Clinical insights into small cell lung cancer: Tumor heterogeneity, diagnosis, therapy, and future directions.

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is characterized by rapid growth and high metastatic capacity. It has strong epidemiologic and biologic links to tobacco carcinogens. Although the majority of SCLCs exhibit neuroendocrine features, an important subset of tumors lacks these properties. Genomic profiling of SCLC reveals genetic instability, almost universal inactivation of the tumor suppressor genes TP53 and RB1, and a high mutation burden. Because of early metastasis, only a small fraction of patients are amenable to curative-intent lung resection, and these individuals require adjuvant platinum-etoposide chemotherapy. Therefore, the vast majority of patients are currently being treated with chemoradiation with or without immunotherapy. In patients with disease confined to the chest, standard therapy includes thoracic radiotherapy and concurrent platinum-etoposide chemotherapy. Patients with metastatic (extensive-stage) disease are treated with a combination of platinum-etoposide chemotherapy plus immunotherapy with an anti-programmed death-ligand 1 monoclonal antibody. Although SCLC is initially very responsive to platinum-based chemotherapy, these responses are transient because of the development of drug resistance. In recent years, the authors have witnessed an accelerating pace of biologic insights into the disease, leading to the redefinition of the SCLC classification scheme. This emerging knowledge of SCLC molecular subtypes has the potential to define unique therapeutic vulnerabilities. Synthesizing these new discoveries with the current knowledge of SCLC biology and clinical management may lead to unprecedented advances in SCLC patient care. Here, the authors present an overview of multimodal clinical approaches in SCLC, with a special focus on illuminating how recent advancements in SCLC research could accelerate clinical development.

Calls to action on lung cancer management and research.

Lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally, remains a pressing health issue despite significant medical advances. The New York Lung Cancer Foundation brought together experts from academia, the pharmaceutical and biotech industries as well as organizational leaders and patient advocates, to thoroughly examine the current state of lung cancer diagnosis, treatment, and research. The goal was to identify areas where our understanding is incomplete and to develop collaborative public health and scientific strategies to generate better patient outcomes, as highlighted in our "Calls to Action." The consortium prioritized 8 different calls to action. These include (1) develop strategies to cure more patients with early-stage lung cancer, (2) investigate carcinogenesis leading to lung cancers in patients without a history of smoking, (3) harness precision medicine for disease interception and prevention, (4) implement solutions to deliver prevention measures and effective therapies to individuals in under-resourced countries, (5) facilitate collaborations with industry to collect and share data and samples, (6) create and maintain open access to big data repositories, (7) develop new immunotherapeutic agents for lung cancer treatment and prevention, and (8) invest in research in both the academic and community settings. These calls to action provide guidance to representatives from academia, the pharmaceutical and biotech industries, organizational and regulatory leaders, and patient advocates to guide ongoing and planned initiatives.

