Percutaneous coronary intervention using a combination of robotics and telecommunications by an operator in a separate physical location from the patient: an early exploration into the feasibility of telestenting (the REMOTE-PCI study).

AIMS: The present study explores the feasibility of telestenting, wherein a physician operator performs stenting on a patient in a separate physical location using a combination of robotics and telecommunications. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients undergoing robotic stenting were eligible for inclusion. All manipulations of guidewires, balloons, and stents were performed robotically by a physician operator located in an isolated separate room outside the procedure room housing the patient. Communication between the operating physician and laboratory personnel was via telecommunication devices providing real-time audio and video connectivity. Among 20 patients who consented to participate, technical success, defined as successful advancement and retraction of guidewires, balloons, and stents by the robotic system without conversion to manual operation, was achieved in 19 of 22 lesions (86.4%). Procedural success, defined as <30% residual stenosis upon completion of the procedure in the absence of death or repeat revascularisation prior to hospital discharge, was achieved in 19 of 20 patients (95.0%). There were no deaths or repeat revascularisations prior to hospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: To the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first to explore the feasibility of telestenting. Additional studies are required to determine if future advancements in robotics will facilitate telestenting over greater geographic distances.

Melanoma patient derived xenografts acquire distinct Vemurafenib resistance mechanisms.

Variable clinical responses, tumor heterogeneity, and drug resistance reduce long-term survival outcomes for metastatic melanoma patients. To guide and accelerate drug development, we characterized tumor responses for five melanoma patient derived xenograft models treated with Vemurafenib. Three BRAF(V600E) models showed acquired drug resistance, one BRAF(V600E) model had a complete and durable response, and a BRAF(V600V) model was expectedly unresponsive. In progressing tumors, a variety of resistance mechanisms to BRAF inhibition were uncovered, including mutant BRAF alternative splicing, NRAS mutation, COT (MAP3K8) overexpression, and increased mutant BRAF gene amplification and copy number. The resistance mechanisms among the patient derived xenograft models were similar to the resistance pathways identified in clinical specimens from patients progressing on BRAF inhibitor therapy. In addition, there was both inter- and intra-patient heterogeneity in resistance mechanisms, accompanied by heterogeneous pERK expression immunostaining profiles. MEK monotherapy of Vemurafenib-resistant tumors caused toxicity and acquired drug resistance. However, tumors were eradicated when Vemurafenib was combined the MEK inhibitor. The diversity of drug responses among the xenograft models; the distinct mechanisms of resistance; and the ability to overcome resistance by the addition of a MEK inhibitor provide a scheduling rationale for clinical trials of next-generation drug combinations.