Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinomas With Defective Mismatch Repair: Current Knowledge and Clinical Management.

Esophageal, gastroesophageal junction, and gastric adenocarcinomas, referred to collectively as gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas (GEAs), are a major cause of global cancer-related mortality. Our increasing molecular understanding has led to the addition of biomarker-directed approaches to defined subgroups and has improved survival in selected patients, such as those with HER2 and Claudin18.2 overexpression. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of cancer, including GEA, but biomarkers beyond PD-L1 expression are lacking. Mismatch repair deficiency and/or high microsatellite instability (dMMR/MSI-H) is observed in 8% to 22% of nonmetastatic GEA, and 3% to 5% of patients with metastatic disease. dMMR/MSI-H tumors are associated with more favorable prognosis and significant benefit from ICIs, although some heterogeneity exists. The activity of ICIs in advanced dMMR/MSI-H cancer is seen across lines of therapy and should be recommended in the frontline setting. In patients with nonmetastatic dMMR/MSI-H cancer, increasing evidence suggests that perioperative and adjuvant chemotherapy may not provide benefit to the dMMR/MSI-H subgroup. The activity of perioperative chemotherapy-free immune checkpoint regimens in patients with nonmetastatic dMMR/MSI-H cancer is highly promising and underscores the need to identify this unique subgroup. We recommend MMR/MSI testing for all patients with GEA at diagnosis, and review the key rationale and clinical management implications for patient with dMMR/MSI-H tumors across disease stages.

Identification and Characterization of Avoidable Hospital Admissions in Patients With Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: More than 50% of patients with lung cancer are admitted to the hospital while receiving treatment, which is a burden to patients and the healthcare system. This study characterizes the risk factors and outcomes of patients with lung cancer who were admitted to the hospital. METHODS: A multidisciplinary oncology care team conducted a retrospective medical record review of patients with lung cancer admitted in 2018. Demographics, disease and admission characteristics, and end-of-life care utilization were recorded. Following a multidisciplinary consensus review process, admissions were determined to be either "avoidable" or "unavoidable." Generalized estimating equation logistic regression models assessed risks and outcomes associated with avoidable admissions. RESULTS: In all, 319 admissions for 188 patients with a median age of 66 years (IQR, 59-74 years) were included. Cancer-related symptoms accounted for 65% of hospitalizations. Common causes of unavoidable hospitalizations were unexpected disease progression causing symptoms, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation, and infection. Of the 47 hospitalizations identified as avoidable (15%), the median overall survival was 1.6 months compared with 9.7 months (hazard ratio, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.34-3.19; P<.001) for unavoidable hospitalizations. Significant reasons for avoidable admissions included cancer-related pain (P=.02), hypervolemia (P=.03), patient desire to initiate hospice services (P=.01), and errors in medication reconciliation or distribution (P<.001). Errors in medication management caused 26% of the avoidable hospitalizations. Of admissions in patients receiving immunotherapy (n=102) or targeted therapy (n=44), 9% were due to adverse effects of treatment. Patients receiving immunotherapy and targeted therapy were at similar risk of avoidable hospitalizations compared with patients not receiving treatment (P=.3 and P=.1, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We found that 15% of hospitalizations among patients with lung cancer were potentially avoidable. Uncontrolled symptoms, delayed implementation of end-of-life care, and errors in medication reconciliation were associated with avoidable inpatient admissions. Symptom management tools, palliative care integration, and medication reconciliations may mitigate hospitalization risk.

Using the HER2/CEP17 FISH Ratio to Predict Pathologic Complete Response Following Neoadjuvant Anti-HER2 Doublet Therapy in HER2+ Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of HER2-directed therapy that omit neoadjuvant conventional chemotherapy for HER+ breast cancer demonstrate that a subset of patients still obtains a pCR. Identifying tumor characteristics which predict pCR may help select patients for de-escalated neoadjuvant dual HER2-targeted treatment without chemotherapy. This is the first study evaluating the HER2/CEP17 ratio by FISH as a biomarker to predict pCR among patients who received neoadjuvant anti-HER2 regimens without chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from patients with locally advanced HER2+ breast cancer who received neoadjuvant dual HER2-targeted therapy without conventional chemotherapy from a single center was retrospectively reviewed. All patients were enrolled in one of 3 clinical trials evaluating chemotherapy de-escalation. Logistic regression modeling assessed for a relationship between the HER2/CEP17 FISH ratio obtained from baseline tissue biopsy and pCR based on pathology at the time of definitive breast surgery following neoadjuvant treatment. RESULTS: Following neoadjuvant treatment with dual HER2-targeted therapies in 56 patients, the probability of pCR was 73% among patients with a HER2 ratio of 13.1 compared to a probability of 38% among patients with HER2 ratio of 5.5 (OR 4.14, 95% CI 1.44-11.89; P = .012). This positive association persisted after controlling for different treatment regimens administered (OR 2.87, 95% CI 0.9-9.18, P = .020). CONCLUSIONS: These data found a positive association between the HER2/CEP17 FISH ratio and pCR following neoadjuvant dual HER2-targeted therapy without chemotherapy. Larger prospective studies are needed to validate the HER2 ratio as a biomarker to select patients for neoadjuvant dual anti-HER2 therapy without chemotherapy.

Pet Ownership and Cancer Risk in the Women's Health Initiative.

BACKGROUND: Pet ownership and cancer are both highly prevalent in the United States. Evidence suggests that associations may exist between this potentially modifiable factor and cancer prevention, though studies are sparse. The present report examined whether pet ownership (dog, cat, or bird) is associated with lower risk for total cancer and site-specific obesity-related cancers. METHODS: This was a prospective analysis of 123,560 participants (20,981 dog owners; 19,288 cat owners; 1,338 bird owners; and 81,953 non-pet owners) enrolled in the Women's Health Initiative observational study and clinical trials. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate HR and 95% confidence intervals for the association between pet ownership and cancer, adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: There were no significant relationships between ownership of a dog, cat, or bird and incidence of cancer overall. When site-specific cancers were examined, no associations were observed after adjustment for multiple comparisons. CONCLUSION: Pet ownership had no association with overall cancer incidence. IMPACT: This is the first large epidemiologic study to date to explore relationships between pet ownership and cancer risk, as well as associated risks for individual cancer types. This study requires replication in other sizable, diverse cohorts. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(9); 1311-6. ©2016 AACR.