Nivolumab plus Cabozantinib versus Sunitinib for Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus cabozantinib as compared with those of sunitinib in the treatment of previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma are not known. METHODS: In this phase 3, randomized, open-label trial, we randomly assigned adults with previously untreated clear-cell, advanced renal-cell carcinoma to receive either nivolumab (240 mg every 2 weeks) plus cabozantinib (40 mg once daily) or sunitinib (50 mg once daily for 4 weeks of each 6-week cycle). The primary end point was progression-free survival, as determined by blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response as determined by independent review, and safety. Health-related quality of life was an exploratory end point. RESULTS: Overall, 651 patients were assigned to receive nivolumab plus cabozantinib (323 patients) or sunitinib (328 patients). At a median follow-up of 18.1 months for overall survival, the median progression-free survival was 16.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.5 to 24.9) with nivolumab plus cabozantinib and 8.3 months (95% CI, 7.0 to 9.7) with sunitinib (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.64; P<0.001). The probability of overall survival at 12 months was 85.7% (95% CI, 81.3 to 89.1) with nivolumab plus cabozantinib and 75.6% (95% CI, 70.5 to 80.0) with sunitinib (hazard ratio for death, 0.60; 98.89% CI, 0.40 to 0.89; P = 0.001). An objective response occurred in 55.7% of the patients receiving nivolumab plus cabozantinib and in 27.1% of those receiving sunitinib (P<0.001). Efficacy benefits with nivolumab plus cabozantinib were consistent across subgroups. Adverse events of any cause of grade 3 or higher occurred in 75.3% of the 320 patients receiving nivolumab plus cabozantinib and in 70.6% of the 320 patients receiving sunitinib. Overall, 19.7% of the patients in the combination group discontinued at least one of the trial drugs owing to adverse events, and 5.6% discontinued both. Patients reported better health-related quality of life with nivolumab plus cabozantinib than with sunitinib. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab plus cabozantinib had significant benefits over sunitinib with respect to progression-free survival, overall survival, and likelihood of response in patients with previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and others; CheckMate 9ER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03141177.).

Conscience-Based Barriers to Medical Aid in Dying: A Survey of Colorado Physicians.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20% of the United States' population lives in a state or jurisdiction where medical aid in dying (MAiD) is legal. It is unknown how physicians' own barriers are associated with their provision of the spectrum of MAiD services. OBJECTIVE: To measure physicians' religious and/or ethical barriers to providing MAiD services and how such barriers relate to physicians' intentions and behaviors. DESIGN: Three-wave cross-sectional survey fielded in Colorado in 2020-2021. PARTICIPANTS: Physicians providing care to patients likely clinically eligible for MAiD according to probabilistic sampling. MAIN MEASURES: Physicians self-reported barriers to their own participation in MAiD. We considered large ethical and/or religious barriers to be conscience-based barriers. We measured physicians' self-reported intention to participate and self-reported prior participation in MAiD since it was legalized in Colorado in 2017. We estimated differences in intention and behavior outcomes according to presence of conscience-based barriers, adjusting for physician gender, race/ethnicity, time in practice, and specialty. KEY RESULTS: Among 300 respondents, 26% reported "large" ethical and/or religious barriers to their involvement in MAiD. Physicians with longer time in practice and those identifying as non-White were more likely to report conscience-based barriers to MAiD. Comparing physicians with and without conscience-based barriers to MAiD, we found no difference in ancillary participation (discussing, referring) but significant differences in direct participation (serving as consultant [5% vs. 31%] or attending [0% vs. 22%]). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one-quarter of physicians likely to care for MAiD-eligible patients in Colorado reported religious and/or ethical barriers to MAiD. Despite religious and/or ethical barriers, the vast majority of physicians were willing to discuss MAiD and/or refer patients seeking MAiD services. These data provide important empirical foundation for policy from hospitals and health systems as well as medical specialty groups with official positions on MAiD.

Specialty Differences in Medical Aid in Dying Experiences: Results of a Survey of Physicians in Colorado.

