Immune-Related Adverse Event Likelihood Score Identifies "Pure" IRAEs Strongly Associated With Outcome in a Phase I-II Trial Population.

BACKGROUND: Immune-related adverse events (IRAE) pose a significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenge in patients treated with immune-oncology (IO) drugs. IRAEs have been suggested to correlate with better outcome, but studies are conflicting. Estimating the true incidence of IRAEs is particularly difficult in the early phase I/II trial setting. A key issue is the lack of IRAE diagnostic criteria, necessary to discriminate "pure" IRAEs from other treatment-related adverse events not sustained by an autoimmune process. METHODS: In patients treated with immune-oncology (IO) drugs in phases I-II trials at our institute, we identified high confidence (HC) or low confidence (LC) IRAEs by clinical consensus. We empirically developed an IRAE likelihood score (ILS) based on commonly available clinical data. Correlation with outcome was explored by multivariate Cox analysis. To mitigate immortal time-bias, analyses were conducted (1) at 2-month landmark and (2) modeling IRAEs as time-dependent covariate. RESULTS: Among 202 IO-treated patients, 29.2% developed >1 treatment-related adverse events (TRAE). Based on ILS >5, we classified patients in no IRAE (n = 143), HC IRAE (n = 24), or LC IRAE (n = 35). hazard ratios (HR) for HC were significantly lower than LC patients (HR for PFS ranging 0.24-0.44, for OS 0.18-0.23, all P < .01). CONCLUSION: ILS provides a simple system to identify bona fide IRAEs, pruning for other treatment-related events likely due to different pathophysiology. Applying stringent criteria leads to lower and more reliable estimates of IRAE incidence and identifies events with significant impact on survival.

Screening Programs for Breast Cancer: Toward Individualized, Risk-Adapted Strategies of Early Detection.

Early detection of breast cancer (BC) comprises two approaches: screening of asymptomatic women in a specified target population at risk (usually a target age range for women at average risk), and early diagnosis for women with BC signs and symptoms. Screening for BC is a key health intervention for early detection. While population-based screening programs have been implemented for age-selected women, the pivotal clinical trials have not addressed the global utility nor the improvement of screening performance by utilizing more refined parameters for patient eligibility, such as individualized risk stratification. In addition, with the exception of the subset of women known to carry germline pathogenetic mutations in (high- or moderately-penetrant) cancer predisposition genes, such as BRCA1 and BRCA2, there has been less success in outreach and service provision for the unaffected relatives of women found to carry a high-risk mutation (i.e., "cascade testing") as it is in these individuals for whom such actionable information can result in cancers (and/or cancer deaths) being averted. Moreover, even in the absence of clinical cancer genetics services, as is the case for the immediate and at least near-term in most countries globally, the capacity to stratify the risk of an individual to develop BC has existed for many years, is available for free online at various sites/platforms, and is increasingly being validated for non-Caucasian populations. Ultimately, a precision approach to BC screening is largely missing. In the present chapter, we aim to address the concept of risk-adapted screening of BC, in multiple facets, and understand if there is a value in the implementation of adapted screening strategies in selected women, outside the established screening prescriptions, in the terms of age-range, screening modality and schedules of imaging.