RESILIENT part 1: a phase 2 dose-exploration and dose-expansion study of second-line liposomal irinotecan in adults with small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: RESILIENT (NCT03088813) is a phase 2/3 study assessing the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of liposomal irinotecan monotherapy in patients with small cell lung cancer and disease progression on/after first-line platinum-based therapy. Here, we present results from RESILIENT part 1. METHODS: This open-label, single-arm, safety run-in evaluation with dose-exploration and dose-expansion phases included patients ≥18 years old with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0/1; those with asymptomatic central nervous system metastases were eligible. The primary objectives were to evaluate safety and tolerability and recommend a dose for further development. Efficacy end points were objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: During dose exploration, 5 patients received intravenous liposomal irinotecan at 85 mg/m2 (deemed not tolerable; dose-limiting toxicity) and 12 patients received 70 mg/m2 (deemed tolerable). During dose expansion, 13 additional patients received intravenous liposomal irinotecan at 70 mg/m2 . Of these 25 patients (median age [range], 59.0 [48.0-73.0] years, 92.0% with metastatic disease), 10 experienced grade ≥3 treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), most commonly diarrhea (20.0%) and neutropenia (16.0%), and 3 had serious treatment-related TEAEs, of whom 2 died. ORR was 44.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 24.40-65.07; 1 complete response, 10 partial responses) and median (95% CI) PFS and OS were 3.98 (1.45-4.24) months and 8.08 (5.16-9.82) months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Overall, no new safety signals were identified with liposomal irinotecan, and antitumor activity was promising. RESILIENT part 2, a randomized, controlled, phase 3 study of liposomal irinotecan versus topotecan, is ongoing. LAY SUMMARY: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive disease with few treatment options after platinum-based therapy. Administering 1 option, irinotecan, as a "liposomal" formulation, may extend drug exposure and improve outcomes. The RESILIENT part 1 trial assessed the safety and efficacy of liposomal irinotecan in 25 adults with SCLC after disease progression despite platinum-based therapy. No new safety concerns were reported. The most common moderate-to-severe side effects were diarrhea (20% of patients) and neutropenia (16%). Tumors responded to treatment in 44% of patients. Average survival was 8.08 months, and time to disease progression was 3.98 months. Liposomal irinotecan trials are ongoing.

2020 Innovation-Based Optimism for Lung Cancer Outcomes.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in both males and females in the U.S. and worldwide. Owing to advances in prevention, screening/early detection, and therapy, lung cancer mortality rates are decreasing and survival rates are increasing. These innovations are based on scientific discoveries in imaging, diagnostics, genomics, molecular therapy, and immunotherapy. Outcomes have improved in all histologies and stages. This review provides information on the clinical implications of these innovations that are practical for the practicing physicians, especially oncologists of all specialities who diagnose and treat patients with lung cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Lung cancer survival rates have improved because of new prevention, screening, and therapy methods. This work provides a review of current standards for each of these areas, including targeted and immunotherapies. Treatment recommendations are provided for all stages of lung cancer.

From clinical specimens to human cancer preclinical models-a journey the NCI-cell line database-25 years later.

The intramural the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and more recently the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center with many different collaborators comprised a complex, multi-disciplinary team that collaborated to generated large, comprehensively annotated, cell-line related research resources which includes associated clinical, and molecular characterization data. This material has been shared in an anonymized fashion to accelerate progress in overcoming lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer death across the world. However, this cell line collection also includes a range of other cancers derived from patient-donated specimens that have been remarkably valuable for other types of cancer and disease research. A comprehensive analysis conducted by the NCI Center for Research Strategy of the 278 cell lines reported in the original Journal of Cellular Biochemistry Supplement, documents that these cell lines and related products have since been used in more than 14 000 grants, and 33 207 published scientific reports. This has resulted in over 1.2 million citations using at least one cell line. Many publications involve the use of more than one cell line, to understand the value of the resource collectively rather than individually; this method has resulted in 2.9 million citations. In addition, these cell lines have been linked to 422 clinical trials and cited by 4700 patents through publications. For lung cancer alone, the cell lines have been used in the research cited in the development of over 70 National Comprehensive Cancer Network clinical guidelines. Finally, it must be underscored again, that patient altruism enabled the availability of this invaluable research resource.

The association between copy number aberration, DNA methylation and gene expression in tumor samples.

We systematically studied the association between somatic copy number aberration (SCNA), DNA methylation and gene expression using -omic data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) on six cancer types: breast cancer, colon cancer, glioblastoma, leukemia, lower-grade glioma and prostate cancer. A major challenge for such integrated study is that the association between DNA methylation and gene expression is severely confounded by tumor purity and cell type composition, which are often unobserved and difficult to estimate. To overcome this challenge, we developed a method to remove confounding effects by calculating the principal components that span the space of the latent factors. Another intriguing findings of our study is that there could be both positive and negative associations between SCNA and DNA methylation, while the CpGs with negative/positive associations with SCNA are often located around CpG islands/ocean, respectively. A joint study of SCNA, DNA methylation, and gene expression suggest that SCNA often affect DNA methylation and gene expression independently.

