Search

Objective: Circulating tumor DNA assays have robust potential as molecular surveillance tools. They may also exacerbate patient distress without improving outcomes. We investigate patient acceptability of a validated ctHPVDNA assay (NavDx) during cancer surveillance for HPV(+) oropharyngeal cancer (OPC)., Methods: Consented HPV(+) OPC participants completed the NCCN Distress Thermometer, the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS), and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale both (1) before NavDx blood draw, and (2) after results were provided. Patients then completed a series of focused questions related to their perceptions of the assay., Results: Overall, 55 patients completed the study, with 98.2 % showing no recurrence. For the NCCN Distress Thermometer, median patient distress decreased (2.0 (IQR 1-5) vs. 1.0 (IQR 0-3)) (p < 0.001) in association with NavDx. Using scores ≥ 4 as a cutoff point to define clinically elevated distress, scores also improved (36.4 % vs. 18.2 %, p = 0.031). For HADS, anxiety significantly improved (5.0 (IQR 2.0-7.0) vs. 3.0 (IQR 1.0-6.5)) (p = 0.037), but not depression (3.0 (IQR 1.0-7.0) vs. 3.0 (IQR 1.0-6.5)) (p = 0.870). FACT-G scores showed no substantial differences. On survey questionnaires, 95.5 % of patients believed the test to be helpful, and 100 % felt "somewhat" or "extremely" confident in the assay as a monitoring tool. While 59.1 % felt that it reduced anxiety, 88.4 % concordantly felt that it did not introduce anxiety., Conclusion: ctHPVDNA as a molecular surveillance tool reduced distress levels in HPV(+) OPC patients, with notably high patient confidence in the approach. Further investigation is warranted to judiciously incorporate this emerging modality in surveillance guidelines., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: [Dr. Zumsteg’s spouse does legal work for Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Allergan, and Boehringer Ingelheim through her law firm]., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: This phase I trial was conducted to determine the safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD)/recommended phase II dose, and efficacy of crizotinib plus erlotinib in patients with advanced NSCLC., Methods: Patients with NSCLC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2 after failure of one or two prior chemotherapy regimens were eligible. Erlotinib, 100 mg, was given continuously once daily starting between day -14 and -7; crizotinib, 200 mg twice daily (dose level 1) or 150 mg twice daily (dose level -1), was added continuously beginning on day 1 of treatment cycle 1. Potential pharmacokinetic interactions between crizotinib and erlotinib were evaluated., Results: Twenty-seven patients received treatment; 26 received crizotinib plus erlotinib. Frequent adverse events were diarrhea, rash, decreased appetite, and fatigue. Dose-limiting toxicities were dehydration, diarrhea, dry eye, dysphagia, dyspepsia, esophagitis and vomiting. The MTD was crizotinib, 150 mg twice daily, with erlotinib, 100 mg once daily. Crizotinib increased the erlotinib area under the concentration-time curve 1.5-fold (dose level -1) and 1.8-fold (dose level 1). The plasma level of crizotinib appeared to be unaffected by coadministration of erlotinib. Two patients whose tumors harbored activating EGFR mutations achieved confirmed partial responses, one at each crizotinib dose level., Conclusions: The MTD of the combination of crizotinib and erlotinib in patients with advanced NSCLC was crizotinib, 150 mg twice daily, with erlotinib, 100 mg once daily, which is less than the approved dose of either agent. The phase II portion of the study was not initiated., (Copyright © 2016 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Although there have been several recent additions to the conventional armamentarium used to treat patients with advanced colorectal cancer, principally as a result of the development of selective and nonselective pharmacologic agents and antibodies, the general outcome of patients with advanced disease is still poor. However, a greater understanding of cancer biology, as well as major advances in biotechnology, is beginning to identify and characterize molecular aberrations that are common in patients with colorectal cancer. These advances have resulted in the development of a wide range of rationally designed, target-based anticancer therapeutic agents, which, by virtue of their selectivity, would be expected to produce less nonspecific toxicity and therefore higher therapeutic indices compared with nonspecific cytotoxic agents. This review will discuss several novel targets and therapeutic agents, particularly those designed to interrupt aberrant signal transduction and apoptotic processes. It will also emphasize the complexity of these systems and the need to incorporate novel clinical development paradigms based on a thorough scientific understanding of these targets.