Increased rates of chronic physical health conditions across all organ systems in autistic adolescents and adults.

BACKGROUND: The poorer physical health of autistic adults compared to non-autistic adults has been highlighted by several epidemiological studies. However, research has so far been limited to specific geographical areas and has primarily focused on young autistic individuals (aged 35 years and younger). Recent studies indicate a higher rate of mortality in autistic people, as well as poorer quality of self-reported healthcare interactions. This study aims to determine, first, whether autistic people experience greater levels of non-communicable health conditions and second, whether these are explained by differences in demographics (i.e. sex, country of residence, ethnicity, education level), alcohol use, smoking, body mass index (BMI), or family history of medical conditions. METHOD: We employed a cross-sectional, convenience-sampling study via an anonymous, online survey of autistic and non-autistic adults (n = 2305, mean age = 41.6, 65.9% female, 49% autistic). The survey asked participants to self-report information about their demographics, autism diagnosis, diet, exercise, sleep, sexual health, substance use, personal medical history, and family medical history (for all first-degree, biological relatives). Binomial logistic regression across four iterative models of increasing complexity was applied to assess rates of physical health conditions. The Benjamini-Hochberg correction was used to account for multiple testing, and only physical health conditions that achieved at least 1% endorsement within the overall sample (n > 22) were included in the analysis to reduce risk of Type I errors. We also used novel network analysis methods to test whether there are increased levels of multimorbidity between autistic and non-autistic people. RESULTS: There were significantly elevated rates of non-communicable conditions across all organ systems in autistic people, including gastrointestinal, neurological, endocrine, visual, ear/nose/throat, skin, liver and kidney, and haematological conditions. We confirmed previous findings by showing highly significant differences in rates of neurological and gastrointestinal symptoms (p < 0.0001). In addition, we established in the largest sample to date that Ehler-Danlos Syndrome (EDS) was more likely to occur among autistic females compared to non-autistic females. Finally, we found a higher prevalence of Coeliac's disease among autistic individuals compared to non-autistic individuals after controlling for sex, ethnicity, country of residence, alcohol use, smoking, and BMI, but these results became non-significant after accounting for family history. LIMITATIONS: Our study is biased towards females, white individuals, highly educated people, and UK residents, likely due to sampling biases. Our self-report study design may also exclude those who lack access to computers, or those with intellectual disability. Our network analysis is also limited in size. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence of widespread, physical health comorbidity that spans nearly all major organ systems in autistic adults compared to non-autistic adults, using both binary logistic regression and network models. Healthcare professionals must be made aware of the range of co-occurring physical health conditions that may be more common among autistic people. However, our findings also point towards potential avenues requiring further exploration, such as the association of autism with both Coeliac's disease and EDS.

Prospective Pilot Study of 18F-Fluoroestradiol PET/CT in Patients With Invasive Lobular Carcinomas.

BACKGROUND. PET/CT with 18F-fluoroestradiol (FES) (FDA-approved in 2020) depicts tissues expressing estrogen receptor (ER). Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is commonly ER positive. OBJECTIVE. The primary aim of this study was to assess the frequency with which sites of histologically proven ILC have abnormal uptake on FES PET/CT. METHODS. This prospective single-center pilot study, conducted from December 2020 to August 2021, enrolled patients with histologically confirmed ILC to undergo FES PET/CT; patients optionally underwent FDG PET/CT. Two nuclear radiologists assessed FES PET/CT and FDG PET/CT studies for abnormal uptake corresponding to known ILC sites at enrollment and for additional sites of abnormal uptake, resolving differences by consensus. The primary endpoint was percentage of known ILC sites showing abnormal FES uptake. The alternative to the null hypothesis was that more than 60% of sites would have abnormal FES uptake, exceeding the percentage of ILC with abnormal FDG uptake described in prior literature. A sample size of 24 biopsied lesions was preselected to provide 81% power for the alternative hypothesis (one-sided α = .10). Findings on FES PET/CT and FDG PET/CT were summarized for additional secondary endpoints. RESULTS. The final analysis included 17 patients (mean age, 59.1 ± 13.2 years) with 25 sites of histologically confirmed ILC at enrollment (22 breast lesions, two axillary lymph nodes, one distant metastasis). FES PET/CT showed abnormal uptake in 22 of 25 (88%) lesions, sufficient to reject the null hypothesis (p = .002). Thirteen patients underwent FDG PET/CT. Four of 23 (17%) sites of histologically confirmed ILC, including additional sites detected and confirmed after enrollment, were identified with FES PET/CT only, and 1 of 23 (4%) was identified only with FDG PET/CT (p = .18). FES PET/CT depicted additional lesions not detected with standard-of-care evaluation in 4 of 17 (24%) patients (two contralateral breast cancers and two metastatic axillary lymph nodes, all with subsequent histologic confirmation). Use of FES PET/CT resulted in changes in clinical stage with respect to standard-of-care evaluation in 3 of 17 (18%) patients. CONCLUSION. The primary endpoint of the trial was met. The frequency of abnormal FES uptake among sites of histologically known ILC was found to be to be significantly greater than 60%. CLINICAL IMPACT. This pilot study shows a potential role of FES PET/CT in evaluation of patients with ILC. TRIAL REGISTRATION. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04252859.