New Developments in Neoadjuvant Therapy for Lung Cancer.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the United States and worldwide. While most patients present with advanced metastatic disease for which a cure is elusive, increased use of spiral CT screening has led to identification of more early-stage patients who can be treated. At the same time, immunotherapy and new targeted therapies have improved survival in advanced disease. These new therapies are now being studied in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings to reduce systemic recurrences and improve cure rates. The results of early clinical trials of checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy alone and combined with chemotherapy, as well as those of neoadjuvant studies of molecular therapies, have been promising. Ongoing large neoadjuvant trials of immunotherapies and molecular therapies alone and in combination with chemotherapy are underway and eagerly awaited. In this article, we review these new developments in neoadjuvant therapy for lung cancer.

Long-term safety and survival with gefitinib in select patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Results from the US IRESSA Clinical Access Program (ICAP).

BACKGROUND: This is the first report of long-term (>10 years) safety, tolerability, and survival data on patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who received treatment with gefitinib, an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor. METHODS: Patients with advanced NSCLC (N = 191) who entered the IRESSA Clinical Access Program (ICAP) (June 2011 to January 2013) and had previously obtained a clinical benefit from gefitinib therapy (including patients who had received gefitinib since 2001) were analyzed for adverse events (AEs). A subset of patients (n = 79) underwent retrospective chart review to capture demographic, safety, and survival data. RESULTS: Seventy-five of 191 patients (39%) remained on long-term gefitinib therapy as of September 2016. Overall, serious AEs (SAEs) were reported in 64 patients (34%), the majority of which were attributed to underlying disease or comorbidities; only 3 patients (1.6%) had SAEs that were considered as possibly gefitinib-related. In the retrospective chart review cohort, 70% of patients were women; 58% were former smokers, and 30% were never-smokers; 56% were diagnosed with adenocarcinoma, and 13% were diagnosed with squamous carcinoma. Although EGFR mutational status was tested in only 17 patients (22%), it was assumed that most tumors were EGFR-mutation-positive. The median duration of gefitinib therapy was 11.1 years (7.8 years before and 3.5 years during ICAP), with 10-year and 15-year survival rates of 86% and 59%, respectively, from the initiation of therapy. CONCLUSIONS: A subset of long-term NSCLC survivors who were receiving gefitinib had an excellent long-term safety profile. Although it is assumed that most of these patients' tumors harbor EGFR mutations, molecular studies of available tumor specimens are planned to uncover the features that predict long-term survival. Cancer 2018;124:2407-14. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

PreMeta: a tool to facilitate meta-analysis of rare-variant associations.

BACKGROUND: Meta-analysis is essential to the discovery of rare variants that influence complex diseases and traits. Four major software packages, namely MASS, MetaSKAT, RAREMETAL, and seqMeta, have been developed to perform meta-analysis of rare-variant associations. These packages first generate summary statistics for each study and then perform the meta-analysis by combining the summary statistics. Because of incompatible file formats and non-equivalent summary statistics, the output files from the study-level analysis of one package cannot be directly used to perform meta-analysis in another package. RESULTS: We developed a computationally efficient software program, PreMeta, to resolve the non-compatibility of the four software packages and to facilitate meta-analysis of large-scale sequencing studies in a consortium setting. PreMeta reformats the output files of study-level summary statistics generated by the four packages (text files produced by MASS and RAREMETAL, binary files produced by MetaSKAT, and R data files produced by seqMeta) and translates the summary statistics from one form to another, such that the summary statistics from any package can be used to perform meta-analysis in any other package. With this tool, consortium members are not required to use the same software for study-level analyses. In addition, PreMeta checks for allele mismatches, corrects summary statistics, and allows the rescaled inverse normal transformation to be performed at the meta-analysis stage by rescaling summary statistics. CONCLUSIONS: PreMeta processes summary statistics from the four packages to make them compatible and avoids the need to redo study-level analyses. PreMeta documentation and executable are available at: http://dlin.web.unc.edu/software/premeta .