In Colorado, medical aid in dying (MAiD) is legal, allowing a terminally ill person to request a prescription and self-administer a medication to end their life. Such requests are granted under certain circumstances, including a malignant neoplasm diagnosis, with a goal of peaceful death. This study examined differences in attitudes and actual participation in MAiD between oncologists and non-oncologists, using data from a recent survey of physicians regarding MAiD.

A pilot randomized study of a telephone-based cognitive-behavioral stress-management intervention to reduce distress in phase 1 oncology trial caregivers.

OBJECTIVES: Caregivers of adult phase 1 oncology trial patients experience high levels of distress and face barriers to in-person supportive care. The Phase 1 Caregiver LifeLine (P1CaLL) pilot study assessed the feasibility, acceptability, and general impact of an individual telephone-based cognitive behavioral stress-management (CBSM) intervention for caregivers of phase I oncology trial patients. METHODS: The pilot study involved 4 weekly adapted CBSM sessions followed by participant randomization to 4 weekly cognitive behavioral therapy sessions or metta-meditation sessions. A mixed-methods design used quantitative data from 23 caregivers and qualitative data from 5 caregivers to examine the feasibility and acceptability outcomes. Feasibility was determined using recruitment, retention, and assessment completion rates. Acceptability was assessed with self-reported satisfaction with program content and participation barriers. Baseline to post-intervention changes in caregiver distress and other psychosocial outcomes were assessed for the 8-session intervention. RESULTS: The enrollment rate was 45.3%, which demonstrated limited feasibility based on an a priori criterion enrollment rate of 50%. Participants completed an average of 4.9 sessions, with 9/25 (36%) completing all sessions and an 84% assessment completion rate. Intervention acceptability was high, and participants found the sessions helpful in managing stress related to the phase 1 oncology trial patient experience. Participants showed reductions in worry and isolation and stress. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: The P1CaLL study demonstrated adequate acceptability and limited feasibility and provided data on the general impact of the intervention on caregiver distress and other psychosocial outcomes. Caregivers of phase 1 oncology trial patients would benefit from supportive care services; a telephone-based intervention may have more utilization and thus make a larger impact.

Nivolumab plus cabozantinib versus sunitinib in first-line treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma (CheckMate 9ER): long-term follow-up results from an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In the primary analysis of CheckMate 9ER, nivolumab plus cabozantinib showed superior progression-free survival, overall survival, and objective response over sunitinib in patients with previously untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma (median follow-up of 18·1 months). Here, we report extended follow-up of overall survival and updated efficacy and safety. METHODS: This open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial was done in 125 hospitals and cancer centres across 18 countries. We included patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated advanced or metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma, a Karnofsky performance status of 70% or higher, measurable disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 assessed by the investigator, any International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic risk category, and available tumour tissue for PD-L1 testing. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to nivolumab (240 mg) intravenously every 2 weeks plus cabozantinib (40 mg) orally once daily or sunitinib (50 mg orally) once daily (4 weeks per 6-week cycle). Randomisation, stratified by IMDC risk status, tumour PD-L1 expression, and geographical region, was done by permuted block within each stratum using a block size of four, via an interactive response system. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by blinded independent central review. Overall survival was a secondary endpoint (reported here as the preplanned final analysis according to the protocol). Efficacy was assessed in all randomly assigned patients; safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of any study drug. This ongoing study, closed to recruitment, is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03141177. FINDINGS: Between Sept 11, 2017, and May 14, 2019, 323 patients were randomly assigned to the nivolumab plus cabozantinib group and 328 to the sunitinib group. With an extended follow-up (data cutoff of June 24, 2021; median 32·9 months [IQR 30·4-35·9]), median overall survival was 37·7 months (95% CI 35·5-not estimable) in the nivolumab plus cabozantinib group and 34·3 months (29·0-not estimable) in the sunitinib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·55-0·90], p=0·0043) and updated median progression-free survival was 16·6 months (12·8-19·8) versus 8·3 months (7·0-9·7; HR 0·56 [95% CI 0·46-0·68], p<0·0001). Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 208 (65%) of 320 patients with nivolumab plus cabozantinib versus 172 (54%) of 320 with sunitinib. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were hypertension (40 [13%] of 320 patients in the nivolumab plus cabozantinib group vs 39 [12%] of 320 in the sunitinib group), palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (25 [8%] vs 26 [8%]), and diarrhoea (22 [7%] vs 15 [5%]). Grade 3-4 treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 70 (22%) of 320 patients in the nivolumab plus cabozantinib group and 31 (10%) of 320 in the cabozantinib group. One additional treatment-related death occurred with sunitinib (sudden death). INTERPRETATION: With extended follow-up and preplanned final overall survival analysis per protocol, nivolumab plus cabozantinib demonstrated improved efficacy versus sunitinib, further supporting the combination in the first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical.

