Does Pre-Emptive Availability of PREDICT 2.1 Results Change Ordering Practices for Oncotype DX? A Multi-Center Prospective Cohort Study.

For early-stage hormone receptor (HR)-positive and HER2-negative breast cancer, tools to estimate treatment benefit include free and publicly available algorithms (e.g., PREDICT 2.1) and expensive molecular assays (e.g., Oncotype DX). There remains a need to identify patients who de-rive the most benefit from molecular assays and where this test may be of poor value. In this multicenter prospective cohort study, we evaluated whether use of PREDICT 2.1 would impact physician decision making. For the first 6 months of the study, data on physician use of both PREDICT 2.1 and Oncotype DX ordering were collected on all newly diagnosed patients eligible for molecular testing. After 6 months, an educational intervention was undertaken to see if providing physicians with PREDICT 2.1 results affects the frequency of Oncotype DX requests. A total of 602 patients across six cancer centers in Ontario, Canada were recruited between March 2020 and November 2021. Providing PREDICT 2.1 results and an educational intervention did not alter the ordering of an Oncotype DX. For patients with low clinical risk, either by clinico-pathologic features or by PREDICT 2.1, the probability of obtaining a high Oncotype DX recurrence score was substantially lower compared to patients with high-clinical-risk disease. The introduction of an educational intervention had no impact on molecular assay requests. However, routine ordering of molecular assays for patients with low-clinical-risk disease is of poor value.

Quantifying preferences for urea cycle disorder treatments using a discrete choice experiment.

AIMS: Urea cycle disorders (UCDs) can cause ammonia accumulation and central nervous system toxicity. Nitrogen-binding medications can be efficacious, but certain attributes may negatively impact adherence. This study sought to quantify the administration-related attributes influencing overall prescription selection and patient adherence. METHODS: A web-based, quantitative survey including discrete choice experiment (DCE) methodology captured responses from health care providers for patients with UCDs. A series of hypothetical treatment profile sets with attributes such as route of administration, taste/odor, preparation instructions, packaging, dose measurement, and weight use restrictions were presented. From 16 sets of 3 hypothetical product profiles, respondents evaluated attributes most preferred for prescription selection or patient adherence. Attributes assumed a higher overall preference if relative importance (RI) scores were >16.67% (the value if all attributes were of equal importance). Preference weight scores were assessed. A nine-point Likert scale assessed respondent attitudes, such as satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 51 respondents completed the survey. Respondents reported dissatisfaction with current treatments (mean [SD] = 5.4 [1.7]). For prescription selection, four attributes achieved RI >16.67%: taste/odor (24%), weight restrictions (21%), preparation instructions (18%), and route of administration (17%). For adherence, three attributes related to administration achieved RI >16.67%: taste/odor (28%), preparation instructions (21%), and route of administration (17%). Preference weights for "taste/odor masked" were higher than "not taste/odor masked" for prescription selection (mean [SD]; 1.52 [1.10] vs -1.52 [1.10]) and treatment adherence (73.8 [55.2] vs -73.8 [55.2]). LIMITATIONS: This study contained a relatively small sample size. Survey respondent selection, the use of hypothetical product profiles, and exclusion of non-pharmacologic treatment options could have contributed to potential biases. CONCLUSIONS: Among attributes tested, taste/odor was the most important attribute influencing overall preference for both prescribing and patient adherence, with taste/odor masking preferred. Optimizing nitrogen-binding medications through masking taste/odor may support improved patient adherence and outcomes in UCDs.

INDUCE-2: A Phase I/II, open-label, two-part study of feladilimab in combination with tremelimumab in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Combining immunotherapies with distinct mechanisms of action has the potential to overcome treatment resistance and improve outcomes. The inducible T-cell co-stimulator (ICOS) agonist feladilimab is directed at enhancing T-cell activation and function, thereby promoting an antitumor response. INDUCE-2 (NCT03693612) was a Phase I/II, open-label, two-part study evaluating the anti-ICOS agonist feladilimab in combination with the anti-CTLA-4 antibody tremelimumab in patients with select advanced solid tumors. Objectives of Part 1 were to determine the safety, tolerability, and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of feladilimab in combination with tremelimumab. In Part 2, the antitumor activity of the combination (administered at the RP2D determined in Part 1) was to be assessed in patients with relapsed/refractory head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Primary endpoints included the rates of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), adverse events (AEs), AEs of special interest, and serious AEs. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate, while biomarker assessment was exploratory. A total of 26 patients were enrolled, 18 (69%) of whom had completed the study at end date. One patient, in the highest dose group (24/225 mg feladilimab/tremelimumab), experienced a DLT 18 days after the first dose of study treatment. All patients experienced at least one AE; AEs led to treatment discontinuation in four (15%) patients. Partial response was observed in one patient. Feladilimab in combination with tremelimumab was well-tolerated but showed limited efficacy. Based on the totality of data from Part 1, it was decided not to continue with Part 2.