HER2 mutations in lung adenocarcinomas: A report from the Lung Cancer Mutation Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) mutations have been reported in lung adenocarcinomas. Herein, the authors describe the prevalence, clinical features, and outcomes associated with HER2 mutations in 1007 patients in the Lung Cancer Mutation Consortium (LCMC). METHODS: Patients with advanced-stage lung adenocarcinomas were enrolled to the LCMC. Tumor specimens were assessed for diagnosis and adequacy; multiplexed genotyping was performed in Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-certified laboratories to examine 10 oncogenic drivers. The LCMC database was queried for patients with HER2 mutations to access demographic data, treatment history, and vital status. An exploratory analysis was performed to evaluate the survival of patients with HER2 mutations who were treated with HER2-directed therapies. RESULTS: A total of 920 patients were tested for HER2 mutations; 24 patients (3%) harbored exon 20 insertion mutations (95% confidence interval, 2%-4%). One patient had a concurrent mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor (MET) amplification. The median age of the patients was 62 years, with a slight predominance of females over males (14 females vs 10 males). The majority of the patients were never-smokers (71%) and presented with advanced disease at the time of diagnosis. The median survival for patients who received HER2-targeted therapies (12 patients) was 2.1 years compared with 1.4 years for those who did not (12 patients) (P = .48). Patients with HER2 mutations were found to have inferior survival compared with the rest of the LCMC cohort with other mutations: the median survival was 3.5 years in the LCMC population receiving targeted therapy and 2.4 years for patients not receiving targeted therapy. CONCLUSIONS: HER2 mutations were detected in 3% of patients with lung adenocarcinoma in the LCMC. HER2-directed therapies should be investigated in this subgroup of patients. Cancer 2017;123:4099-4105. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

New and emerging targeted treatments in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Targeted therapies are substantially changing the management of lung cancers. These treatments include drugs that target driver mutations, those that target presumed important molecules in cancer cell proliferation and survival, and those that inhibit immune checkpoint molecules. This area of research progresses day by day, with novel target discoveries, novel drug development, and use of novel combination treatments. Researchers and clinicians have also extensively investigated the predictive biomarkers and the molecular mechanisms underlying inherent or acquired resistance to these targeted therapies. We review recent progress in the development of targeted treatments for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, especially focusing on data from published clinical trials.

Extended topoisomerase 1 inhibition through liposomal irinotecan results in improved efficacy over topotecan and irinotecan in models of small-cell lung cancer.

Liposomal irinotecan (irinotecan liposome injection, nal-IRI), a liposomal formulation of irinotecan, is designed for extended circulation relative to irinotecan and for exploiting discontinuous tumor vasculature for enhanced drug delivery to tumors. Following tumor deposition, nal-IRI is taken up by phagocytic cells followed by irinotecan release and conversion to its active metabolite, SN-38. Sustained inhibition of topoisomerase 1 by extended SN-38 exposure as a result of delivery by nal-IRI is hypothesized to enable superior antitumor activity compared with traditional topoisomerase 1 inhibitors such as conventional irinotecan and topotecan. We evaluated the antitumor activity of nal-IRI compared with irinotecan and topotecan in preclinical models of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) including in a model pretreated with carboplatin and etoposide, a first-line regimen used in SCLC. Nal-IRI demonstrated antitumor activity in xenograft models of SCLC at clinically relevant dose levels, and resulted in complete or partial responses in DMS-53, DMS-114, and NCI-H1048 cell line-derived models as well as in three patient-derived xenograft models. The antitumor activity of nal-IRI was superior to that of topotecan in all models tested, which generally exhibited limited control of tumor growth and was superior to irinotecan in four out of five models. Further, nal-IRI demonstrated antitumor activity in tumors that progressed following treatment with topotecan or irinotecan, and demonstrated significantly greater antitumor activity than both topotecan and irinotecan in NCI-H1048 tumors that had progressed on previous carboplatin plus etoposide treatment. These results support the clinical development of nal-IRI in patients with SCLC.