Physicians' Attitudes and Experiences with Medical Aid in Dying in Colorado: a "Hidden Population" Survey.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20% of the US population live in states where MAiD is a legal, though highly contentious, practice. Little generalizable data exists on the experiences of MAiD providers who comprise a small, and intentionally hidden, population. OBJECTIVE: To examine the nature, extent, and consequences of physicians' participation in MAiD. DESIGN: An anonymous, multi-wave, mailed survey (RR= 55%). PARTICIPANTS: An enriched sample (n=583) of Colorado physicians caring for potential MAiD patients. MAIN MEASURES: Physician willingness, preparedness, and participation in a continuum of MAiD activities. Other outcomes include the effects of providing MAiD and the barriers physicians face related to MAiD. KEY RESULTS: Overall, 81.1% of respondents were willing to discuss MAiD with a patient, 88.3% to refer for MAiD, 46.3% to be a consultant, and 28.1% to be an attending. Fewer felt prepared to discuss MAiD (54.4%), provide a MAiD referral (62.8%), be a consultant (30.7%), or be an attending (18.0%). More than half of respondents (52.3%) had discussed MAiD with a patient, 27.3% provided a MAiD referral, 12.8% had been a MAiD consultant, and 8.5% had been a MAiD attending. Among MAiD consultants and attendings, 75% reported that their most recent MAiD case was emotionally fulfilling and professionally rewarding, though 75% also reported that it was time consuming and 46.9% reported that it was ethically challenging. Common barriers to physician participation in MAiD include lack of knowledge about MAiD (46.8%), the emotional (45.6%) and time (41.7%) investments, and ethical concerns (41.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Many physicians in our sample are both willing and prepared to discuss MAiD with patients and to provide MAiD referrals. Fewer are prepared and willing to serve as an attending or consultant and fewer have provided these services. MAID consultants and attendings largely report the experience to be emotionally fulfilling and professionally rewarding, but all respondents reported multiple barriers to participation.

Prostate Cancer in Older Adults: Risk of Clinically Meaningful Disease, the Role of Screening and Special Considerations.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer in men in the USA and several studies suggest more aggressive disease in older patients. However, screening remains controversial, especially in the older patient population. RECENT FINDINGS: Aggressive prostate cancers are more common in older men. Screening trial results are conflicting but data suggest an improvement in prostate cancer mortality and increased detection of metastatic disease with screening. When PSA is utilized with multiparametric MRI and biomarker assays, patients at significant risk of clinically meaningful prostate cancer can be appropriately selected for biopsy. A thoughtful and individualized approach is central when considering prostate cancer screening in older men. This approach includes life expectancy estimation, use of appropriate geriatric assessment tools, use of multiparametric MRI and biomarkers in addition to PSA, and most importantly shared decision-making with patients.

Identifying Geriatric Oncology Competencies for Medical Oncology Trainees: A Modified Delphi Consensus Study.

BACKGROUND: Most oncology trainees are not taught about the needs of older patients, who make up the majority of patients with cancer. Training of health care providers is critical to improve the care of older adults with cancer. There is no consensus about which geriatric oncology (GO) competencies are important for medical oncology trainees. Our objective was to identify GO competencies medical oncology trainees should acquire during training. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A modified Delphi consensus of experts in oncology medical education and GO was conducted. Experts categorized at what training stage proposed competencies should be attained: internal medicine, oncology, or GO training. Consensus was obtained if two thirds of experts agreed on the training stage at which the competency should be attained. RESULTS: A total of 78 potential competencies were identified, of which 35 (44.9%) proposed competencies were felt to be appropriate to be acquired during oncology training. The majority of the identified competencies pertained to prescribing of systemic therapy (n = 12) and psychosocial and supportive care (n = 13). No competencies related to geriatric assessment were identified for acquisition during oncology training. CONCLUSION: Experts in oncology education and geriatric oncology agreed upon a set of GO competencies appropriate for oncology trainees. These results provide the foundation for developing a GO curriculum for medical oncology trainees and will hopefully lead to better care of older adults with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The aging population will drive the projected rise in cancer incidence. Although aging patients make up the majority of patients diagnosed with cancer, oncologists rarely receive training on how to care for them. Training of health care providers is critical to improving the care of older adults with cancer. The results of this study will help form the foundation of developing a geriatric oncology curriculum for medical oncology trainees.