The COVID-19 pandemic and its effects on follow-up of patients with early breast cancer: A patient survey.

PURPOSE: Despite limited evidence supporting its effectiveness, most guidelines recommend long-term, routinely scheduled in-person surveillance of patients with early breast cancer (EBC). The COVID-19 pandemic led to increased use of virtual care. This survey evaluated patient perspectives on follow-up care. METHODS: Patients with EBC undergoing surveillance were surveyed about follow-up protocols, perceptions, and interest in clinical trials assessing different follow-up strategies. RESULTS: Of 402 approached patients 270 completed the survey (response rate 67%). Median age 62.5 years (range 25-86) and median time since breast cancer diagnosis was 3.8 years (range < 1-33 years). Most (n = 148/244, 60%) were followed by more than one provider. Routine follow-ups with breast examination were mostly conducted by medical/radiation oncologists every 6 months (n = 110/236, 46%) or annually (n = 106/236, 44%). Participants felt routine follow-up was useful to monitor for recurrence, manage side effects of cancer treatment and to provide support/reassurance. Most participants felt regular follow-up care would detect recurrent cancer earlier (n = 214/255, 96%) and increase survival (n = 218/249, 88%). The COVID-19 pandemic reduced the number of in-person visits for 54% of patients (n = 63/117). Patients were concerned this reduction of in-person visits would lead to later detection of both local (n = 29/63, 46%) and distant recurrences (n = 25/63, 40%). While many felt their medical and radiation oncologists were the most suited to provide follow-up care, 55% felt comfortable having their primary care provider (PCP) conduct surveillance. When presented with a scenario where follow-up has no effect on earlier detection or survival, 70% of patients still wanted routine in-person follow-up for reassurance (63%) with the goal of earlier recurrence detection (56%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite limited evidence of effectiveness of routine in-person assessment, patients continue to place importance on regularly scheduled in-person follow-up.

A Phase I/II Study of GSK525762 Combined with Fulvestrant in Patients with Hormone Receptor-positive/HER2-negative Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Endocrine-based therapy is the initial primary treatment option for hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC). However, patients eventually experience disease progression due to resistance to endocrine therapy. Molibresib (GSK525762) is a small-molecule inhibitor of bromodomain and extraterminal (BET) family proteins (BRD2, BRD3, BRD4, and BRDT). Preclinical data suggested that the combination of molibresib with endocrine therapy might overcome endocrine resistance. This study aimed to investigate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and efficacy [objective response rate (ORR)] of molibresib combined with fulvestrant in women with HR+/HER2- mBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this phase I/II dose-escalation and dose-expansion study, patients received oral molibresib 60 or 80 mg once daily in combination with intramuscular fulvestrant. Patients enrolled had relapsed/refractory, advanced/metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer with disease progression on prior treatment with an aromatase inhibitor, with or without a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor. RESULTS: The study included 123 patients. The most common treatment-related adverse events (AE) were nausea (52%), dysgeusia (49%), and fatigue (45%). At a 60-mg dosage of molibresib, >90% of patients experienced treatment-related AE. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related AE were observed in 47% and 48% of patients treated with molibresib 60 mg and molibresib 80 mg, respectively. The ORR was 13% [95% confidence interval (CI), 8-20], not meeting the 25% threshold for proceeding to phase II. Among 82 patients with detected circulating tumor DNA and clinical outcome at study enrollment, a strong association was observed between the detection of copy-number amplification and poor progression-free survival (HR, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.73-4.83; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Molibresib in combination with fulvestrant did not demonstrate clinically meaningful activity in this study.

Shorter Durations of Anti-HER2 Therapy for Patients with Early-Stage, HER2-Positive Breast Cancer: The Physician Perspective.

