Treatment of the blood cancer polycythemia vera with ruxolitinib in the MAJIC-PV study: a plain language summary.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of an article describing the main results of the MAJIC-PV study. This study looked at using the cancer drug ruxolitinib to treat a type of blood cancer called polycythemia vera. People with polycythemia vera make too many red blood cells in their body. This can make their blood thicker and can increase the chances of blood clots forming in their blood vessels.Researchers wanted to find out how well ruxolitinib worked compared with the best available therapy as a treatment for people with polycythemia vera who were at risk of developing blood clots that could lead to a heart attack or stroke. Specifically, the study looked at people who had already taken the chemotherapy hydroxycarbamide (also known as hydroxyurea) for their polycythemia vera, but it either didn't work for them or gave them side effects that they could not tolerate. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: In the study, researchers divided 180 adults with polycythemia vera who were at high risk of developing blood clots that could lead to a stroke into two groups: 93 people who took ruxolitinib twice a day, and 87 people who took the best available therapy. 43% of people who took ruxolitinib and 26% of people who had the best available therapy had normal blood counts and spleen size within 1 year of treatment. 84% of people who took ruxolitinib and 75% of people who had the best available therapy lived for at least 3 years without their polycythemia vera becoming a more advanced type of blood cancer. The most common side effects were disorders of the digestive system (stomach and gut), disorders of the blood vessels, and infections. This is similar to the side effects that doctors know about for ruxolitinib. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: Compared with people who had the best available therapy for their polycythemia vera, people who took ruxolitinib were more likely to have normal blood counts and spleen size within 1 year of treatment, and were more likely to live longer without their polycythemia vera becoming a more advanced type of blood cancer.

Plain language summary: 5-year results from the CROWN study of lorlatinib vs crizotinib in non-small-cell lung cancer.

WHAT IS THIS STUDY ABOUT?: This is a summary of the results of an ongoing study called CROWN. In the CROWN study, researchers looked at the effects of two medicines called lorlatinib (Lorbrena) and crizotinib (Xalkori) for people with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who had not been treated yet. Everyone in the study had changes in a gene called anaplastic lymphoma kinase, or ALK, in their cancer cells. The changes in the ALK gene can make cancer grow. This analysis looked at how well lorlatinib and crizotinib worked and their side effects in people with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC after 5 years. WHAT DID THIS STUDY FIND?: After observing people for an average of 5 years, researchers found that more people who took lorlatinib were still alive without their cancer getting worse than the people who took crizotinib. At 5 years, the probability of being alive without their cancer getting worse was 60% in people who took lorlatinib compared with 8% in people who took crizotinib. Fewer people who took lorlatinib had their cancer spread within or to the brain than the people who took crizotinib. In more than half of the people who took lorlatinib, tumors that had spread to the brain did not get worse, and no new tumors spread to the brain after 5 years. In contrast, in about half of the people who took crizotinib, tumors that had spread to the brain got worse or new tumors spread to the brain after 16.4 months. More people who took lorlatinib (115 out of 149, or 77%) had severe or life-threatening side effects than people who took crizotinib (81 out of 142, or 57%). These side effects were like the ones reported in the earlier 3-year analysis. WHAT DO THE FINDINGS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: The 5-year results from the CROWN study showed that more people who took lorlatinib continued to benefit from their treatment than those who took crizotinib. The 5-year benefit of lorlatinib in people with ALK-positive NSCLC has never been seen before.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03052608 (Phase 3 CROWN study) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Plain language summary of isatuximab plus carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone for the treatment of people with high-risk newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

What is this summary about? This is a summary of a publication about the GMMG-CONCEPT study that was published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology in September 2023. The study tested if a combination of cancer drugs (isatuximab plus carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone, or Isa-KRd for short) was a safe treatment for people with high­risk newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. The GMMG-CONCEPT study included participants who had not been treated before and were eligible to receive a procedure called autologous stem cell transplant, as well as participants who were not eligible to receive transplants.How was the study in this summary conducted? This report looked at a total of 125 participants; 99 were transplant-eligible and 26 were transplant-non-eligible. All participants were treated with Isa-KRd. The researchers measured the proportion of people who had 'no detectable levels' of myeloma cells in their body left while on treatment (called minimal residual disease negativity, or MRD negativity for short). The researchers measured the progression-free survival, or the average length of time it took between the participants joining the study until their cancer got worse or they died. The researchers also measured overall survival, which is the total amount of time people lived during the study, even if their cancer got worse. The researchers also monitored for side effects of Isa-KRd in all participants that received at least one treatment.What were the results of the study? At the end of the consolidation therapy (intensified therapy that happens after initial therapy), MRD negativity was observed in the majority of transplant-eligible and transplant non-eligible patients. For many patients, this effect lasted 6 or more months. After more than 3 years in transplant eligible participants and 2 years and 9 months for transplant non-eligible participants, most participants were alive and their disease did not get worse. In both groups, the most common side effects of Isa-KRd treatment were low blood cell counts and infections. Overall, most of the side effects did not last long or were easily treated.What were the main conclusions reported by the researchers? In the GMMG-CONCEPT study, Isa-KRd treatment reduced the number of myeloma cells to no detectable levels in more than two thirds of the participants with high-risk newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03104842 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

