Search

The medians and ranges for all analytes at baseline.

Purpose:GOG-0218, a double-blind placebo-controlled phase III trial, compared carboplatin and paclitaxel with placebo, bevacizumab followed by placebo, or bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Results demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS), but no overall survival (OS) benefit with bevacizumab. Blood samples were collected for biomarker analyses.Experimental Design:Plasma samples were analyzed via multiplex ELISA technology for seven prespecified biomarkers [IL6, Ang-2, osteopontin (OPN), stromal cell–derived factor-1 (SDF-1), VEGF-D, IL6 receptor (IL6R), and GP130]. The predictive value of each biomarker with respect to PFS and OS was assessed using a protein marker by treatment interaction term within the framework of a Cox proportional hazards model. Prognostic markers were identified using Cox models adjusted for baseline covariates.Results:Baseline samples were available from 751 patients. According to our prespecified analysis plan, IL6 was predictive of a therapeutic advantage with bevacizumab for PFS (P = 0.007) and OS (P = 0.003). IL6 and OPN were found to be negative prognostic markers for both PFS and OS (P < 0.001). Patients with high median IL6 levels (dichotomized at the median) treated with bevacizumab had longer PFS (14.2 vs. 8.7 months) and OS (39.6 vs. 33.1 months) compared with placebo.Conclusions:The inflammatory cytokine IL6 may be predictive of therapeutic benefit from bevacizumab when combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel. Aligning with results observed in patients with renal cancer treated with antiangiogenic therapies, it appears plasma IL6 may also define those patients with EOC more or less likely to benefit from the addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy.

Association between outcomes (PFS and OS) and baseline covariates (age, stage/debulking status, and performance status).

Quartile analysis of IL6. Median survival times are given in months, and HR's represent treatment hazard ratios.

Relationship between covariates and IL6.

Legends

3-way interaction analyses between outcome, treatment, and markers.

Flow diagram of patients through the study.

SUMMARY Objectives To investigate the noninferiority of intensive voice therapy and compare its effects with weekly voice therapy on multidimensional outcomes of voice and well-being, satisfaction, and attendance in people with muscle tension dysphonia (MTD). The study further aimed to explore clinician's perceptions of barriers and enablers to implementation of intensive therapy. Study Design Noninferiority randomised controlled trial with nested focus group. Methods Twenty adults with MTD were randomised to receive either weekly voice therapy (1 hour per week for 8 weeks) or intensive voice therapy (1 hour, 4 days per week for 2 weeks). Participants were assessed by a blinded assessor twice before treatment, once post treatment and once at 4 weeks follow up on the primary outcome measure VHI and a range of secondary auditory-perceptual, acoustic, and patient (i.e., VoiSS, satisfaction) and clinician reported outcome measures (i.e., AusTOMs, attendance rates). Five Speech Language Pathologists also participated in a focus group to explore barriers and enablers to implementing intensive therapy, with questions and analyses guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework. Results While noninferiority for the primary outcome measure VHI was not confirmed, secondary outcome measures revealed comparable within group clinically important improvements for VoiSS and the AusTOMs, as well as selected acoustic and auditory-perceptual measures for both groups. A trend of more improvements being maintained in the intensive group was identified. Comparably high satisfaction and attendance was also found between groups. Clinicians reported more enablers than barriers to providing intensive therapy which included beliefs that it led to greater progression and consolidation of patient learning, was supported by the local context and was associated with positive emotions. Barriers related to difficulties with booking and scheduling and the belief that intensive therapy was not for all patients. Conclusions While the current study was likely underpowered to establish non-inferiority of intensive therapy, secondary outcomes suggested that intensive therapy may produce comparable benefits to voice, wellbeing, satisfaction and attendance compared to weekly therapy and may be a viable therapy option for individuals with MTD. When implementing intensive therapy, clinicians should consider patient's preferences and availability, as well as systems which allow for flexible booking and therapy provision for patients. Clear recommendations for future research including the use of a larger sample and telehealth are also provided.