Role of race in oncogenic driver prevalence and outcomes in lung adenocarcinoma: Results from the Lung Cancer Mutation Consortium.

BACKGROUND: The discovery of oncogenic drivers has ushered in a new era for lung cancer, but the role of these mutations in different racial/ethnic minorities has been understudied. The Lung Cancer Mutation Consortium 1 (LCMC1) database was investigated to evaluate the frequency and impact of oncogenic drivers in lung adenocarcinomas in the racial/ethnic minority patient population. METHODS: Patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinomas from 14 US sites were enrolled in the LCMC1. Tumor samples were collected from 2009 through 2012 with multiplex genotyping performed on 10 oncogenic drivers (KRAS, epidermal growth factor receptor [EGFR], anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangements, ERBB2 [formerly human epidermal growth factor receptor 2], BRAF, PIK3CA, MET amplification, NRAS, MEK1, and AKT1). Patients were classified as white, Asian, African American (AA), or Latino. The driver mutation frequency, the treatments, and the survival from diagnosis were determined. RESULTS: One thousand seven patients were included. Whites represented the majority (n = 838); there were 60 AAs, 48 Asians, and 28 Latinos. Asian patients had the highest rate of oncogenic drivers with 81% (n = 39), and they were followed by Latinos with 68% (n = 19), whites with 61% (n = 511), and AAs with 53% (n = 32). For AAs, the EGFR mutation frequency was 22%, the KRAS frequency was 17%, and the ALK frequency was 4%. Asian patients were most likely to receive targeted therapies (51% vs 27% for AAs). There were no significant differences in overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Differences were observed in the prevalence of oncogenic drivers in lung adenocarcinomas and in subsequent treatments among racial groups. The lowest frequency of drivers was seen for AA patients; however, more than half of AA patients had a driver, and those treated with targeted therapy had outcomes similar to those of other races. Cancer 2016;122:766-772. © 2015 American Cancer Society.

Simultaneous inference on treatment effects in survival studies with factorial designs.

A clinical trial with a 2×2 factorial design involves randomization of subjects to treatment A or A‾ and, within each group, further randomization to treatment B or B‾. Under this design, one can assess the effects of treatments A and B on a clinical endpoint using all patients. One may additionally compare treatment A, treatment B, or combination therapy AB to A‾B‾. With multiple comparisons, however, it may be desirable to control the overall type I error, especially for regulatory purposes. Because the subjects overlap in the comparisons, the test statistics are generally correlated. By accounting for the correlations, one can achieve higher statistical power compared to the conventional Bonferroni correction. Herein, we derive the correlation between any two (stratified or unstratified) log-rank statistics for a 2×2 factorial design with a survival time endpoint, such that the overall type I error for multiple treatment comparisons can be properly controlled. In addition, we allow for adjustment of prognostic factors in the treatment comparisons and conduct simultaneous inference on the effect sizes. We use simulation studies to show that the proposed methods perform well in realistic situations. We then provide an application to a recently completed randomized controlled clinical trial on alcohol dependence. Finally, we discuss extensions of our approach to other factorial designs and multiple endpoints.

Clinicopathologic features and outcomes of patients with lung adenocarcinomas harboring BRAF mutations in the Lung Cancer Mutation Consortium.

