twenty people living with multimorbidity and prescribed ≥ 10 repeat medications will be recruited from each practice prior to practice randomisation. In intervention practices, the MyComrade intervention will be delivered by pairs of general practitioners (GPs) in ROI, and a GP and practice-based pharmacist (PBP) in NI. The GPs/GP and PBP will schedule the time to review the medications together using a checklist. Usual care will proceed in practices in the control arm. Data will be collected via electronic health records and postal questionnaires at recruitment and 4 and 8 months after randomisation. Qualitative interviews to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention and explore experiences related to multimorbidity management will be conducted with a purposive sample of GPs, PBPs, practice administration staff and patients in intervention and control practices. The feasibility of conducting a health economic evaluation as part of a future definitive trial will be assessed. DISCUSSION: The findings of this pilot study will assess the feasibility of a trial of the MyComrade intervention in two different health systems. Evaluation of the progression criteria will guide the decision to progress to a definitive trial and inform trial design. The findings will also contribute to the growing evidence-base related to intervention development and feasibility studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN80017020 . Date of confirmation is 4/11/2019.

A Scalable Quality Assurance Process for Curating Oncology Electronic Health Records: The Project GENIE Biopharma Collaborative Approach.

PURPOSE: The American Association for Cancer Research Project Genomics Evidence Neoplasia Information Exchange Biopharma Collaborative is a multi-institution effort to build a pan-cancer repository of genomic and clinical data curated from the electronic health record. For the research community to be confident that data extracted from electronic health record text are reliable, transparency of the approach used to ensure data quality is essential. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four institutions participating in AACR's Project GENIE created an observational cohort of patients with cancer for whom tumor molecular profiling data, therapeutic exposures, and treatment outcomes are available and will be shared publicly with the research community. A comprehensive approach to quality assurance included assessments of (1) feasibility of the curation model through pressure test cases; (2) accuracy through programmatic queries and comparison with source data; and (3) reproducibility via double curation and code review. RESULTS: Assessments of feasibility resulted in critical modifications to the curation directives. Queries and comparison with source data identified errors that were rectified via data correction and curator retraining. Assessment of intercurator reliability indicated a reliable curation model. CONCLUSION: The transparent quality assurance processes for the GENIE BPC data ensure that the data can be used for analyses that support clinical decision making and advances in precision oncology.

GP-delivered medication review of polypharmacy, deprescribing, and patient priorities in older people with multimorbidity in Irish primary care (SPPiRE Study): A cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a rising prevalence of multimorbidity, particularly in older patients, and a need for evidence-based medicines management interventions for this population. The Supporting Prescribing in Older Adults with Multimorbidity in Irish Primary Care (SPPiRE) trial aimed to investigate the effect of a general practitioner (GP)-delivered, individualised medication review in reducing polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs) in community-dwelling older patients with multimorbidity in primary care. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) set in 51 GP practices throughout the Republic of Ireland. A total of 404 patients, aged ≥65 years with complex multimorbidity, defined as being prescribed ≥15 regular medicines, were recruited from April 2017 and followed up until October 2020. Furthermore, 26 intervention GP practices received access to the SPPiRE website where they completed an educational module and used a template for an individualised patient medication review that identified PIP, opportunities for deprescribing, and patient priorities for care. A total of 25 control GP practices delivered usual care. An independent blinded pharmacist assessed primary outcome measures that were the number of medicines and the proportion of patients with any PIP (from a predefined list of 34 indicators based predominantly on the STOPP/START version 2 criteria). We performed an intention-to-treat analysis using multilevel modelling. Recruited participants had substantial disease and treatment burden at baseline with a mean of 17.37 (standard deviation [SD] 3.50) medicines. At 6-month follow-up, both intervention and control groups had reductions in the numbers of medicines with a small but significantly greater reduction in the intervention group (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.899 to 0.999, p = 0.045). There was no significant effect on the odds of having at least 1 PIP in the intervention versus control group (odds ratio [OR] 0.39, 95% CI: 0.140 to 1.064, p = 0.066). Adverse events recorded included mortality, emergency department (ED) presentations, and adverse drug withdrawal events (ADWEs), and there was no evidence of harm. Less than 2% of drug withdrawals in the intervention group led to a reported ADWE. Due to the inability to electronically extract data, primary outcomes were measured at just 2 time points, and this is the main limitation of this work. CONCLUSIONS: The SPPiRE intervention resulted in a small but significant reduction in the number of medicines but no evidence of a clear effect on PIP. This reduction in significant polypharmacy may have more of an impact at a population rather than individual patient level. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN12752680.

Implications of Selection Bias Due to Delayed Study Entry in Clinical Genomic Studies.