Phase II Trial of Neoadjuvant Systemic Chemotherapy Followed by Extirpative Surgery in Patients with High Grade Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Data supporting neoadjuvant chemotherapy of high grade upper tract urothelial carcinoma are scant. In this multi-institution, prospective, phase II trial we investigated pathological complete responses after neoadjuvant chemotherapy of high grade upper tract urothelial carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with high grade upper tract urothelial carcinoma in whom nephroureterectomy was planned were assigned to 4 neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles of accelerated methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin in those with baseline creatinine clearance greater than 50 ml per minute or gemcitabine and carboplatin in those with creatinine clearance 30 to 50 ml per minute or less. The study primary end point was a pathological complete response (ypT0N0). The accrual goal was 30 patients per arm. An 18% pathological complete response was considered worth further study while a 4% pathological complete response would not have justified pursuing this regimen. With 28 eligible patients per arm success was defined as 3 or more pathological complete responses (10.7%) in a given arm. Secondary end points included safety, renal function and oncologic outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 30 patients enrolled in the accelerated methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin arm from 2015 to 2017. Six patients enrolled in the gemcitabine and carboplatin arm, which closed due to poor accrual. Of the 29 patients eligible for accelerated methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin, including 23 men and 6 women with a median age of 65 years (range 40 to 84), 80% completed all planned treatments, 3 (10.3%) achieved ypT0N0 and 1 achieved ypT0Nx for a pathological complete response in 13.8% (90% CI 4.9-28.8). In 1 patient receiving accelerated methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin nephroureterectomy was deferred due to grade 4 sepsis. The grade 3-4 toxicity rate was 23% in the accelerated methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin arm with no grade 5 event. CONCLUSIONS: Accelerated methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with high grade upper tract urothelial carcinoma and creatinine clearance greater than 50 ml per minute was safe and demonstrated predefined activity with a 14% pathological complete response rate. Final pathological stage ypT1 or less in more than 60% of patients is encouraging. Together the results of this prospective trial support the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in eligible patients with high grade upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

Treating Elderly Patients With Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer.

Bladder cancer is an extremely common cancer that primarily affects individuals aged >65 years. In caring for patients with bladder cancer, clinicians must also consider care of older persons in general. Management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) involves multidisciplinary treatment planning, because curative-intent therapy includes either surgery or radiation, with consideration of the role of systemic therapy. As clinicians develop a treatment plan, considering a geriatric oncology perspective may enhance patient care and influence outcomes for this large and growing population. Similarly, treatment plan development must also consider aspects unique to an older patient population, such as altered organ function, increased comorbidity, decreased functional reserve, and perhaps altered goals of treatment. Thus a thorough evaluation inclusive of disease assessment and geriatric assessment is essential to care planning. Population-based data show that as patients with MIBC age, use of standard therapies declines. Given the complexities of coordinating a multidisciplinary care plan, as well the complexities of treating a heterogeneous and potentially vulnerable older patient population, clinicians may benefit from upfront assessments to inform and guide the process. This review highlights the unique treatment planning considerations for elderly patients diagnosed with MIBC.

Feasibility and Acceptability of a Remotely Delivered, Web-Based Behavioral Intervention for Men With Prostate Cancer: Four-Arm Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial.