BACKGROUND: The advent of effective targeted therapy for BRAF(V600E) -mutant lung adenocarcinomas necessitates further exploration of the unique clinical features and behavior of advanced-stage BRAF-mutant lung adenocarcinomas. METHODS: Data were reviewed for patients with advanced lung adenocarcinomas enrolled in the Lung Cancer Mutation Consortium whose tumors underwent testing for mutations in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), AKT1, BRAF, dual-specificity mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase 1 (MEK1), neuroblastoma RAS viral (v-ras) oncogene homolog (NRAS), and phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit α (PIK3CA); for anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) translocations; and for MET amplification. RESULTS: Twenty-one BRAF mutations were identified in 951 patients with adenocarcinomas (2.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4%-3.4%): 17 (81%; 95% CI, 60%-92%) were BRAF(V600E) mutations, and 4 were non-BRAF(V600E) mutations. Among the 733 cases tested for all 10 genes, BRAF mutations were more likely to occur than most other genotypic abnormalities in current or former smokers (BRAF vs sensitizing EGFR, 82% vs 36%, mid-P < .001; BRAF vs ALK, 39%, mid-P = .003; BRAF vs other mutations, 49%, mid-P = .02; BRAF vs patients with more than 1 oncogenic driver [doubleton], 46%, mid-P = .04.) The double-mutation rate was 16% among patients with BRAF mutations but 5% among patients with other genomic abnormalities (mid-P = .045). Differences were not found in survival between patients with BRAF mutations and those with other genomic abnormalities (P > .20). CONCLUSIONS: BRAF mutations occurred in 2.2% of advanced-stage lung adenocarcinomas, were most commonly V600E, and were associated with distinct clinicopathologic features in comparison with other genomic subtypes and with a high mutation rate in more than 1 gene. These findings underscore the importance of comprehensive genomic profiling in assessing patients with advanced lung adenocarcinomas.

Fluorescence in situ hybridization, immunohistochemistry, and next-generation sequencing for detection of EML4-ALK rearrangement in lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved method for detecting EML4-ALK rearrangement is fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH); however, data supporting the use of immunohistochemistry (IHC) for that purpose are accumulating. Previous studies that compared FISH and IHC considered FISH the gold standard, but none compared data with the results of next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied FISH and IHC (D5F3 antibody) systematically for EML4-ALK rearrangement in 51 lung adenocarcinoma patients, followed by NGS in case of discordance. RESULTS: Of 51 patients, 4 were positive with FISH (7.8%), and 8 were positive with IHC (15.7%). Three were positive with both. NGS confirmed that four of the five patients who were positive with IHC and negative with FISH were positive for ALK. Two were treated by crizotinib, with progression-free survival of 18 and 6 months. Considering NGS as the most accurate test, the sensitivity and specificity were 42.9% and 97.7%, respectively, for FISH and 100% and 97.7%, respectively, for IHC. CONCLUSION: The FISH-based method of detecting EML4-ALK rearrangement in lung cancer may miss a significant number of patients who could benefit from targeted ALK therapy. Screening for EML4-ALK rearrangement by IHC should be strongly considered, and NGS is recommended in borderline cases. Two patients who were negative with FISH and positive with IHC were treated with crizotinib and responded to therapy.

Molecular Testing for Treatment of Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: How to Implement Evidence-Based Recommendations.

The recent discovery of relevant biomarkers has reshaped our approach to therapy selection for patients with non-small cell lung cancer. The unprecedented outcomes demonstrated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors in molecularly defined cohorts of patients has underscored the importance of genetic profiling in this disease. Despite published guidelines on biomarker testing, successful tumor genotyping faces significant hurdles at both academic and community-based practices. Oncologists are now faced with interpreting large-scale genomic data from multiple tumor types, possibly making it difficult to stay current with practice standards in lung cancer. In addition, physicians' lack of time, resources, and face-to-face opportunities can interfere with the multidisciplinary approach that is essential to delivery of care. Finally, several challenges exist in optimizing the amount and quality of tissue for molecular testing. Recognizing the importance of biomarker testing, a series of advisory boards were recently convened to address these hurdles and clarify best practices. We reviewed these challenges and established recommendations to help optimize tissue acquisition, processing, and testing within the framework of a multidisciplinary approach.

