Patient decision aids in mainstreaming genetic testing for women with ovarian cancer: A prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient preference for short (gist) or detailed/extensive decision aids (DA) for genetic testing at ovarian cancer (OC) diagnosis. DESIGN: Cohort study set within recruitment to the Systematic Genetic Testing for Personalised Ovarian Cancer Therapy (SIGNPOST) study (ISRCTN: 16988857). SETTING: North-East London Cancer Network (NELCN) population. POPULATION/SAMPLE: Women with high-grade non-mucinous epithelial OC. METHODS: A more detailed DA was developed using patient and stakeholder input following the principles/methodology of IPDAS (International Patients Decision Aids Standards). Unselected patients attending oncology clinics evaluated both a pre-existing short and a new long DA version and then underwent mainstreaming genetic testing by a cancer clinician. Appropriate inferential descriptive and regression analyses were undertaken. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Satisfaction, readability, understanding, emotional well-being and preference for long/short DA. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 66 years (interquartile range 11), and 85% were White British ethnicity. Of the participants, 74% found DAs helpful/useful in decision-making. Women reported higher levels of satisfaction (86% versus 58%, p < 0.001), right amount of information provided (76.79% versus49.12%, p < 0.001) and improved understanding (p < 0.001) with the long DA compared with the short DA. There was no statistically significant difference in emotional outcomes (feeling worried/concerned/reassured/upset) between 'short' and 'long' DA; 74% of patients preferred the long DA and 24% the short DA. Patients undergoing treatment (correlation coefficient (coef) = 0.603; 95% CI 0.165-1.041, p = 0.007), those with recurrence (coef = 0.493; 95% CI 0.065-0.92, p = 0.024) and older women (coef = 0.042; 95% CI 0.017-0.066, p = 0.001) preferred the short DA. Ethnicity did not affect outcomes or overall preference for long/short DA. CONCLUSIONS: A longer DA in OC patients has higher satisfaction without increasing emotional distress. Older women and those undergoing treatment/recurrence prefer less extensive information, whereas those in remission preferred a longer DA.

Learning from Crisis: a Multicentre Study of Oncology Telemedicine Clinics Introduced During COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated adaptation of cancer patient care. Oncology patients who contract COVID-19 have poor outcomes. Telemedicine clinics (teleclinics) have been introduced for cancer patients to reduce the risk of horizontal transmission at St. Bartholomew's Hospital and The Royal Free Hospital in London. Teleclinics have become routine in many specialities; however, inclusion in oncology care was not standard prior to the pandemic. A mixed-methods survey was designed and delivered to cancer patients (n = 106) at St. Bartholomew's Hospital and The Royal Free Hospital who had transitioned to teleclinics in March 2020. The survey explored patients' perceptions of this format. In total, 96 (90.5%) patients consented to take part, across a range of tumour types. Overall, respondents reacted favourably to the format of the teleclinics, with 90.6% of respondents (87/96) stating they would utilise teleclinics beyond the pandemic. Additionally, a survey was distributed to clinicians delivering these teleclinics (n = 16) to explore previous training in, perceptions of, and lessons learned from the introduction of telemedicine. Results suggest patients are accepting of teleclinic use for most clinical purposes. Teleclinic implementation affords benefits to cancer patient care both during and after COVID-19, but there is an urgent need for telemedicine education in oncology specialty training.

Implementation of Multigene Germline and Parallel Somatic Genetic Testing in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: SIGNPOST Study.

We present findings of a cancer multidisciplinary-team (MDT) coordinated mainstreaming pathway of unselected 5-panel germline BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1 and parallel somatic BRCA1/BRCA2 testing in all women with epithelial-OC and highlight the discordance between germline and somatic testing strategies across two cancer centres. Patients were counselled and consented by a cancer MDT member. The uptake of parallel multi-gene germline and somatic testing was 97.7%. Counselling by clinical-nurse-specialist more frequently needed >1 consultation (53.6% (30/56)) compared to a medical (15.0% (21/137)) or surgical oncologist (15.3% (17/110)) (p < 0.001). The median age was 54 (IQR = 51-62) years in germline pathogenic-variant (PV) versus 61 (IQR = 51-71) in BRCA wild-type (p = 0.001). There was no significant difference in distribution of PVs by ethnicity, stage, surgery timing or resection status. A total of 15.5% germline and 7.8% somatic BRCA1/BRCA2 PVs were identified. A total of 2.3% patients had RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1 PVs. A total of 11% germline PVs were large-genomic-rearrangements and missed by somatic testing. A total of 20% germline PVs are missed by somatic first BRCA-testing approach and 55.6% germline PVs missed by family history ascertainment. The somatic testing failure rate is higher (23%) for patients undergoing diagnostic biopsies. Our findings favour a prospective parallel somatic and germline panel testing approach as a clinically efficient strategy to maximise variant identification. UK Genomics test-directory criteria should be expanded to include a panel of OC genes.