Despite evidence from clinical trials showing the efficacy of shorter durations of therapy, most HER2-positive early breast cancer (EBC) patients receive a year of anti-HER2 therapy. A survey of Canadian oncologists was conducted online, with electronic data collection, and the analysis is reported descriptively. Measures collected included current practices with respect to the duration of adjuvant anti-HER2 therapy, perspectives on data regarding shorter durations of treatment, and interest in further trials on this subject. Responses were received from 42 providers across Canada. Half (50%, 21/42) reported having never recommended 6 months of anti-HER2 therapy. The primary reason physicians consider a shorter duration is in response to treatment-related toxicities (76%, 31/41). Most participants (79%, 33/42) expressed the need for more data to determine which patients can be safely and effectively treated with shorter durations. Patient factors such as young age, initial stage, hormone receptor status, and type of neoadjuvant chemotherapy were attributed to reluctance to offer shorter durations of treatment. Many respondents (83%, 35/42) expressed interest in participating in the proposed clinical trial of 6 months of anti-HER2 therapy. In contemporary Canadian practice, 12 months of anti-HER2 therapy remains the primary practice. Future trials are required to better define the role of shorter treatment durations.

HR+/HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer Treatment in the First-Line Setting: Expert Review.

The approval of CDK4/6 inhibitors has dramatically improved care for the treatment of HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer, but navigating the rapidly-expanding treatment evidence base is challenging. In this narrative review, we provide best-practice recommendations for the first-line treatment of HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer in Canada based on relevant literature, clinical guidelines, and our own clinical experience. Due to statistically significant improvements in overall survival and progression-free survival, ribociclib + aromatase inhibitor is our preferred first-line treatment for de novo advanced disease or relapse ≥12 months after completion of adjuvant endocrine therapy and ribociclib or abemaciclib + fulvestrant is our preferred first-line treatment for patients experiencing early relapse. Abemaciclib or palbociclib may be used when alternatives to ribociclib are needed, and endocrine therapy can be used alone in the case of contraindication to CDK4/6 inhibitors or limited life expectancy. Considerations for special populations-including frail and fit elderly patients, as well as those with visceral disease, brain metastases, and oligometastatic disease-are also explored. For monitoring, we recommend an approach across CDK4/6 inhibitors. For mutational testing, we recommend routinely performing ER/PR/HER2 testing to confirm the subtype of advanced disease at the time of progression and to consider ESR1 and PIK3CA testing for select patients. Where possible, engage a multidisciplinary care team to apply evidence in a patient-centric manner.

Regularly scheduled physical examinations and the detection of breast cancer recurrences.

PURPOSE: Follow-up care of early breast cancer (EBC) patients usually includes routinely scheduled physical examinations. While ASCO guidelines recommend a physical exam every three to six months for the first three years, little evidence supports this schedule. We evaluated recurrence detection of patients transferred into a single centre survivorship program that follows ASCO recommendations. METHODS: Patients with EBC referred to the Wellness Beyond Cancer Program (WBCP) who had breast cancer recurrence between February 1, 2013, and January 1, 2019 were reviewed. Descriptive analyses were used to present patient and disease characteristics stratified by type of recurrence and mode of cancer detection. RESULTS: Of 206 recurrences, 135 were distant recurrences (65.5%), 41 were ipsilateral breast recurrences (19.9%), and 30 were contralateral breast primaries (14.6%). Distant recurrences were primarily detected via patient-reported symptoms (125/135, 92.6%). 53.7% (22/41) of ipsilateral breast recurrences were detected by patients and 41.5% (17/41) by routine imaging. Contralateral breast primaries were primarily detected by imaging 83.3% (25/30) and patient-reported symptoms 16.7% (5/30). Only 2/206 (1.14%) recurrences/new primaries were detected by healthcare providers at routinely scheduled follow-up visits. CONCLUSIONS: Despite following ASCO guidelines, healthcare providers rarely detect recurrences at routinely scheduled follow-up appointments. Our data suggests that approximately 35, 000 follow-up visits were required for healthcare providers to detect these 2 recurrences. While reduced in-person visits may affect other aspects of follow-up care (e.g. toxicity management), it appears unlikely, provided patients attend regular screening tests, that less frequent in-person follow-up is associated with worse breast cancer-related outcomes.