Exploring the relationship between technology use, hearing help-seeking, and hearing aid outcomes in older adults.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to explore technology use and its relationship to help-seeking for hearing impairment (HI) and success with hearing aids among older adults. Previous research had suggested a link between higher levels of technology use and hearing aid success. DESIGN: General technology use was evaluated using a purposefully developed 25-item questionnaire. Twelve items related to everyday technology use (e.g. DVD player) and 13 related to advanced technology use (e.g. Bluetooth). STUDY SAMPLE: Four groups of older adults with HI participated in the study: (1) non-consulters (n=49), (2) consulters (n=62), (3) unsuccessful hearing aid owners (n=61), and (4) successful hearing aid owners (n=79). RESULTS: Preliminary analyses revealed a main effect in the use of everyday and advanced technology across the four participant groups. However, it was found that age and living arrangements accounted for most of the variance in reported everyday technology use (p=.030; p=.029, respectively) and age and gender accounted for the variance in reported advanced technology use (p<.001; p=.040, respectively). For everyday technology, an increase in age and living alone were associated with decreased technology use and for advanced technology use, age and female gender were associated with decreased technology use. CONCLUSIONS: Although we hypothesized that technology use would be less amongst non-consulters and unsuccessful hearing aid owners, our findings did not support this prediction. Technology use did not vary by group membership once the covariates of age, gender, and living arrangements were accounted for.

Using multiplexed assays of oncogenic drivers in lung cancers to select targeted drugs.

IMPORTANCE: Targeting oncogenic drivers (genomic alterations critical to cancer development and maintenance) has transformed the care of patients with lung adenocarcinomas. The Lung Cancer Mutation Consortium was formed to perform multiplexed assays testing adenocarcinomas of the lung for drivers in 10 genes to enable clinicians to select targeted treatments and enroll patients into clinical trials. OBJECTIVES: To determine the frequency of oncogenic drivers in patients with lung adenocarcinomas and to use the data to select treatments targeting the identified driver(s) and measure survival. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From 2009 through 2012, 14 sites in the United States enrolled patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinomas and a performance status of 0 through 2 and tested their tumors for 10 drivers. Information was collected on patients, therapies, and survival. INTERVENTIONS: Tumors were tested for 10 oncogenic drivers, and results were used to select matched targeted therapies. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Determination of the frequency of oncogenic drivers, the proportion of patients treated with genotype-directed therapy, and survival. RESULTS: From 2009 through 2012, tumors from 1007 patients were tested for at least 1 gene and 733 for 10 genes (patients with full genotyping). An oncogenic driver was found in 466 of 733 patients (64%). Among these 733 tumors, 182 tumors (25%) had the KRAS driver; sensitizing EGFR, 122 (17%); ALK rearrangements, 57 (8%); other EGFR, 29 (4%); 2 or more genes, 24 (3%); ERBB2 (formerly HER2), 19 (3%); BRAF, 16 (2%); PIK3CA, 6 (<1%); MET amplification, 5 (<1%); NRAS, 5 (<1%); MEK1, 1 (<1%); AKT1, 0. Results were used to select a targeted therapy or trial in 275 of 1007 patients (28%). The median survival was 3.5 years (interquartile range [IQR], 1.96-7.70) for the 260 patients with an oncogenic driver and genotype-directed therapy compared with 2.4 years (IQR, 0.88-6.20) for the 318 patients with any oncogenic driver(s) who did not receive genotype-directed therapy (propensity score-adjusted hazard ratio, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.53-0.9], P = .006). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Actionable drivers were detected in 64% of lung adenocarcinomas. Multiplexed testing aided physicians in selecting therapies. Although individuals with drivers receiving a matched targeted agent lived longer, randomized trials are required to determine if targeting therapy based on oncogenic drivers improves survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01014286.