Breast Cancer, Version 3.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

The therapeutic options for patients with noninvasive or invasive breast cancer are complex and varied. These NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer include recommendations for clinical management of patients with carcinoma in situ, invasive breast cancer, Paget disease, phyllodes tumor, inflammatory breast cancer, and management of breast cancer during pregnancy. The content featured in this issue focuses on the recommendations for overall management of ductal carcinoma in situ and the workup and locoregional management of early stage invasive breast cancer. For the full version of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer, visit NCCN.org.

A human breast cancer-derived xenograft and organoid platform for drug discovery and precision oncology.

Models that recapitulate the complexity of human tumors are urgently needed to develop more effective cancer therapies. We report a bank of human patient-derived xenografts (PDXs) and matched organoid cultures from tumors that represent the greatest unmet need: endocrine-resistant, treatment-refractory and metastatic breast cancers. We leverage matched PDXs and PDX-derived organoids (PDxO) for drug screening that is feasible and cost-effective with in vivo validation. Moreover, we demonstrate the feasibility of using these models for precision oncology in real time with clinical care in a case of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) with early metastatic recurrence. Our results uncovered a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drug with high efficacy against the models. Treatment with this therapy resulted in a complete response for the individual and a progression-free survival (PFS) period more than three times longer than their previous therapies. This work provides valuable methods and resources for functional precision medicine and drug development for human breast cancer.

Cancer Misinformation and Harmful Information on Facebook and Other Social Media: A Brief Report.

There are few data on the quality of cancer treatment information available on social media. Here, we quantify the accuracy of cancer treatment information on social media and its potential for harm. Two cancer experts reviewed 50 of the most popular social media articles on each of the 4 most common cancers. The proportion of misinformation and potential for harm were reported for all 200 articles and their association with the number of social media engagements using a 2-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum test. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Of 200 total articles, 32.5% (n = 65) contained misinformation and 30.5% (n = 61) contained harmful information. Among articles containing misinformation, 76.9% (50 of 65) contained harmful information. The median number of engagements for articles with misinformation was greater than factual articles (median [interquartile range] = 2300 [1200-4700] vs 1600 [819-4700], P = .05). The median number of engagements for articles with harmful information was statistically significantly greater than safe articles (median [interquartile range] = 2300 [1400-4700] vs 1500 [810-4700], P = .007).

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Breast Cancer, Version 4.2021.

The NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer include up-to-date guidelines for clinical management of patients with carcinoma in situ, invasive breast cancer, Paget disease, phyllodes tumor, inflammatory breast cancer, male breast cancer, and breast cancer during pregnancy. These guidelines are developed by a multidisciplinary panel of representatives from NCCN Member Institutions with breast cancer-focused expertise in the fields of medical oncology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology, pathology, reconstructive surgery, and patient advocacy. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the most recent updates to recommendations for adjuvant systemic therapy in patients with nonmetastatic, early-stage, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer.

A Phase 1 dose-escalation study of disulfiram and copper gluconate in patients with advanced solid tumors involving the liver using S-glutathionylation as a biomarker.