Polysomnographic Assessment of Sleep Disturbances in Cancer Development: A Historical Multicenter Clinical Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Many cellular processes are controlled by sleep. Therefore, alterations in sleep might be expected to stress biological systems that could influence malignancy risk. RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the association between polysomnographic measures of sleep disturbances and incident cancer, and what is the validity of cluster analysis in identifying polysomnography phenotypes? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective multicenter cohort study using linked clinical and provincial health administrative data on consecutive adults free of cancer at baseline with polysomnography data collected between 1994 and 2017 in four academic hospitals in Ontario, Canada. Cancer status was derived from registry records. Polysomnography phenotypes were identified by k-means cluster analysis. A combination of validation statistics and distinguishing polysomnographic features was used to select clusters. Cox cause-specific regressions were used to assess the relationship between identified clusters and incident cancer. RESULTS: Among 29,907 individuals, 2,514 (8.4%) received a diagnosis of cancer over a median of 8.0 years (interquartile range, 4.2-13.5 years). Five clusters were identified: mild (mildly abnormal polysomnography findings), poor sleep, severe OSA or sleep fragmentation, severe desaturations, and periodic limb movements of sleep (PLMS). The associations between cancer and all clusters compared with the mild cluster were significant while controlling for clinic and year of polysomnography. When additionally controlling for age and sex, the effect remained significant only for PLMS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.26; 95% CI, 1.06-1.50) and severe desaturations (aHR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.04-1.66). Further controlling for confounders, the effect remained significant for PLMS, but was attenuated for severe desaturations. INTERPRETATION: In a large cohort, we confirmed the importance of polysomnographic phenotypes and highlighted the role that PLMS and oxygenation desaturation may play in cancer. Using this study's findings, we also developed an Excel (Microsoft) spreadsheet (polysomnography cluster classifier) that can be used to validate the identified clusters on new data or to identify which cluster a patient belongs to. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; Nos.: NCT03383354 and NCT03834792; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.

Does the number of 6-monthly adjuvant zoledronate infusions received affect treatment efficacy for early breast cancer? A sub-study of ABCSG-12.

BACKGROUND: The widespread adoption of adjuvant bisphosphonate therapy for postmenopausal early breast cancer (EBC) patients was based on results of the Early Breast Cancer Trialist Group (EBCTCG) meta-analysis. Despite multiple regimens evaluated, there was no signal of varying efficacy with type, dose/dose intensity of bisphosphonate administration. We evaluated the effect of early treatment cessation using long-term outcome data from the ABCSG-12 trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ABCSG-12 randomized 1803 hormone-receptor positive EBC patients on ovarian suppression between 1999 and 2006 to receive 4 mg zoledronic acid 6-monthly or not (and tamoxifen or anastrozole, 2:2 factorial design). In the current study, we evaluated whether the number of zoledronate infusions had an impact on breast cancer-specific outcomes. We hypothesized that amongst patients who received at least one zoledronate infusion, the number of infusions had no effect on outcomes. Time-to-event endpoints were analysed with Cox models and Kaplan Meier curves starting from a 3-year landmark. BMD analysis was restricted to patients who participated in the BMD sub-study. RESULTS: 725 patients who received at least one zoledronate infusion were included in the time-to-event analysis. There was no statistically significant difference in disease-free or overall survival in the patients who received ≤6 zoledronate infusions (n = 170) compared to those who received ≥7 zoledronate infusions (n = 555). CONCLUSIONS: Comparable to efforts to de-escalate treatment duration in metastatic bone disease, there was no evidence to indicate that a reduced number of zoledronate infusions is associated with reduced adjuvant efficacy. Further studies to define optimal regimens of adjuvant bone-targeted therapies are required.

BMS-986158, a Small Molecule Inhibitor of the Bromodomain and Extraterminal Domain Proteins, in Patients with Selected Advanced Solid Tumors: Results from a Phase 1/2a Trial.

This phase 1/2a, open-label study (NCT02419417) evaluated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics of BMS-986158, a selective bromodomain and extraterminal domain (BET) inhibitor. Dose escalation was performed with 3 BMS-986158 dosing schedules: A (5 days on, 2 days off; range, 0.75-4.5 mg), B (14 days on, 7 days off; 2.0-3.0 mg), and C (7 days on, 14 days off; 2.0-4.5 mg). Eighty-three patients were enrolled and received ≥1 BMS-986158 dose. Diarrhea (43%) and thrombocytopenia (39%) were the most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). A lower incidence of TRAEs was found with schedules A (72%) and C (72%) vs. B (100%). Stable disease was achieved in 12 (26.1%), 3 (37.5%), and 9 (31.0%) patients on schedules A, B, and C, respectively. Two patients on schedule A with a 4.5-mg starting dose (ovarian cancer, n = 1; nuclear protein in testis [NUT] carcinoma, n = 1) experienced a partial response. BMS-986158 demonstrated rapid-to-moderate absorption (median time to maximum observed plasma concentration, 1-4 h). As expected with an epigenetic modifier, expression changes in select BET-regulated genes occurred with BMS-986158 treatment. Schedule A dosing (5 days on, 2 days off) yielded tolerable safety, preliminary antitumor activity, and a dose-proportional PK profile.