IMPORTANCE: Real-world data sets that combine clinical and genomic data may be subject to left truncation (when potential study participants are not included because they have already passed the milestone of interest at the time of study recruitment). The lapse between diagnosis and molecular testing can present analytic challenges and threaten the validity and interpretation of survival analyses. OBSERVATIONS: Effects of ignoring left truncation when estimating overall survival are illustrated using data from the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Project Genomics Evidence Neoplasia Information Exchange Biopharma Collaborative (GENIE BPC), and a straightforward risk-set adjustment approach is described. Ignoring left truncation results in overestimation of overall survival: unadjusted median survival estimates from diagnosis among patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer or stage IV colorectal cancer were overestimated by more than 1 year. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Clinicogenomic data are a valuable resource for evaluation of real-world cancer outcomes and should be analyzed using appropriate methods to maximize their potential. Analysts must become adept at application of appropriate statistical methods to ensure valid, meaningful, and generalizable research findings.

Early-Phase Interventional Trials in Oral Cancer Prevention.

The increasing breadth of molecular targets, promise of immune-targeted therapies and repurposed agents have heightened interest in cancer prevention. While, to date, testing of oral cancer chemoprevention strategies has failed to deliver therapeutic agents for routine clinical practice, there remains an urgent need for further clinical research to overcome this hurdle. Patients at the greatest risk of disease stand to benefit the most from inclusion in clinical trials; therefore, there is a need to carefully define this population using validated clinical and molecular markers. Safety, tolerability and the efficacy of interventions is assessed through carefully selected endpoints. These endpoints may include pharmacodynamic, clinical, histological and on-target molecular modifications as an individual or as a composite endpoint. Early-phase trials provide an area of opportunity to explore novel and repurposed agents in the setting of oral cancer chemoprevention, eventually leading to phase III trials with clinical endpoints such as transformation and clinical outcome; these studies are large, lengthy and expensive and should be reserved for the most promising of agents. This paper will explore current evidence in oral cancer chemoprevention, drug repurposing, selection of appropriate endpoints for early-phase trials and novel therapeutic angles in oral cancer chemoprevention.

SAVER: sodium valproate for the epigenetic reprogramming of high-risk oral epithelial dysplasia-a phase II randomised control trial study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Sodium valproate (VPA) has been associated with a reduced risk of head and neck cancer development. The potential protective mechanism of action is believed to be via inhibition of histone deacetylase and subsequent epigenetic reprogramming. SAVER is a phase IIb open-label, randomised control trial of VPA as a chemopreventive agent in patients with high-risk oral epithelial dysplasia (OED). The aim of the trial is to gather preliminary evidence of the clinical and biological effects of VPA upon OED and assess the feasibility and acceptability of such a trial, with a view to inform a future definitive phase III study. METHODS: One hundred and ten patients with high-risk OED will be recruited from up to 10 secondary care sites in the UK and randomised into either VPA or observation only for 4 months. Women of childbearing potential will be excluded due to the teratogenic properties of VPA. Tissue and blood samples will be collected prior to randomisation and on the last day of the intervention/observation-only period (end of 4 months). Clinical measurement and additional safety bloods will be taken at multiple time points during the trial. The primary outcome will be a composite, surrogate endpoint of change in lesion size, change in grade of dysplasia and change in LOH profile at 8 key microsatellite regions. Feasibility outcomes will include recruitment targets, compliance with the study protocol and adverse effects. A qualitative sub-study will explore patient experience and perception of the trial. DISCUSSION: The current management options for patients with high-risk OED are limited and mostly include surgical resection and clinical surveillance. However, there remains little evidence whether surgery can effectively lead to a notable reduction in the risk of oral cancer development. Similarly, surveillance is associated with concerns regarding delayed diagnosis of OED progressing to malignancy. The SAVER trial provides an opportunity to investigate the effects of a repurposed, inexpensive and well-tolerated medication as a potential chemopreventive strategy for patients with high-risk OED. The clinical and biological findings of SAVER will inform the appropriateness, design and feasibility of a definitive phase III trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database ( Eudra-CT 2018-000197-30 ). ( http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12448611 ). The trial was prospectively registered on 24/04/2018.

MET Exon 14-altered Lung Cancers and MET Inhibitor Resistance.

PURPOSE: MET tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) can achieve modest clinical outcomes in MET exon 14-altered lung cancers, likely secondary to primary resistance. Mechanisms of primary resistance remain poorly characterized and comprehensive proteomic analyses have not previously been performed. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We performed hybrid capture-based DNA sequencing, targeted RNA sequencing, cell-free DNA sequencing, selected reaction monitoring mass spectrometry (SRM-MS), and immunohistochemistry on patient samples of MET exon 14-altered lung cancers treated with a MET TKI. Associations between overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and putative genomic alterations and MET protein expression were evaluated. RESULTS: Seventy-five of 168 MET exon 14-altered lung cancers received a MET TKI. Previously undescribed (zygosity, clonality, whole-genome duplication) and known (copy-number focality, tumor mutational burden, mutation region/type) genomic factors were not associated with ORR/PFS (P > 0.05). In contrast, MET expression was associated with MET TKI benefit. Only cases with detectable MET expression by SRM-MS (N = 15) or immunochemistry (N = 22) responded to MET TKI therapy, and cancers with H-score ≥ 200 had a higher PFS than cancers below this cutoff (10.4 vs. 5.5 months, respectively; HR, 3.87; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In MET exon 14-altered cancers treated with a MET TKI, a comprehensive analysis of previously unknown and known genomic factors did not identify a genomic mechanism of primary resistance. Instead, MET expression correlated with benefit, suggesting the potential role of interrogating the proteome in addition to the genome in confirmatory prospective trials.