BACKGROUND: Disulfiram and metals inactivate key oncoproteins resulting in anti-neoplastic activity. The goal of this study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose of copper when administered with disulfiram in patients with advanced solid tumors and liver involvement. METHODS: Disulfiram 250 mg was administered daily in 28-day cycles. Four doses of copper gluconate were tested (2, 4, 6, and 8 mg of elemental copper) in a standard 3 + 3 dose escalation design. Patients were evaluated for dose limiting toxicities and response. Protein S-glutathionylation was evaluated as a pharmacodynamic marker. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were enrolled and 16 patients were evaluable for dose limiting toxicities. Among the 21 patients, there was a median of 4 lines of prior chemotherapy. Five Grade 3 toxicities were observed (anorexia, elevated aspartate aminotransferase or AST, elevated alkaline phosphatase, fever, and fatigue). Response data was available for 15 patients. Four patients had stable disease with the longest duration of disease control being 116 days. The median duration of treatment for evaluable patients was 55 days (range 28-124). Reasons for discontinuation included functional decline, disease progression, and disease-associated death. Increased S-glutathionylation of serum proteins was observed with treatment. CONCLUSION: Disulfiram 250 mg daily with copper gluconate (8 mg of elemental copper) was well-tolerated in patients with solid tumors involving the liver and was not associated with dose limiting toxicities. While temporary disease stabilization was noted in some patients, no objective responses were observed. Treatment was associated with an increase in S-glutathionylation suggesting that this combination could exert a suppressive effect on cellular growth and protein function. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00742911 , first posted 28/08/2008.

Evaluation of Oncology Hospital at Home: Unplanned Health Care Utilization and Costs in the Huntsman at Home Real-World Trial.

PURPOSE: Patients with cancer experience high rates of morbidity and unplanned health care utilization and may benefit from new models of care. We evaluated an adult oncology hospital at home program's rate of unplanned hospitalizations and health care costs and secondarily, emergency department (ED) use, length of hospital stays, and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions during the 30 days after enrollment. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, nonrandomized, real-world cohort comparison of 367 hospitalized patients with cancer-169 patients consecutively admitted after hospital discharge to Huntsman at Home (HH), a hospital-at-home program, compared with 198 usual care patients concurrently identified at hospital discharge. All patients met clinical criteria for HH admission, but those in usual care lived outside the HH service area. Primary outcomes were the number of unplanned hospitalizations and costs during the 30 days after enrollment. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stays, ICU admissions, and ED visits during the 30 days after enrollment. RESULTS: Groups were comparable except that more women received HH care. In propensity-weighted analyses, the odds of unplanned hospitalizations was reduced in the HH group by 55% (odds ratio, 0.45, 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.70; P < .001) and health care costs were 47% lower (mean cost ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.72; P < .001) over the 30-day period. Secondary outcomes also favored HH. Total hospital stay days were reduced by 1.1 days (P = .004) and ED visits were reduced by 45% (odds ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.92; P = .022). There was no evidence of a difference in ICU admissions (P = .972). CONCLUSION: This oncology hospital at home program shows initial promise as a model for oncology care that may lower unplanned health care utilization and health care costs.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase II Study of Regorafenib Versus Placebo in Advanced/Metastatic, Treatment-Refractory Liposarcoma: Results from the SARC024 Study.

LESSONS LEARNED: The results from the liposarcoma cohort of SARC024 confirm previously published data and do not support the routine use of regorafenib in this patient population. Continued exploration of novel therapies, including combination approaches, is warranted for a patient population in whom limited treatment options exist. BACKGROUND: Regorafenib is a multitargeted kinase inhibitor with a kinase profile overlapping, but distinct from, pazopanib, an agent approved for recurrent and metastatic non-gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST), non-adipocytic soft tissue sarcoma. We conducted a randomized, phase II study of regorafenib versus placebo in refractory liposarcoma patients. METHODS: Patients with advanced or metastatic, treatment-refractory liposarcoma were randomized 1:1 to receive regorafenib 160 mg or placebo once daily (3 weeks on, 1 week off). Patients with well-differentiated liposarcoma only were excluded. Crossover for placebo was allowed upon progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), according to RECIST version 1.1. RESULTS: Forty-eight subjects with liposarcoma (34 dedifferentiated, 12 myxoid/round cell, 2 pleomorphic) were enrolled. Median PFS was 1.87 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-3.67) months for regorafenib versus 2.07 (95% CI, 1.64-3.44) months for placebo; stratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.85 (95% CI, 0.46, 1.58), p = .62. No responses were seen on regorafenib. One PR was observed on placebo. Median overall survival was 6.46 (95% CI, 4.16-23.48) months for regorafenib and 4.89 (95% CI, 3.02-9.77) months for placebo, stratified HR, 0.66 (95% CI, 0.31-1.40), p = .28). Treatment-related adverse events were similar to the known safety profile of regorafenib. CONCLUSION: Regorafenib did not appear to improve PFS in treatment-refractory liposarcoma. No new significant safety signals were observed.