Results of the phase I CCTG IND.231 trial of CX-5461 in patients with advanced solid tumors enriched for DNA-repair deficiencies.

CX-5461 is a G-quadruplex stabilizer that exhibits synthetic lethality in homologous recombination-deficient models. In this multicentre phase I trial in patients with solid tumors, 40 patients are treated across 10 dose levels (50-650 mg/m2) to determine the recommended phase II dose (primary outcome), and evaluate safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (secondary outcomes). Defective homologous recombination is explored as a predictive biomarker of response. CX-5461 is generally well tolerated, with a recommended phase II dose of 475 mg/m2 days 1, 8 and 15 every 4 weeks, and dose limiting phototoxicity. Responses are observed in 14% of patients, primarily in patients with defective homologous recombination. Reversion mutations in PALB2 and BRCA2 are detected on progression following initial response in germline carriers, confirming the underlying synthetic lethal mechanism. In vitro characterization of UV sensitization shows this toxicity is related to the CX-5461 chemotype, independent of G-quadruplex synthetic lethality. These results establish clinical proof-of-concept for this G-quadruplex stabilizer. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02719977.

Time to Update Evidence-Based Guideline Recommendations About Concurrent Tamoxifen and Antidepressant Use? A Systematic Review.

Concerns around pharmacological interaction between tamoxifen and antidepressants have resulted in evidence-base guidelines that recommend avoidance or caution with concurrent use. It remains unclear however whether this interaction is clinically important. A systematic review of studies comparing endocrine therapy (including tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors) alone or concurrent with antidepressants in breast cancer patients was performed. The literature search sought studies within MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Collaboration Library published from database inception until December 1, 2020. Outcomes of interest included recurrence, breast cancer-specific survival, overall mortality, quality of life, and treatment compliance. Studies were assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized controlled trials and the Newcastle Ottawa tool for case-control and cohort studies. From 695 citations, we included 15 studies (2 randomized controlled trials [255 patients], 10 retrospective cohort studies [75,678 patients], and 3 case-control studies [18,836 patients]). While between-study clinical and methodologic differences (including analysis of confounding variables) precluded formal meta-analysis, findings from included studies did not find consistent evidence that concurrent use of antidepressants (including paroxetine) with tamoxifen therapy has negative impacts on the outcomes of interest. In this systematic review, despite data from nearly 100,000 patients, concurrent use of tamoxifen and antidepressants showed no consistent negative effect on clinical outcomes. Given the recognized harm to patients of changing either endocrine therapy or antidepressants to avoid concurrent use, current evidence-based guidelines should be updated accordingly. More rigorously designed pharmacoepidemiologic studies are needed.

First-in-Class Anti-immunoglobulin-like Transcript 4 Myeloid-Specific Antibody MK-4830 Abrogates a PD-1 Resistance Mechanism in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: In this first-in-human study (NCT03564691) in advanced solid tumors, we investigated a novel first-in-class human IgG4 monoclonal antibody targeting the immunoglobulin-like transcript 4 (ILT4) receptor, MK-4830, as monotherapy and in combination with pembrolizumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with histologically/cytologically confirmed advanced solid tumors, measurable disease by RECIST v1.1, and evaluable baseline tumor sample received escalating doses of intravenous MK-4830 every 3 weeks as monotherapy (parts A and B) and in combination with pembrolizumab (part C). Safety and tolerability were the primary objectives. Pharmacokinetics, objective response rate per RECIST v1.1, and molecular biomarkers were also evaluated. RESULTS: Of 84 patients, 50 received monotherapy and 34 received combination therapy. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed; maximum tolerated dose was not reached. MK-4830 showed dose-related target engagement. Eleven of 34 patients in the dose-escalation phase who received combination therapy achieved objective responses; 5 previously had progressive disease on anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapies. Exploratory evaluation of the association between response and pretreatment gene expression related to interferon-gamma signaling in tumors suggested higher sensitivity to T-cell inflammation with combination therapy than historically expected with pembrolizumab monotherapy, with greater response at more moderate levels of inflammation. CONCLUSIONS: This first-in-class MK-4830 antibody dosed as monotherapy and in combination with pembrolizumab was well tolerated with no unexpected toxicities, and demonstrated dose-related evidence of target engagement and antitumor activity. Inflammation intrinsic to the ILT4 mechanism may be facilitated by alleviating the myeloid-suppressive components of the tumor microenvironment, supporting the target of ILT4 as a potential novel immunotherapy in combination with an anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agent.