Background: Over 50% of patients with ovarian cancer (OVCA) succumb to their disease within five years from diagnosis, highlighting the need for new approaches to identify therapeutic options. The PARIS® test is a CLIA certified organoid based high throughput drug sensitivity assay that can be used by oncologists to select personalized treatments. In this study our objectives were to: 1) demonstrate the feasibility of organoid based drug testing in the clinical setting; 2) highlight the clinical utility and the predictive value of the PARIS® test; and 3) identify new therapeutic options for OVCA patients. Methods: 93 patients, with a median age at diagnosis of 55 years (range 25-82) were selected as eligible for the PARIS® test at the discretion of the oncologists. The cohort included 74.1% high grade serous tumors, 6.9% low grade serous tumors, 6.0% clear cell carcinomas, 3.4% granulosa cell tumors, 2.5% Mullerian tumors, 1.7% carcinosarcomas and 2.5% fallopian tumors. 16.1% of patients were treatment naïve and 83.9% received one or more previous lines of treatment. 116 patient derived tumor organoids (PDTOs) were derived from surgical excisions, biopsies, or body fluids and subjected to functional testing with a panel of chemo- and targeted therapies that are FDA-approved or in clinical development. Drug responses were evaluated using a proprietary score ranking drugs from exceptional responses to no response. The median turnaround time from biopsy to report delivery was 19 days. Results: The success rate for deriving OVCA organoids was 92%; 81.0% of samples demonstrated exceptional/good response to at least one drug. PDTO drug sensitivities were highly concordant with both retrospective and prospective clinical response. Drugs that frequently showed exceptional/good responses included WEE1 inhibitors (28.4%), HDAC inhibitors (25.0%), and Pan-DNMT inhibitors (11.2%). Further, 12.9% of cases showed responses to the BTK/EGFR inhibitor ibrutinib and 23.3% to HER2 inhibitors lapatinib and neratinib. Two patients with advanced stage, recurrent low grade serous ovarian cancer showed exceptional and durable clinical responses to PARIS® guided treatments, ibrutinib and lapatinib, respectively. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the utility of organoid based drug testing to identify potentially effective drugs and to guide treatment choice for patients with ovarian cancer. Tumor organoid based personalized treatments lead to extraordinary responses in several patients, including a patient in hospice care who responded to ibrutinib monotherapy and is still alive after 27 months. Citation Format: Amanda M. Prechtl, Marwah Al-Aloosi, Payel Chatterjee, Rachele Rosati, Samantha Velazquez, Lauren Appleyard, Grace Durenberger, Cristina Cordero, Robert Diaz, Hallie Swan, Brady Bernard, Siddhartha Mukherjee, Barbara Goff, Elizabeth Swisher, Heidi Gray, Kalyan Banda, Christopher Kemp, Carla Grandori. Tumor organoid based drug sensitivity testing in ovarian cancer identifies exceptional responders to targeted therapies [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 3399.

Gestational trophoblastic diseases and neoplasias (GTDs and GTNs) comprise a spectrum of diseases arising from abnormally proliferating placental/trophoblastic tissue following an antecedent molar or non-molar pregnancy. These can spread to the brain hematogenously in about 10% of patients, mostly in high-risk disease. The optimal management of patients with brain metastases from GTN is unclear, with multiple systemic regimens under use and an uncertain role for radiotherapy.Here, we review the epidemiology, workup, and treatment of GTN with central nervous system (CNS) involvement. Literature searches in PubMed and Google Scholar were conducted using combinations of keywords such as 'gestational trophoblastic disease,' 'gestational trophoblastic neoplasia,' 'choriocarcinoma,' and 'brain metastases.'Systemic therapy is the frontline treatment for GTN with brain metastases, and radiotherapy should only be considered in the context of a clinical trial or for resistant/recurrent disease. Surgery has a limited role in palliating symptoms or relieving intracranial pressure/bleeding. Given the highly specialized care these patients require, treatment at a high-volume referral center with multidisciplinary collaboration likely leads to better outcomes. Randomized trials should be conducted to determine the best systemic therapy option for GTN.