BACKGROUND: Diet and exercise may be associated with quality of life and survival in men with prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the feasibility and acceptability of a remotely delivered web-based behavioral intervention among men with prostate cancer. METHODS: We conducted a multi-site 4-arm pilot randomized controlled trial of a 3-month intervention (TrueNTH Community of Wellness). Eligibility included self-reported prostate cancer diagnosis, having a personal device that connected to the internet, age ≥18 years, and ability to read English and receive text messages and emails. Men receiving chemotherapy or radiation, or those who reported contraindications to exercise, could participate with physician clearance. Participants were randomized (1:1:1:1) to additive intervention levels: website; website and personalized diet and exercise prescription; website, personalized prescription, Fitbit, and text messages; and website, personalized prescription, Fitbit, text messages, and 2 30-minute phone calls-one with an exercise trainer and one with a registered dietician. Primary outcomes were feasibility (accrual and attrition) and acceptability (survey data and website use). We described self-reported diet and exercise behavior at the time of enrollment, 3 months, and 6 months as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 202 men consented and were randomized between August 2017 and September 2018 (level 1: 49, level 2: 51, level 3: 50, level 4: 52). A total of 160 men completed the onboarding process and were exposed to their randomly assigned intervention (38, 38, 42, and 42 in levels 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively). The follow-up rate was 82.7% (167/202) at 3 months and 77.2% (156/202) at 6 months. Participants had a median age of 70 years and were primarily White and college educated. Website visit frequency over the 3-month intervention period increased across levels (median: 2, 9, 11, and 16 visits for levels 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively). Most were satisfied or very satisfied with the intervention (20/39, 51%; 27/42, 64%; 23/44, 52%; and 27/42, 64% for levels 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively). The percentage of men who reported being very satisfied was highest among level 4 participants (10/42, 24% vs 4/39, 10%; 5/42, 12%; and 5/44, 11% for levels 1, 2, and 3, respectively). Dissatisfaction was highest in level 1 (5/39, 13% vs 1/42, 2%; 3/44, 7%; and 2/42, 5% for levels 2, 3, and 4, respectively). We observed small improvements in diet and physical activity at 3 months among men in level 4 versus those in level 1. CONCLUSIONS: A web-based, remotely delivered, tailored behavioral intervention for men with prostate cancer is feasible. Future studies are warranted to increase the effect of the intervention on patient behavior while maintaining sustainability and scalability as well as to design and implement interventions for more diverse populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03406013; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03406013.

Management of Metastatic Prostate Cancer in Frail/Elderly Patients.

As the world population ages, we can expect to care for an increasing number of older cancer patients. Prostate cancer is inherently a condition that affects patients of advanced age. In caring for these patients who have advanced prostate cancer, it is important to first assess the health status of the patient and his goals of care. As this is established, likely through a geriatric assessment, this will inform how to modify or mold the treatment plan to fit a patient's needs and vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities may surface as patients undergo treatment such as androgen deprivation therapy-the backbone of systemic therapy for advanced disease. Androgen deprivation therapy leads to long-term adverse effects; therefore, providers should carefully consider its use and proactively manage toxicity. It is important to assess patients before starting treatment and to adjust the choice of therapy, or supportive services, in order to maximize benefit and minimize potential harms.

Phase I trial of vandetanib in combination with gemcitabine and capecitabine in patients with advanced solid tumors with an expanded cohort in pancreatic and biliary cancers.

BACKGROUND: Vandetanib is a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor that affects vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGF), epidermal growth factor (EGF), and rearranged during transfection (RET) mediated receptors which are important for growth and invasion of biliary and pancreatic cancers. This phase I study evaluated the safety profile of vandetanib in combination with standard doses of gemcitabine and capecitabine in order to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). METHODS: In this single center phase I trial, patients received gemcitabine intravenously (i.v.) at 1000 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 15 in a 28 day cycle, capecitabine orally at 850 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-21, and escalating doses of vandetanib (200 or 300 mg orally daily). Once the MTD was defined, an expansion cohort of patients with advanced biliary cancers and locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer was enrolled. Blood samples were also collected at predetermined time points for biomarker analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were enrolled: 9 in the dose escalation and 14 in the dose expansion cohort. One dose limiting toxicity (DLT), of grade 4 neutropenia, occurred in the 200 mg vandetanib cohort. The most common adverse effects were diarrhea (39 %), nausea and vomiting (34%), and rash (33%). There were 3 partial responses and stable disease of >2 months (range 2-45, median 5) was observed in 15/23 patients. There was no association between changes in biomarker analytes and disease response. CONCLUSION: The combination of gemcitabine, capecitabine and vandetanib is well tolerated at the recommended phase II dose of gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 weekly for three consecutive weeks, capecitabine 850 mg/m2 BID days 1-21, and vandetanib 300 mg daily, every 28 days. This combination demonstrated promising activity in pancreaticobiliary cancers and further evaluation is warranted in these diseases. NCT00551096.