A plain language summary about a cell cycle-based, new surveillance mechanism against cancer.

What is this summary about? This is a plain language summary about a new mechanism on how our body selectively looks for any unusual cells that might turn into cancer. It was presented in a paper published in a scientific journal. The paper reviewed the relevant existing literature but importantly, defined a new anti-cancer surveillance system that is different from what was previously known. Our immune system has specialised cells that can detect certain proteins on the surface of cancer cells and induce an immune response to eliminate them before they can form tumours. In this way, it acts as our body's "anti-cancer immune surveillance" system. The new mechanism is a cell cycle-based surveillance against cancer. This mechanism supports our bodies' natural defence by selectively checking for any abnormal or tumour cells and directly altering their growth cycle, or cell cycle, and causing them to lose the ability to form tumors before they can turn into a cancer. At the same time, the normal cells are largely not impacted.What did the research find out? The author of the paper presented a theory with supporting evidence that a cell cycle-based anti-cancer surveillance system exists in our body. When a normally-functioning cell is about to become a tumor cell due to viral infection, genetic mutations or other changes, a tumor-suppressing protein called interferon-beta (IFN-ß) can directly work on the cell to slow its growth at a specific phase of its growth cycle, the S (synthesis) phase, a phase of the cell cycle when DNA is replicating. Accompanied by the slow S phase progression, the cell ages and declines (senescence) and is no longer capable of forming a tumor. This process takes place in most cases when normally-functioning cells are transforming into cancer cells. However, IFN-ß can also stop the growth of certain cancer cell types in the G1 phase (the phase before the S phase) so the cells are no longer cancerous at this stage. Whether the IFN-ß effect is growth arrest in G1 or slowing growth at the S phase is dependent on whether or not the cell has permanently lost the function of another tumor-suppressing protein called retinoblastoma protein-1 (RB1). If the cell has lost RB1 permanently or irreversibly, as in most cases during cancer formation, IFN-ß induces signals to activate proteins related to RB1 (such as a cell cycle regulating protein called p107) to slow its growth at S phase and to trigger cell aging, so it is no longer has the ability to form a cancer. In this process, a barrier or checkpoint within the S phase consisting of activated proteins, such as p107, is in place to slow the S phase progression. If RB1 function can be restored as observed in certain lymphoma or leukaemia cells, IFN-ß signals can activate RB1 directly to stop the cell growth in the G1 phase. The IFN-ß action has little effect on normal cells since they have functional RB1. In normal cells, RB1 function is properly present and it tightly regulates the cell cycle so they are not significantly impacted by the IFN-ß-induced cell cycle effect. Therefore, two proteins IFN-ß and RB1 together with the relevant proteins such as p107, form a network or system for a new anticancer surveillance mechanism to keep watch selectively for and remove cancer cells in our body, i.e., the cell cycle-based anticancer surveillance system. The publication further illustrates the molecular basis underlying the cell cycle change and senescence. The research has implications for future cancer treatment.