UK consensus recommendations on the management of oral epithelial dysplasia during COVID-19 pandemic outbreaks.

OBJECTIVES: Oral Epithelial Dysplasia (OED) is associated with an increased risk of oral cancer development. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is necessitating the suspension or dramatic reduction of face-to-face non-urgent elective services, including OED clinics. Little is known regarding the potential impact of elective services suspension upon the risk of OED progression, and whether alternative strategies (e.g. remote consultations) may be introduced to ensure OED surveillance. The aim of this paper is to provide expert-opinion consensus recommendations for the management of OED during the current and future pandemic outbreaks. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A working group of nine UK-based senior clinicians and academics in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Oral Medicine was created and twelve consensus statements were developed using a modified-Delphi process. Greater than 80% agreement was considered a consensus. RESULTS: Consensus was achieved for all twelve statements (89-100% agreement). The group agreed that, during the temporary suspension of elective services associated with COVID-19 pandemic outbreaks, patients with OED can be risk stratified to determine the length of accepted delay in face-to-face consultation. Remote consultations with patient-provided clinical photographs may be a useful way of maintaining a level of surveillance in this group of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Using an expert working group methodology, we have developed consensus recommendations for the monitoring of individuals with OED during pandemic outbreaks associated with temporary suspension of elective services. This has identified areas of future research and highlighted the need for a stronger evidence base to inform the set-up and delivery of surveillance regimens for patients with OED.

Neoadjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab in resectable non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: We conducted the first trial of neoadjuvant PD-1 blockade in resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), finding nivolumab monotherapy to be safe and feasible with an encouraging rate of pathologic response. Building on these results, and promising data for nivolumab plus ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4) in advanced NSCLC, we expanded our study to include an arm investigating neoadjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab. METHODS: Patients with resectable stage IB (≥4 cm)-IIIA (American Joint Committee on Cancer Tumor Node Metastases seventh edition), histologically confirmed, treatment-naïve NSCLC received nivolumab 3 mg/kg intravenously plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg intravenously 6 weeks prior to planned resection. Nivolumab 3 mg/kg was given again approximately 4 and 2 weeks preoperatively. Primary endpoints were safety and feasibility with a planned enrollment of 15 patients. Pathologic response was a key secondary endpoint. RESULTS: While the treatment regimen was feasible per protocol, due to toxicity, the study arm was terminated early by investigator consensus after 9 of 15 patients were enrolled. All patients received every scheduled dose of therapy and were fit for planned surgery; however, 6 of 9 (67%) experienced treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and 3 (33%) experienced grade ≥3 TRAEs. Three of 9 patients (33%) had biopsy-confirmed tumor progression precluding definitive surgery. Of the 6 patients who underwent resection, 3 are alive and disease-free, 2 experienced recurrence and are actively receiving systemic treatment, and one died postoperatively due to acute respiratory distress syndrome. Two patients who underwent resection had tumor pathologic complete responses (pCRs) and continue to remain disease-free over 24 months since surgery. Pathologic response correlated with pre-treatment tumor PD-L1 expression, but not tumor mutation burden. Tumor KRAS/STK11 co-mutations were identified in 5 of 9 patients (59%), of whom two with disease progression precluding surgery had tumor KRAS/STK11/KEAP1 co-mutations. CONCLUSIONS: Though treatment was feasible, due to toxicity the study arm was terminated early by investigator consensus. In light of this, and while the long-term disease-free status of patients who achieved pCR is encouraging, further investigation of neoadjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with resectable NSCLC requires the identification of predictive biomarkers that enrich for response.

The evolution of an evidence based intervention designed to improve prescribing and reduce polypharmacy in older people with multimorbidity and significant polypharmacy in primary care (SPPiRE).

INTRODUCTION: By the time an intervention is ready for evaluation in a definitive RCT the context of the evidence base may have evolved. To avoid research waste, it is imperative that intervention design and evaluation is an adaptive process incorporating emerging evidence and novel concepts. The aim of this study is to describe changes that were made to an evidence based intervention at the protocol stage of the definitive RCT to incorporate emerging evidence. METHODS: The original evidence based intervention, a GP delivered web guided medication review, was modified in a five step process:Identification of core components of the original intervention.Literature review.Modification of the intervention.Pilot study.Final refinements. A framework, developed in public health research, was utilised to describe the modification process. RESULTS: The population under investigation changed from older people with a potentially inappropriate prescription (PIP) to older people with significant polypharmacy, a proxy marker for complex multimorbidity. An assessment of treatment priorities and brown bag medication review, with a focus on deprescribing were incorporated into the original intervention. The number of repeat medicines was added as a primary outcome measure as were additional secondary patient reported outcome measures to assess treatment burden and attitudes towards deprescribing. CONCLUSIONS: A framework was used to systematically describe how and why the original intervention was modified, allowing the new intervention to build upon an effective and robustly developed intervention but also to be relevant in the context of the current evidence base.