Distress among caregivers of phase I trial participants: a cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: The number of patients with cancer enrolling in phase I trials is expected to increase as these trials incorporate patient selection and exhibit greater efficacy in the era of targeted therapies. Despite the fact that people with advanced cancer often require a caregiver, little is known about the experience of caregivers of people enrolling in oncology phase I clinical trials. We conducted a cross-sectional study assessing the distress and emotion regulation of caregivers of phase I trial participants to inform the design of future interventions targeting the unique needs of this population. METHODS: Caregivers of oncology patients were approached at the patient's phase I clinical trial screening visit. Caregiver participants completed a one-time survey incorporating validated instruments to comprehensively assess distress and emotion regulation. Basic demographic information about both the caregiver and patient was collected. RESULTS: Caregivers exhibited greater distress than population norms. Emotion regulation was also moderately impaired. Respondents identified positive aspects of caregiving despite exhibiting moderate distress. CONCLUSION: Enrollment of a patient in a phase I clinical trial is a time of stress for their caregivers. This pilot study demonstrates the feasibility of engaging caregivers of phase I trial participants and the need to better support them through this component of their caregiving experience.

Respect for the Patient-Oncologist Relationship May Limit Serious Illness Communication by Acute and Postacute Care Clinicians After Discharge to a Skilled Nursing Facility.

PURPOSE: There is a need to increase palliative care access for hospitalized older adults with cancer discharged to a skilled nursing facility (SNF) at risk of poor outcomes. Assessing and Listening to Individual Goals and Needs (ALIGN) is a palliative care intervention developed to address this gap. This study gathered perspectives from clinicians across care settings to describe perceptions on serious illness communication and care coordination for patients with cancer after discharge to a SNF to guide ALIGN refinements. METHODS: We conducted 37 semistructured interviews with clinicians and leaders in hospital medicine (n = 12), oncology (n = 9), palliative care (n = 12), home health care (n = 6), and hospice (n = 4). Some participants had experience working in more than one specialty. The Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model framework was used to develop the interview guide that explored barriers to care, prognosis discussions, and hospice recommendations. Interviews were coded and analyzed using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Analysis identified four themes: (1) discharge to a SNF is recognized as a time of worsening prognosis; (2) care silos create communication and information barriers during a period of increasing palliative care need; (3) family caregiver distress escalates following care transitions; and (4) lack of clarity of roles and respect for the patient-oncologist relationship limits prognostic communication and changes in focus of treatment. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that acute and postacute care clinicians defer serious illness conversations to the oncologist when patients are on a steep trajectory of decline, experiencing multiple care transitions, and may have limited contact with their oncologist. There is a need to clarify roles among nononcology and oncology clinicians in discussing prognosis and recommending hospice for older adults discharged to SNF.

Targeted therapy in advanced urothelial carcinoma.

Urothelial carcinoma (UC) is a common and deadly cancer in the United States. While molecularly targeted therapies have been integrated into the standard-of-care management of other solid tumors in recent years, the use of targeted therapy in UC has lagged behind. Accordingly, the management of advanced disease, along with outcomes, has remained largely unchanged for the past 2 decades. Despite the lack of new agents in the clinic, preclinical and early clinical studies have demonstrated that numerous potentially"targetable" molecular pathways exist, including the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2/neu), and insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor (IGF1R) pathways. This review focuses on targeted therapies related to these pathways of interest for the treatment of advanced UC, describing the evidence to support further investigation of these approaches. Notably, the identification and validation of new agents will only occur through accrual to urothelial cancer trials designed to answer these questions, which will require the support of the entire urologic community.