Combined bictegravir, emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide for treating people with HIV: a plain language summary of the BICSTaR study up to 1 year.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of an article about an ongoing study called the BICSTaR study.The BICSTaR study includes people with HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) who are taking a medicine called bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (shortened to B/F/TAF). B/F/TAF is a single tablet that contains 3 different drugs for the treatment of HIV. The drugs work together to reduce the levels of HIV so that the virus can no longer be detected by a blood test.People taking part in the study are adults with HIV living in Europe, Canada, Israel, Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan. People take 1 tablet of B/F/TAF once a day. They are either taking B/F/TAF as their first treatment for HIV, or they have switched to B/F/TAF from another HIV treatment.Researchers looked at how well B/F/TAF worked and how safe it was in people who took B/F/TAF for a year. WHAT ARE THE KEY TAKEAWAYS?: Researchers found that B/F/TAF worked well in almost all people in the study by reducing levels of HIV in the blood. The virus could not be found in the blood of more than 9 out of 10 (94%) people who were taking B/F/TAF as their first HIV medicine and more than 9 out of 10 people (97%) who had taken another HIV medicine before starting B/F/TAF. This is known as having an 'undetectable viral load' and is a major goal for HIV treatment success. Researchers did not find any evidence of HIV developing resistance to B/F/TAF, which might stop B/F/TAF from working properly.Around 1 out of 10 people (13%) had side effects (any unwanted sign or symptom that people have when taking a medicine that researchers think might be caused by the medicine) that might have been caused by B/F/TAF. Most of these side effects were not classified as serious. Less than 1 out of 100 (0.1%) people had serious side effects that might have been caused by B/F/TAF. Only 6 out of 100 people stopped taking B/F/TAF due to side effects caused by B/F/TAF. As a result, more than 9 out of 10 people (95%) took B/F/TAF for at least 1 year. WHAT WERE THE MAIN CONCLUSIONS REPORTED BY THE RESEARCHERS?: B/F/TAF worked well in people with HIV in this study. Most people (around 9 out of 10) did not have any side effects.

Two 5-year studies of bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide in people with HIV: a plain-language summary.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a plain-language summary of an article that reported on two studies of the medication bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (shortened to B/F/TAF). B/F/TAF is a single pill containing three different drugs used to treat human immunodeficiency virus (known as HIV). The drugs work together to lower the levels of HIV (called viral load) in the body and make the virus undetectable in the blood. Researchers measured whether B/F/TAF was safe and effective when taken over 5 years in over 400 people in 10 countries who had never taken HIV medication before. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: After 5 years, almost all (99%) of the people who took B/F/TAF had an undetectable viral load. This does not mean that they were cured, but that the levels of HIV were so low that the tests used by researchers could not detect the virus in the blood. CD4 is a type of immune system cell. HIV causes CD4 cell numbers to decrease. On average, the number of CD4 cells increased by more than 300 cells per microliter (cells/µL) of blood over 5 years. This means that the immune system was improving. HIV is able to change its genes to escape the effects of the drugs. This is known as HIV resistance to treatment. Nine people had a viral load high enough to suggest that the drugs might not be working, but no resistance to B/F/TAF was seen. Some people (less than one in three) experienced medical problems thought to be linked to B/F/TAF treatment, known as side effects. The most common side effects were headache, diarrhea, nausea, tiredness (fatigue), dizziness, and difficulty falling or staying asleep (insomnia). On average, people's body weight increased by 3 kg in the first year of taking B/F/TAF. This might be because their general health improved after starting HIV treatment. Weight gained after that time was similar to the level of weight gain expected in the general population. Very few people (less than 1 in 100) stopped taking B/F/TAF because of side effects thought to have been caused by B/F/TAF. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: B/F/TAF was effective at treating HIV in people who had never taken HIV medication before. Most (70%) people were still taking B/F/TAF after 5 years.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02607930 (Study 1489); NCT02607956 (Study 1490) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

A plain language summary of the PERSEUS study of daratumumab plus bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone for treating newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