Breast Cancer, Version 3.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Several new systemic therapy options have become available for patients with metastatic breast cancer, which have led to improvements in survival. In addition to patient and clinical factors, the treatment selection primarily depends on the tumor biology (hormone-receptor status and HER2-status). The NCCN Guidelines specific to the workup and treatment of patients with recurrent/stage IV breast cancer are discussed in this article.

NCCN Guidelines Updates: Breast Cancer.

Advances in molecular testing have ushered in the new era of precision medicine. The 2018 publication of the TAILORx trial helped refine the use of genetic expression assays, specifically the 21-gene recurrence score, in assigning patients to endocrine therapy alone or with chemotherapy. The NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer explore the clinical applications of this study. The algorithm for managing the axilla in early breast cancer has been further refined, based on the presence or absence of clinical evidence of lymph node involvement. Ovarian suppression has been validated as the optimal approach in higher risk premenopausal women, based on updated analysis of the SOFT and TEXT pivotal trials. In the metastatic setting, the NCCN Guidelines further reinforce the benefit of the CDK4/6 inhibitors, extending the "preferred" recommendation to all the available agents in metastatic disease. Options in triple-negative breast cancer now include, for the first time, an immunotherapeutic agent.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Breast Cancer, Version 3.2018.

These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight the updated recommendations for use of multigene assays to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic chemotherapy therapy for women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early-stage invasive breast cancer. This report summarizes these updates and discusses the rationale behind them.

Breast Cancer, Version 4.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast represents a heterogeneous group of neoplastic lesions in the breast ducts. The goal for management of DCIS is to prevent the development of invasive breast cancer. This manuscript focuses on the NCCN Guidelines Panel recommendations for the workup, primary treatment, risk reduction strategies, and surveillance specific to DCIS.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Breast Cancer, Version 1.2017.

These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight the important updates/changes to the surgical axillary staging, radiation therapy, and systemic therapy recommendations for hormone receptor-positive disease in the 1.2017 version of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer. This report summarizes these updates and discusses the rationale behind them. Updates on new drug approvals, not available at press time, can be found in the most recent version of these guidelines at NCCN.org.

Invasive Breast Cancer Version 1.2016, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women in the United States and is second only to lung cancer as a cause of cancer death. The overall management of breast cancer includes the treatment of local disease with surgery, radiation therapy, or both, and the treatment of systemic disease with cytotoxic chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, biologic therapy, or combinations of these. This article outlines the NCCN Guidelines specific to breast cancer that is locoregional (restricted to one region of the body), and discusses the management of clinical stage I, II, and IIIA (T3N1M0) tumors. For NCCN Guidelines on systemic adjuvant therapy after locoregional management of clinical stage I, II and IIIA (T3N1M0) and for management for other clinical stages of breast cancer, see the complete version of these guidelines at NCCN.org.

NCCN Guidelines Insights Breast Cancer, Version 1.2016.

These NCCN Guideline Insights highlight the important updates to the systemic therapy recommendations in the 2016 NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer. In the most recent version of these guidelines, the NCCN Breast Cancer Panel included a new section on the principles of preoperative systemic therapy. In addition, based on new evidence, the panel updated systemic therapy recommendations for women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer in the adjuvant and metastatic disease settings and for patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. This report summarizes these recent updates and discusses the rationale behind them.

Breast Cancer Risk Reduction, Version 2.2015.

Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed malignancy in women in the United States and is second only to lung cancer as a cause of cancer death. To assist women who are at increased risk of developing breast cancer and their physicians in the application of individualized strategies to reduce breast cancer risk, NCCN has developed these guidelines for breast cancer risk reduction.

Breast Cancer Version 2.2015.

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women in the United States and is second only to lung cancer as a cause of cancer death. The overall management of breast cancer includes the treatment of local disease with surgery, radiation therapy, or both, and the treatment of systemic disease with cytotoxic chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, biologic therapy, or combinations of these. This portion of the NCCN Guidelines discusses recommendations specific to the locoregional management of clinical stage I, II, and IIIA (T3N1M0) tumors.