Safety of COVID-19 vaccines in subjects with solid tumor cancers receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors.

The incidence of severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in cancer subjects receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) following COVID-19 vaccination and the relationship between the incidence of severe irAE and the interval between COVID-19 vaccination and ICI dose have not been established. We performed a retrospective study evaluating the incidence of irAEs in solid tumor subjects receiving ICI therapy who received any COVID-19 vaccinations since FDA authorization. irAEs were defined as severe with one or more grade 3 or above events (CTCAE v5.0), multiple organ involvement, or requiring hospitalization for management. Two hundred and eighty-four subjects who received COVID vaccinations from December 2020 and February 2022 were included in this analysis [median age at vaccination 67 years (IQR 59.0-75.0); 67.3% male]. Twenty-nine subjects (10.2%) developed severe irAEs, of which 12 subjects (41.4%) received ICI monotherapy, 10 subjects (34.5%) received combination ICI therapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab, and 7 subjects (24.1%) received ICI plus VEGFR-TKI therapy. Hospitalization occurred in 62% of subjects with severe irAEs, with a median duration of 3 days (IQR: 3.0-7.5 days). Immunosuppressive therapy was required in 79.3%, with a median duration of 103 days (IQR: 42.0-179.0). ICI therapy was discontinued in 51.7% of subjects with severe irAE; dosing was held or interrupted in 34.5%. Among severe irAEs, the median interval between vaccination and ICI treatment closest to the occurrence of severe irAE was 15.5 days (IQR: 10.0-23.0). In solid tumor cancer subjects receiving ICIs, COVID-19 vaccination is not associated with an increased incidence of severe irAEs compared to historical data and may be safely administered during ICI cancer therapy in subjects who lack contraindications.

Use and Influence of Medical Aid in Dying Service on Physician Experiences.

Background: The involvement of Medical Aid in Dying (MAiD) experts to guide MAiD prescribers who may be unfamiliar with the process is unknown. Objective: To examine the involvement of consulting services on physician experiences participating in MAiD activities. Design: This is an anonymous survey. Participants: Colorado physicians (n = 583) likely to care for MAiD-eligible patients. Measures: Consulting services used in a recent MAiD case and perspectives on use of a MAiD service. Results: Of 300 physicians (response rate 55%), 49 physicians had served as a MAiD attending and/or consulting physician. In a recent MAiD case, commonly used services included palliative care (92%), hospice (81%), social work (78%), or a MAiD service (63%). When a MAiD service was not used vs. used, respondents felt the MAiD case was less professionally risky (28% vs. 7%, p = 0.04). Conclusion: Along with palliative care, hospice, and social work, use of an experienced MAiD service was relatively common. The role and function of MAiD services warrant further exploration.

Racial differences in survival for early stage (T1) penile cancer: Analysis from the SEER database.

BACKGROUND: Penile cancer accounts for less than 1% of male cancers in the United States. Localized disease, particularly T1 tumors are potentially curable with local therapy. We present the racial differences in survival outcomes for T1, penile cancer from the SEER database. METHODS: From 2004 to 2016 all men with T1, N0, M0 penile cancer in the SEER-18 database were included. Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariable Cox-Regression analysis were conducted to investigate prognostic variables for cancer specific survival (CSS). RESULTS: A total of 4,406 men were identified with penile cancer; 1,941 men had T1 disease. The Kaplan-Meier (KM) analysis showed those with primary site surgery had better 5-year CSS compared to those without primary site surgery (P <.0001) and a significant difference in CSS based on race (P= 0.0078). On multivariable analysis, Hispanic individuals had worse CSS (HR 1.92; P = 0.0057) compared to the White men. Black men were also found to have a poor CSS however this was not statistically significant (HR 1.53, P = 0.118). Men with penile cancer who had either penectomy (HR 0.45; P = 0.006) or penile preservation surgery (HR 0.25; P< 0.001) had improved CSS. CONCLUSION: Racial disparities in CSS exist among men with in early-stage penile cancer. KM analysis showed significant differences in CSS by race and in those receiving primary site surgery. On multivariable analysis, the CSS is worse in Hispanic compared to White men. There is a trend towards worse CSS in Black men however this was not statistically significant.