What is this summary about? This summary describes the first analysis of the PERSEUS study, which looked at adults with multiple myeloma that had never been treated before, also called newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Multiple myeloma is a type of cancer in the blood, specifically in plasma cells within the soft, spongy tissue in the center of most bones, called the bone marrow. Researchers wanted to see if adding daratumumab (D) to a standard treatment of three other medicines called VRd, which stands for bortezomib (V), lenalidomide (R), and dexamethasone (d), could stop the multiple myeloma from getting worse and help participants live longer without multiple myeloma.Half of the participants were assigned to the treatment plan with daratumumab; they received D-VRd during initial treatment phases (induction and consolidation), followed by daratumumab as well as lenalidomide (D-R) in the maintenance phase. The other half of participants received treatment without daratumumab; they received VRd induction and consolidation followed by lenalidomide alone (R) maintenance. In addition, all participants were able to receive an autologous stem cell transplant, a procedure used to further help reduce multiple myeloma.What were the results? At the time of this analysis of PERSEUS, about 4 years after participants started the study, participants who received D-VRd treatment followed by D-R maintenance had a better response to treatment (as measured by specific markers of multiple myeloma) and were more likely to be alive and free from their multiple myeloma getting worse in comparison to participants who received VRd followed by R maintenance. Side effects (unwanted or undesirable effects of treatment) in both treatment groups were in line with the known side effects of daratumumab and VRd.What do the results mean? The results of the PERSEUS study showed that including daratumumab in D-VRd induction/consolidation and D-R maintenance was better for treating multiple myeloma than the current standard VRd treatment followed by R maintenance alone in adults with a new diagnosis of multiple myeloma who were also able to receive an autologous stem cell transplant. Of importance, there were no unexpected side effects in either group.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02874742 (GRIFFIN) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Effects of benralizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA): A plain language summary of the ANANKE study.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary outlines the findings from the ANANKE study on the treatment of patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) with benralizumab. SEA is an inflammatory disease of the lungs caused by eosinophils. Patients with SEA may experience asthma attacks (exacerbations) and decreased ability to breathe (lung function) despite taking medications. Benralizumab (Fasenra®) is a biologic therapy (a medicine produced using living cells) approved for the treatment of SEA.The ANANKE study was conducted in Italy and evaluated the characteristics of patients with SEA who received benralizumab as prescribed by their doctors. It also described the effects of benralizumab on participants in terms of frequency of exacerbations, lung function and overall control of asthma, and their need to take oral corticosteroids (OCS) to control symptoms. The effects of benralizumab have been observed in participants treated for: 1) an average of 10.3 months, and 2) up to 96 weeks (approximately 2 years). The effects were also compared between different groups: 1) participants with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and those without, and 2) participants who received other biologics before benralizumab (bio-experienced) and those who started with benralizumab as their first biologic (naïve). CRSwNP is an inflammatory condition that makes breathing even more difficult. WHAT WERE THE KEY FINDINGS?: Before receiving benralizumab, participants showed a high blood eosinophil count (the number of eosinophils in the bloodstream), frequent exacerbations, insufficient lung function, and poor disease control (symptom management). After 96 weeks, benralizumab almost eliminated exacerbations, improved lung function, reduced the use of OCS, and increased the control of SEA symptoms while lowering blood eosinophil count. Comparable effects were observed between participants with and without CRSwNP and between naïve and bio-experienced participants. WHAT WERE THE MAIN CONCLUSIONS REPORTED BY THE RESEARCHERS?: The ANANKE study showed that participants had frequent exacerbations and were characterized by eosinophilic inflammation before starting benralizumab. Overall, benralizumab improved the control of the disease for up to 2 years and induced similar beneficial effects regardless of the presence of CRSwNP and the use of previous biologics. These findings highlight the long-lasting and broad action of benralizumab.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04272463 (ANANKE) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Plain language summary of the CARTITUDE-4 study of ciltacabtagene autoleucel for the treatment of people with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of a phase 3 clinical trial called CARTITUDE-4. This trial compared the anti-cancer therapy ciltacabtagene autoleucel (or cilta-cel) with standard therapies in people who have multiple myeloma, a cancer that affects specific kinds of blood cells called plasma cells. The people in the study had been treated with 1 to 3 previous treatments for multiple myeloma, including a common anti-myeloma treatment called lenalidomide, but their multiple myeloma did not get better. HOW WAS THE STUDY IN THIS SUMMARY CONDUCTED?: About half of the 419 participants in this study received cilta-cel, while the other half received standard therapies, or therapies that are commonly used to treat multiple myeloma. Participants who received cilta-cel had a type of immune cell called T cells collected from their blood and genetically modified to recognize a specific protein found on myeloma cells. These modified T cells, which comprise cilta-cel, were then infused back into the bloodstream. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY?: After approximately 1 year in the study, more participants were alive without their cancer getting worse in the cilta-cel group (76%) than in the standard therapies group (49%). The most common side effects in both groups were infections and low blood cell counts. Cytokine release syndrome (a potentially serious side effect caused by overactivation of the immune system) was common but mostly mild. Neurotoxicities (including immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome, which can cause symptoms such as headaches, changes in consciousness, and difficulty with memory, attention, speaking, or understanding others) were less common and were reported in 20.5% of participants treated with cilta-cel. WHAT WERE THE MAIN CONCLUSIONS REPORTED BY THE RESEARCHERS?: In CARTITUDE-4, more participants treated with cilta-cel showed improvements and were alive with control of their disease 12 months after receiving cilta-cel compared with participants who received standard therapies.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04181827 (CARTITUDE-4) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Plain language summary of zanubrutinib or ibrutinib in chronic lymphocytic leukemia that is resistant to treatment or has come back after treatment.