Providing an acute oncology service during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to adaptations being made to all aspects of the NHS, including general practice, acute medical specialties and oncology. This has presented unique challenges to acute oncology services (AOSs) in how to provide continuity of care while maintaining the safety of patients and staff. We describe the experience of the AOS team at Barts Health NHS Trust, working across three acute hospitals in east London. Changes to the service due to COVID-19 included increased remote reviews and referrals to the specialist oncology cancer acute assessment unit. The patient population reviewed in April 2020 (at the initial peak of the pandemic in the UK) was markedly different to one reviewed in April 2019, with 55% more patients presenting with a new diagnosis of cancer via an emergency route. Finally, we suggest changes to AOSs for future waves of the pandemic.

Clinical outcomes of patients with corticosteroid refractory immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced enterocolitis treated with infliximab.

INTRODUCTION: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) have changed the treatment landscape for many cancers, but also cause severe inflammatory side effects including enterocolitis. CPI-induced enterocolitis is treated empirically with corticosteroids, and infliximab (IFX) is used in corticosteroid-refractory cases. However, robust outcome data for these patients are scarce. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter (six cancer centers), cohort study of outcomes in patients treated with IFX for corticosteroid-refractory CPI-induced enterocolitis between 2007 and 2020. The primary outcome was corticosteroid-free clinical remission (CFCR) with Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grade 0 for diarrhea at 12 weeks after IFX initiation. We also assessed cancer outcomes at 1 year using RECIST V1.1 criteria. RESULTS: 127 patients (73 male; median age 59 years) were treated with IFX for corticosteroid-refractory CPI-induced enterocolitis. Ninety-six (75.6%) patients had diarrhea CTCAE grade >2 and 115 (90.6%) required hospitalization for colitis. CFCR was 41.2% at 12 weeks and 50.9% at 26 weeks. In multivariable logistic regression, IFX-resistant enterocolitis was associated with rectal bleeding (OR 0.19; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.80; p=0.03) and absence of colonic crypt abscesses (OR 2.16; 95% CI 1.13 to 8.05; p=0.03). Cancer non-progression was significantly more common in patients with IFX-resistant enterocolitis (64.4%) as compared with patients with IFX-responsive enterocolitis (37.5%; p=0.013). CONCLUSION: This is the largest study to date reporting outcomes of IFX therapy in patients with corticosteroid-refractory CPI-induced enterocolitis. Using predefined robust endpoints, we have demonstrated that fewer than half of patients achieved CFCR. Our data also indicate that cancer outcomes may be better in patients developing prolonged and severe inflammatory side effects of CPI therapy.

Targeting HPV in gynaecological cancers - Current status, ongoing challenges and future directions.

Despite the success of preventive vaccination, the Human Papilloma Virus still accounts for 266,000 deaths annually, as the main causative factor of cervical, vaginal, anal, penile and oropharyngeal cancers. Human Papilloma Virus infects epithelial cells, driving tumourigenesis primarily from incorporation of DNA into the host cellular genome. Translation of two particular Human Papilloma Virus-specific oncoproteins, E6 and E7, are the key drivers of malignancy. If diagnosed early cervical, vaginal and vulval cancers have good prognosis and are treated with curative intent. However, metastatic disease carries a poor prognosis, with first-line systemic treatment providing only modest increase in outcome. Having shown promise in other solid malignancies, immune checkpoint inhibition and therapeutic cancer vaccines have been directed towards Human Papilloma Virus-associated gynaecological cancers, mindful that persistent Human Papilloma Virus infection drives malignancy and is associated with immunosuppression and lack of T-cell immunity. In this review, we discuss novel therapeutic approaches for targeting Human Papilloma Virus-driven gynaecological malignancies including vaccination strategies, use of immunomodulation, immune checkpoint inhibitors and agents targeting Human Papilloma Virus-specific oncoproteins. We also highlight the evolving focus on exciting new treatments including adoptive T-cell therapies.

Targeted therapies in gynaecological cancers.

The treatment of cancer has changed dramatically over the last decade, driven by increased understanding of the cancer genome, immune landscape, molecular alterations and aberrant pathways that drive cancer progression. Advances in molecular biology have led to the development of targeted agents, including monoclonal antibodies, small molecules and check-point inhibitors. Unlike chemotherapy, which inhibits DNA replication and mitosis, these agents target cancer signalling pathways, stroma, immune microenvironment and vasculature in tumour tissues. In gynaecological cancer, drugs targeting defective DNA repair, such as PARP inhibitors, have been approved for advanced ovarian cancer, and drugs targeting angiogenesis have been used in the treatment of advanced or recurrent ovarian and cervical cancers. Immune check-point inhibitors such as anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies have proved successful for mismatch repair-deficient endometrial cancers and HPV-targeted therapies are under development for HPV-related malignancies. In this era of precision medicine, improved understanding of cancer biology and genomics needs to be utilised to develop predictive biomarkers for these targeted therapies to maximise patient benefit.