Polysomnographic Markers of Obstructive Sleep Apnea Severity and Cancer-related Mortality: A Large Retrospective Multicenter Clinical Cohort Study.

Rationale: The evidence for an association between cancer survival and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) remains underexplored. Objectives: To evaluate an association between markers of OSA severity (respiratory disturbances, hypoxemia, and sleep fragmentation) and cancer-related mortality in individuals with previously diagnosed cancer. Methods: We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study using linked clinical and provincial health administrative data on consecutive adults who underwent a diagnostic sleep study between 1994 and 2017 in four Canadian academic hospitals and were previously diagnosed with cancer through the Ontario Cancer Registry. Multivariable cause-specific Cox regressions were used to address the research objective. Results: We included 2,222 subjects. Over a median follow-up time of 5.6 years (interquartile range [IQR], 2.7-9.1 years), 261/2,222 (11.7%) individuals with prevalent cancer died from cancer-related causes, which accounted for 44.2% (261/590) of all-cause death. Controlling for age, sex, alcohol use disorder, prior heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, diabetes, treatment for OSA, clinic site, year of the sleep study, and time since the cancer diagnosis, measures of hypoxemia and sleep fragmentation, but not apnea-hypopnea index, were significantly associated with the cancer-specific mortality: percentage of time spent with arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2) < 90% (hazard ratio [HR] per 5% increase, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.09); mean SaO2 (HR per 3% increase, 0.79; 0.68-0.92); and percentage of stage 1 sleep (HR per 16% increase, 1.27; 1.07-1.51). Conclusions: In a large clinical cohort of adults with suspected OSA and previously diagnosed cancer, measures of nocturnal hypoxemia and sleep fragmentation as markers of OSA severity were significantly associated with cancer-related mortality, suggesting the need for more targeted risk awareness.

Case report: a fatal case of Aspergillus felis infection in an immunocompetent host.

We report a fatal case of Aspergillus felis invasive rhinosinusitis with secondary cerebral abscesses in an immunocompetent host despite aggressive surgical debridement and combination antifungals. Whilst this organism is known to cause fatalities in cats, only a few cases in humans have been documented, all of which had significant immunosuppression. This is the first human death due to A. felis described in an immunocompetent host.

Oral magnesium supplements for cancer treatment-induced hypomagnesemia: Results from a pilot randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Optimal management of cancer treatment-induced hypomagnesemia (hMg) is not known. We assessed the feasibility of using a novel pragmatic clinical trials model to compare two commonly used oral Mg replacement strategies. METHODS: Patients with grade 1 to 3 hMg while receiving either platinum-based chemotherapy or epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRI) were randomized to oral magnesium oxide (MgOx) or oral magnesium citrate (MgCit). The trial methodology utilized the integrated consent model. Feasibility would be successful if; accrual rate was ≥5 patients a month and if measures of patient and physician engagement, were > 50%. Secondary endpoints included; comparison of Mg levels, cardiac arrhythmias, and rates of treatment delay/hospitalizations. RESULTS: From July 2016 to December 2017, an average of 1 patient a month was accrued. All 15 eligible and approached patients consented to participate in the study (100% engagement) and 7/15 were randomized to MgOx and 8/15 to MgCit. The percentage of physicians who approached patients for the study was 4 of 6 (66.6% engagement). The mean slope of change in Mg (mmol/L/day) was 0.0022 (95% CI: -0.0001 to 0.0044) for MgOx and 0.0006 (95% CI, -0.0012 to 0.0024) for MgCit (P = .2123). Three patients (20%) required IV magnesium while on the study (2 MgCit and 1 MgOx). Grade 1 diarrhea occurred in 3 patients in the MgCit arm. CONCLUSION: Despite oral magnesium tolerability and meeting most of its feasibility endpoints, this study did not meet its target accrual rate. Alternative designs would be necessary for a definitive efficacy study.