What is this summary about? This is a plain language summary of a research study called ALPINE. The study involved people who had been diagnosed with, and previously treated at least once for, relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL).Lymphocytes help to find and fight off viruses and infections in the body, but when someone has CLL or SLL, the body creates abnormal lymphocytes, leaving the patient with a weakened immune system and susceptible to illness. In CLL, these lymphocytes are in the bone marrow and bloodstream, whereas for SLL, they are mostly found in the lymph nodes, such as those in the neck.How was the research done? The ALPINE study was designed to directly compare the cancer-fighting effects and side effects of zanubrutinib and ibrutinib as treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory CLL/SLL.What were the results? After 30 months, zanubrutinib was more effective than ibrutinib at reducing and keeping the cancer from coming back. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03734016 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Real-world experience with clinical management of talquetamab in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: a qualitative study of US healthcare providers.

OBJECTIVE: Talquetamab is the first-in-class GPRC5DxCD3 bispecific antibody for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Given limited real-world data, this study was conducted with US healthcare providers (HCPs) to understand real-world talquetamab dosing and symptom management. METHODS: In February/March 2024, individual in-depth interviews (IDIs; n = 10) were conducted with HCPs administering talquetamab in real-world settings. A subsequent expert panel (n = 6) further discussed current practices. RESULTS: The IDIs reported a variety of settings for step-up dosing (SUD), including inpatient (n = 5), outpatient (n = 3), and hybrid models (n = 2), with a trend toward shorter SUD length to reduce healthcare resource utilization. Most HCPs used a biweekly (Q2W) schedule in SUD (n = 7) and treatment phases (n = 8). Six participants explored reducing dose frequency to every 4 weeks (Q4W) in patients following positive disease response to treatment, considering patient convenience and relieving GPRC5D-related symptoms. Panelists recommended symptom management and prophylactic strategies, such as dexamethasone and nystatin mouthwash or zinc and vitamin B complex for oral symptoms, and topical steroids and cosmetic products for skin and nail symptoms. CONCLUSION: This study outlines current real-world practices for talquetamab. Findings indicate variation in the SUD care setting. The 0.8 mg/kg Q2W dosing schedule was most common, although switching to Q4W is a real-world symptom management strategy for some patients with responses to therapy. GPRC5D-related symptom management approaches are evolving; prophylactic use of dexamethasone and nystatin mouthwash or zinc and vitamin B complex may be effective strategies to alleviate oral symptoms. Further real-world evidence is needed to inform optimal dosing schedules while mitigating symptom impact.

Talquetamab is a new treatment that was approved in the United States in 2023 for a type of blood cancer called multiple myeloma. This drug is administered at one of two doses, each of which includes a defined step-up dosing schedule where patients first receive smaller amounts of the drug to help avoid serious side effects. Because talquetamab is new and associated with treatment-related symptoms not normally seen with other multiple myeloma treatments, doctors and patients need more guidance on drug administration and symptom management. In this study, we describe findings from interviews and an expert panel discussion with healthcare professionals who have experience using talquetamab. This study found that most healthcare professionals administered step-up dosing with patients staying overnight in the hospital, while other providers administered these doses during outpatient visits. Most providers administered talquetamab once every 2 weeks after utilizing the associated step-up dosing schedule. Additionally, healthcare providers described transitioning some patients, who had responded positively to treatment, to a less frequent dosing schedule of once per month to help reduce the effect of treatment-related symptoms. Participants in the expert panel described approaches for managing or preventing these symptoms, such as dexamethasone and nystatin mouthwashes or zinc and vitamin B complex for oral symptoms, and topical steroids and cosmetic products for skin and nail symptoms. In summary, this study provides valuable real-world information from healthcare providers who have experience treating patients with multiple myeloma with talquetamab.

Inhaled molgramostim therapy for the treatment of autoimmune pulmonary alveolar proteinosis (aPAP): a plain language summary of the IMPALA trial.