Olaparib maintenance for first-line treatment of ovarian cancer: will SOLO1 reset the standard of care?

Maintenance therapy with PARP inhibitors has heralded a new era in the management of recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. The greatest effect is seen in women with BRCA1/2 tumors but those without this mutation also benefit. However, in most patients, the drugs eventually fail to prevent progression, so alternative strategies are needed. The SOLO1 trial randomized women with BRCA1/2-mutated advanced ovarian cancer to olaparib or placebo maintenance after first-line chemotherapy. Olaparib significantly improved progression-free survival to a degree that has not been seen in other first-line trials in ovarian cancer. This landmark trial is likely to change practice for this group of women. Here, we focus on the SOLO1 results in the context of the current management of advanced ovarian cancer.

Heterogeneous response and progression patterns reveal phenotypic heterogeneity of tyrosine kinase inhibitor response in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Molecular intratumour heterogeneity (ITH) is common in clear cell renal carcinomas (ccRCCs). However, it remains unknown whether this is mirrored by heterogeneity of drug responses between metastases in the same patient. METHODS: We performed a retrospective central radiological analysis of patients with treatment-naïve metastatic ccRCC receiving anti-angiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) (sunitinib or pazopanib) within three similar phase II trials. Treatment was briefly interrupted for cytoreductive nephrectomy. All patients had multiple metastases that were measured by regular computed tomography scans from baseline until Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (RECIST)-defined progression. Each metastasis was categorised as responding, stable or progressing. Patients were classed as having a homogeneous response if all lesions were of the same response category and a heterogeneous response if they differed. RESULTS: A total of 115 metastases were assessed longitudinally in 27 patients. Of these patients, 56% had a heterogeneous response. Progression occurred through the appearance of new metastases in 67%, through progression of existing lesions in 11% and by both in 22% of patients. Despite RECIST-defined progression, 57% of existing metastases remained controlled. The sum of controlled lesions was greater than that of uncontrolled lesions in 47% of patients who progressed only with measurable new lesions. CONCLUSIONS: We identified frequent ITH of anti-angiogenic TKI responses, with subsets of metastases responding and progressing within individual patients. This mirrors molecular ITH and may indicate that anti-angiogenic drug resistance is confined to subclones and not encoded on the trunk of the tumours' phylogenetic trees. This is clinically important, as patients with small-volume progression may benefit from drug continuation. Predominant progression with new rather than in existing metastases supports a change in disease biology through anti-angiogenics. The results highlight limitations of RECIST in heterogeneous cancers, which may influence clinical trial data validity. This analysis requires prospective confirmation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: European Clinical Trials Database(EudraCT): 2009-016675-29 , registered 17 March 2010; EudraCT: 2006-004511-21 , registered 09 March 2007; EudraCT: 2006-006491-38 , registered 22 December 2006.

Inflammation and cancer: advances and new agents.

Tumour-promoting inflammation is considered one of the enabling characteristics of cancer development. Chronic inflammatory disease increases the risk of some cancers, and strong epidemiological evidence exists that NSAIDs, particularly aspirin, are powerful chemopreventive agents. Tumour microenvironments contain many different inflammatory cells and mediators; targeting these factors in genetic, transplantable and inducible murine models of cancer substantially reduces the development, growth and spread of disease. Thus, this complex network of inflammation offers targets for prevention and treatment of malignant disease. Much potential exists in this area for novel cancer prevention and treatment strategies, although clinical research to support targeting of cancer-related inflammation and innate immunity in patients with advanced-stage cancer remains in its infancy. Following the initial successes of immunotherapies that modulate the adaptive immune system, we assert that inflammation and innate immunity are important targets in patients with cancer on the basis of extensive preclinical and epidemiological data. The adaptive immune response is heavily dependent on innate immunity, therefore, inhibiting some of the tumour-promoting immunosuppressive actions of the innate immune system might enhance the potential of immunotherapies that activate a nascent antitumour response.

Sequencing systemic therapies in advanced RCC: is there a best strategy?

There is a strong rationale for sequencing targeted therapy in metastatic clear cell renal cancer. However the timing of the switch and the best agent to switch to remains unclear. Randomized data currently are supportive of the sequence of axitinib, followed by everolimus in those patients in which first-line vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy fails. Everolimus is also justified in the second-line setting, and the overall survival data for sorafenib in VEGF TKI resistant disease is impressive. A degree of cross-resistance appears to exist between all these current agents and has resulted in a drive toward the development of new therapies with novel modes of action.