What is this summary about? This is a plain language summary of a late-stage clinical trial called IMPALA, originally reported in The New England Journal of Medicine. The IMPALA trial studied a drug called molgramostim nebulizer solution (molgramostim) to see how well it worked and how safe it was in patients with autoimmune pulmonary alveolar proteinosis (aPAP). Normally, tiny air sacs (alveoli) in the lungs are covered by a thin layer of an oily substance called surfactant that helps to keep them open. In aPAP, surfactant builds up and clogs alveoli making it difficult to breathe. Inhaled molgramostim helps to reduce the amount of surfactant clogging the alveoli.What were the results of the trial? After 24 weeks of treatment, patients who received molgramostim every day had better oxygen transfer into blood than patients who received an inactive substance (placebo). Patients' sense of well-being and quality of life was improved more with daily molgramostim than placebo. The amount of surfactant in the lungs measured using scans and the number of whole-lung lavages (lung washes) patients required were lower with daily molgramostim than placebo. The number of medical problems (adverse events) was similar in patients who received molgramostim and placebo except for chest pain, which was more common with molgramostim.What do the results of the trial mean? The IMPALA trial demonstrated that molgramostim is a promising treatment option for people with aPAP.

Prostate-specific antigen and health-related quality of life in individuals with advanced prostate cancer treated with apalutamide: a plain language summary of the SPARTAN and TITAN studies.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of a paper that describes the results of the SPARTAN and TITAN studies, which looked at whether a treatment called apalutamide can help treat individuals with advanced prostate cancer.The SPARTAN study included 1207 participants with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (or nmCRPC). The TITAN study included 1052 participants with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (or mCSPC). Treatment with apalutamide was compared with treatment with placebo. In both studies, all participants were also given androgen deprivation therapy (or ADT), which has been used for many years for the treatment of prostate cancer.The results showed that treatment with apalutamide plus ADT increased participants' survival time while their health-related quality of life stayed the same, compared with placebo plus ADT. Also, apalutamide plus ADT increased the length of time that the cancer did not spread to other parts of the body (metastasize) or did not continue to grow. In both studies, treatment with apalutamide plus ADT was associated with a deep decline in blood prostate-specific antigen (or PSA) levels (called a deep PSA decline). This additional analysis of the SPARTAN and TITAN studies was performed to understand whether the deep PSA decline in participants who received apalutamide plus ADT was linked to their overall health-related quality of life. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS?: In participants who received apalutamide plus ADT, those who achieved a deep PSA decline after the start of treatment had a greater chance that their health-related quality of life would remain stable. When participants achieved a deep PSA decline at 3 months after the start of treatment, the benefit to their health-related quality of life, including physical wellbeing, was even greater. WHAT DO THESE RESULTS MEAN FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH ADVANCED PROSTATE CANCER?: For individuals with advanced prostate cancer, it is important to monitor both PSA decline and any impacts on health-related quality of life. These results will help doctors and other healthcare professionals have a better understanding of patients' cancer experience and the impact of their treatment.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01946204 (SPARTAN) and, NCT02489318 (TITAN) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Improvements in daytime sleepiness and disrupted nighttime sleep with once-nightly sodium oxybate in people with narcolepsy type 1 and type 2: a plain language summary.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a plain language summary of a published article in the journal Sleep. Narcolepsy is a sleep condition that has 2 different subtypes: narcolepsy type 1 and narcolepsy type 2. These are called NT1 and NT2 for short. Sodium oxybate (SXB) is approved to treat excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) and cataplexy. People with NT1 and NT2 both have EDS, but cataplexy is only present in people with NT1. Limited information is available about how SXB works in people with NT2. This is because previous trials have included only people with NT1 or people with unspecified narcolepsy. For more than 20 years, the only available formulation of this medicine had to be given twice during the night. Many people with narcolepsy find that chronically waking up in the middle of the night for a second dose of SXB is disruptive to themselves or others in their household. People have also reported sleeping through alarm clocks, missing their second dose, and feeling worse the next day. Some people have accidentally taken the second dose too early, putting them at risk for serious adverse effects. These adverse effects may include slow breathing, low blood pressure, or sedation. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a medicine called LUMRYZ™ (sodium oxybate) for extended-release oral suspension in May 2023. LUMRYZ is a once-nightly formulation of SXB (ON-SXB for short) and is taken as a single dose before bedtime. This medicine treats EDS and muscle weakness (also known as cataplexy) in people with narcolepsy. A clinical trial called REST-ON studied ON-SXB to find out if it was better at treating narcolepsy symptoms than a medicine with no active ingredients (placebo). This summary describes a study that tested whether ON-SXB was better than placebo at treating narcolepsy symptoms in people with NT1 or NT2. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: This study showed that compared to people who took placebo, people who took ON-SXB were able to stay awake longer during the day, felt less sleepy during the daytime, had less cataplexy, and had more improvements in their symptoms overall than people who took placebo. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: ON-SXB has been proven effective for people with NT1 or NT2. Unlike prior formulations of SXB, ON-SXB is taken once at bedtime, without requiring waking up in the middle of the night for a second dose.

Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy for HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer: a plain language summary of the monarchE study.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This article summarizes the most recent results of the monarchE study. This study was completed in participants with a type of breast cancer called HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer. In this study, abemaciclib, a non-chemotherapy treatment, was administered with standard of care endocrine therapy after curative surgery. Most participants had received prior chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. The study investigated if abemaciclib helped participants live longer without their cancer returning compared with participants who only received standard of care endocrine therapy. The study participants were assigned to 1 of 2 treatment groups. Participants in Group A were assigned to receive standard of care endocrine therapy with abemaciclib for 2 years, followed by endocrine therapy for a total of at least 5 years. Participants in Group B were assigned to receive standard of care endocrine therapy only for at least 5 years. The effect of treatment was compared between these 2 groups. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Overall, the results showed that the cancer was 34% less likely to come back after surgery in the participants in Group A (abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy) compared with those in Group B (endocrine therapy only). At 4 years since the start of the study treatment, more participants who received the combination of abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy remained free of cancer compared with participants who received endocrine therapy alone (86% versus 79%). Participants who received abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy had more side effects than those who received endocrine therapy alone, but most of these effects were mild to moderate and reversible upon the end of therapy. The most common side effects in the abemaciclib group were diarrhea, infections, low number of white blood cells, and tiredness. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: This study found that administering abemaciclib in combination with standard endocrine therapy after curative breast surgery helped lower the risk of cancer returning in people with HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer. Abemaciclib is a new treatment option for people with this diagnosis. People with high-risk early breast cancer should always talk to their doctors and nurses before making any decisions about their treatment.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03155997 (monarchE study).

People with multiple sclerosis help design a tool to measure physical functioning and how it affects their daily lives: a plain language summary.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary describes how researchers worked with people with multiple sclerosis (MS), neurologists and measurement experts to create an easy-to-use questionnaire to measure the physical function of people with MS. This questionnaire covers topics that are relevant and important to people with MS and their doctors.The ability to do what you want to do, when you want to do it, is one of the most important concerns for people with MS. This questionnaire could help doctors to record and manage how much MS affects people's lives.MS can bring a range of challenging symptoms such as 'brain fog', tiredness, and problems with movement and balance. Many of these symptoms can make day-to-day activities, like working, very difficult for people with MS. Doctors currently use examinations like the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and the MS Functional Composite (MSFC), but these do not fully consider what is important to people living with MS. A questionnaire that specifically measures physical functioning of people with MS could help doctors and people with MS to better understand, communicate and manage the physical effects of MS. In this study, people with MS were asked to help create a questionnaire about physical function that reflects topics that are important to them. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: The PROMIS®nq physical function - Multiple Sclerosis 15a (the PROMIS® PF MS questionnaire) was successfully created with the help of people with MS. People with MS thought that the PROMIS® PF MS questionnaire covered issues important to their physical function. Scores were in line with results of other physical symptom measurement scales like the EDSS. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: The PROMIS® PF MS questionnaire could be used to meaningfully record physical function among people with MS.

Zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy for locally advanced unresectable or metastatic stomach or gastroesophageal junction cancers: a plain language summary.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of two articles. The first article is about a clinical trial called SPOTLIGHT and it was published in the medical journal The Lancet in in April of 2023. The second article is about a clinical trial called GLOW and it was published in the medical journal Nature Medicine in July of 2023. WHAT ARE THE KEY TAKEAWAYS?: Until recently, chemotherapy was the first treatment given to people with stomach cancer or gastroesophageal junction (or GEJ) cancer that is locally advanced unresectable or metastatic. When cancer cells have high amounts of the protein CLDN18.2 but do not have high amounts of the protein HER2, the cancer is known as CLDN18.2-positive (or CLDN18.2+) and HER2-negative (or HER2-). New medicines to treat cancer are being developed. These medicines attach to proteins on cancer cells to help the body recognize and kill cancer cells.The clinical trials SPOTLIGHT and GLOW included participants with CLDN18.2+ and HER2- stomach or GEJ cancer that was locally advanced unresectable or metastatic. These trials looked at whether adding a medicine called zolbetuximab to chemotherapy as the first treatment for cancer helped people live longer before their tumors grew bigger or new tumors grew, after starting the trial. These studies also looked at whether adding zolbetuximab to chemotherapy helped people live longer after starting the trial. WHAT WERE THE MAIN CONCLUSIONS REPORTED BY THE RESEARCHERS?: In SPOTLIGHT and GLOW, on average, participants assigned to zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy lived 1.4 to 1.9 months longer before their tumors grew bigger or new tumors grew, after starting the trial, than participants assigned to a placebo plus chemotherapy. On average, participants assigned to zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy also lived 2.2 to 2.7 months longer, after starting the trial, than participants assigned to a placebo plus chemotherapy. These results suggest that zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy could be a new first treatment for people with CLDN18.2+ and HER2- stomach or GEJ cancer that is locally advanced unresectable or metastatic.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03504397 (SPOTLIGHT); NCT03653507 (GLOW).

The clinical trials SPOTLIGHT and GLOW showed that, on average, participants with stomach or GEJ cancer assigned to zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy lived 2.2 to 2.7 months longer than participants assigned to a placebo plus chemotherapy.

Plain language summary of a clinical study: anamorelin for treatment of Japanese people with non-small cell lung cancer and cachexia.

What is this summary about? This is a plain language summary of a clinical research study. The study was looking the effects of a drug called anamorelin for Japanese people with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (often shortened to NSCLC) who also had a condition called cachexia. People with cachexia have a loss of appetite, severe weight loss, loss of body fat and loss of muscle mass (called muscle wasting). Cachexia is common in many chronic (long term) diseases, such as cancer and can lead to a decrease in a person's ability to do everyday tasks (called functional strength). Cachexia can negatively affect a person's quality of life and increases the risk of serious side effects during chemotherapy.Anamorelin is a drug that has been shown in previous research studies to improve appetite and increase lean body mass (the total weight of the body, not counting fat) and overall body weight. In this study, participants were given anamorelin (100 mg daily) for 12 weeks.What did the researchers find out? Participants who took anamorelin had an increase in their lean body mass and body weight, and had an improvement in their appetite. Their overall body condition improved but no improvement was seen in how well their muscles worked.The researchers found that anamorelin did not cause a large number of significant or severe side effects.What do the results mean? The study showed that anamorelin can help people with advanced NSCLC and cachexia to substantially increase their lean body mass, improve their nutritional status, and increase their appetite. Since January 2021, anamorelin for cachexia has been approved for use in Japanese people with NSCLC.

Changes in symptom burden and quality of life among women with uterine fibroids receiving relugolix combination therapy: a plain language summary.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of findings from two research studies (known as clinical trials). The studies looked at how well a medicine called relugolix combination therapy worked in women with heavy menstrual bleeding (heavy bleeding during a period) with uterine fibroids (noncancerous or benign growths in the uterus). In this analysis of the studies, researchers looked at how patients self-reported their uterine fibroid symptoms before and after taking relugolix combination therapy. Researchers also looked at how patients self-reported the impact of uterine fibroids on their health-related quality of life before and after taking relugolix combination therapy. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Women took either relugolix combination therapy or placebo (a pill that contains no medicine) by mouth once daily for 24 weeks. Women completed the Uterine Fibroid Symptom and Quality of Life questionnaire (where "quality of life" refers to the women's health-related quality of life related to uterine fibroids) before, during, and after treatment. The questionnaire let researchers see if the women felt that relugolix combination therapy decreased the burden of uterine fibroid symptoms and improved the women's health-related quality of life related to uterine fibroids. More women said that they felt less distress due to their uterine fibroid symptoms and that their health-related quality of life related to uterine fibroids was better after taking relugolix combination therapy compared with women who took placebo. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: Relugolix combination therapy may lessen distress associated with uterine fibroid symptoms and improve health-related quality of life related to uterine fibroids.

Treatment options for biliary tract cancer: unmet needs, new targets and opportunities from both physicians' and patients' perspectives.

Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is a rare cancer with poor prognosis, characterized by considerable pathophysiological and molecular heterogeneity. While this makes it difficult to treat, it also provides targeted therapy opportunities. Current standard-of-care is chemotherapy ± immunotherapy, but several targeted agents have recently been approved. The current investigational landscape in BTC emphasizes the importance of biomarker testing at diagnosis. MDM2/MDMX are important negative regulators of the tumor suppressor p53 and provide an additional target in BTC (∼5-8% of tumors are MDM2-amplified). Brigimadlin (BI 907828) is a highly potent MDM2-p53 antagonist that has shown antitumor activity in preclinical studies and promising results in early clinical trials; enrollment is ongoing in a potential registrational trial for patients with BTC.

[Box: see text].