User login
OARSI to FDA: Take osteoarthritis seriously
LAS VEGAS – The Osteoarthritis Research Society International has submitted a 103-page white paper to the Food and Drug Administration, the gist of which is captured in its title: “Osteoarthritis: A Serious Disease.”
The purpose of the voluminous white paper is to persuade FDA officials that osteoarthritis (OA) meets the agency’s formal definition of a serious disease for which there are currently no satisfactory treatments. That recognition would result in removal of current regulatory barriers to development of new structure-modifying treatments for OA, instead allowing such efforts to fall within the agency’s accelerated approval program, Marc C. Hochberg, MD, a coauthor of the white paper, explained at the World Congress on Osteoarthritis.
OARSI would like to see novel investigational therapies be allowed to advance through the developmental pipeline on the basis of favorable changes in clinically relevant biomarkers – be they biochemical or imaging – as intermediate endpoints serving as surrogates for structural change endpoints and meaningful clinical outcomes.
There is an enormous unmet need for effective disease-modifying therapies for OA. Establishing a more flexible regulatory environment for drug development by designating OA as a serious disease is expected to rekindle pharmaceutical industry interest in developing such products, which at present is at an ebb, he continued at the congress sponsored by the Osteoarthritis Research Society International.
The FDA has defined a serious disease as “a disease or condition associated with morbidity that has substantial impact on day-to-day functioning. Short-lived and self-limiting morbidity will usually not be sufficient, but the morbidity need not be irreversible if it is persistent or recurrent. Whether a disease or condition is serious is a matter of clinical judgment, based on its impact on such factors as survival, day-to-day functioning, or the likelihood that the disease, if left untreated, will progress from a less severe condition to a more serious one.”
The white paper makes the case that OA fits that description to a T. Dr. Hochberg said the big picture regarding OA as described in the white paper is this: It’s the most common form of arthritis, affecting more than 250 million people worldwide. And its costs approach 2% of the gross national product in the United States and other developed countries.
“Osteoarthritis accounts for more functional limitation, work loss, and physical disability than any other chronic disease, including cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,” the rheumatologist said.
The white paper cites published data in support of these and other key points. At OARSI 2017, Dr. Hochberg presented highlights from the white paper, submitted to the FDA in December 2016:
• OA prevalence is relentlessly climbing. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention put the U.S. prevalence of OA at 46 million in 2004 and has projected that it will reach 63 million in 2020 and 78 million Americans by 2040. The rise is being driven by the aging of the baby boomers, the obesity epidemic, predisposing physical injuries, and sedentary behavior.
• OA is expensive for patients and society. The combined direct medical costs and indirect costs stemming from lost earnings from OA amount to an estimated $461 billion annually in the United States.
• OA exacts a steep toll in years lived with disability (YLD). Estimated YLD from OA jumped by 75% during 1990-2013. This increase in YLD was exceeded only by dementia at 84% and diabetes at 135%. OA accounts for 1.6% of overall YLD in the United States, a rate comparable to ischemic heart disease at 1.63% and more than twice that for rheumatoid arthritis at 0.68%.
• Comorbidities are the rule. Various studies have estimated that 59%-87% of adults with OA have at least one additional significant chronic condition. The median number is two. One-third of OA patients have four or more additional comorbid conditions. The most common are cardiovascular disease, diabetes, obesity, metabolic syndrome, depression, anxiety, and falls and fractures.
• No effective treatments exist. There are no approved drugs that can prevent or even slow progression of OA to the point where total joint replacement is needed. Current medications are focused on pain relief and maintenance of functional independence. But these drugs are associated with significant risks of life-threatening side effects. NSAIDs have been linked to increased risk of cardiovascular events, GI bleeding, chronic kidney disease, and heart failure. And while opioids provide a small benefit in terms of pain relief, this is outweighed by the associated risks of falls, fractures, dependence, overdose, and death. All of these risks are accentuated in the presence of the common comorbid conditions associated with OA.
• OA increases the risk of dying prematurely. In a meta-analysis of individual patient data from the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study and the Johnston County (N.C.) Osteoarthritis Project conducted specifically for the white paper, investigators determined that OA was associated with a 23% increase in the risk of death independent of age, race, and sex. This excess mortality is attributable in part to the presence of the metabolic syndrome and other commonly comorbid conditions, reduced physical activity because of OA disability, and the use of NSAIDs and opioid analgesics for symptomatic control.
The OARSI initiative is supported by EMD Serono, Fidia Pharma, Flexion Therapeutics, Nordic Biosciences, and Spinifex. Dr. Hochberg reported having numerous financial relationships with industry.
LAS VEGAS – The Osteoarthritis Research Society International has submitted a 103-page white paper to the Food and Drug Administration, the gist of which is captured in its title: “Osteoarthritis: A Serious Disease.”
The purpose of the voluminous white paper is to persuade FDA officials that osteoarthritis (OA) meets the agency’s formal definition of a serious disease for which there are currently no satisfactory treatments. That recognition would result in removal of current regulatory barriers to development of new structure-modifying treatments for OA, instead allowing such efforts to fall within the agency’s accelerated approval program, Marc C. Hochberg, MD, a coauthor of the white paper, explained at the World Congress on Osteoarthritis.
OARSI would like to see novel investigational therapies be allowed to advance through the developmental pipeline on the basis of favorable changes in clinically relevant biomarkers – be they biochemical or imaging – as intermediate endpoints serving as surrogates for structural change endpoints and meaningful clinical outcomes.
There is an enormous unmet need for effective disease-modifying therapies for OA. Establishing a more flexible regulatory environment for drug development by designating OA as a serious disease is expected to rekindle pharmaceutical industry interest in developing such products, which at present is at an ebb, he continued at the congress sponsored by the Osteoarthritis Research Society International.
The FDA has defined a serious disease as “a disease or condition associated with morbidity that has substantial impact on day-to-day functioning. Short-lived and self-limiting morbidity will usually not be sufficient, but the morbidity need not be irreversible if it is persistent or recurrent. Whether a disease or condition is serious is a matter of clinical judgment, based on its impact on such factors as survival, day-to-day functioning, or the likelihood that the disease, if left untreated, will progress from a less severe condition to a more serious one.”
The white paper makes the case that OA fits that description to a T. Dr. Hochberg said the big picture regarding OA as described in the white paper is this: It’s the most common form of arthritis, affecting more than 250 million people worldwide. And its costs approach 2% of the gross national product in the United States and other developed countries.
“Osteoarthritis accounts for more functional limitation, work loss, and physical disability than any other chronic disease, including cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,” the rheumatologist said.
The white paper cites published data in support of these and other key points. At OARSI 2017, Dr. Hochberg presented highlights from the white paper, submitted to the FDA in December 2016:
• OA prevalence is relentlessly climbing. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention put the U.S. prevalence of OA at 46 million in 2004 and has projected that it will reach 63 million in 2020 and 78 million Americans by 2040. The rise is being driven by the aging of the baby boomers, the obesity epidemic, predisposing physical injuries, and sedentary behavior.
• OA is expensive for patients and society. The combined direct medical costs and indirect costs stemming from lost earnings from OA amount to an estimated $461 billion annually in the United States.
• OA exacts a steep toll in years lived with disability (YLD). Estimated YLD from OA jumped by 75% during 1990-2013. This increase in YLD was exceeded only by dementia at 84% and diabetes at 135%. OA accounts for 1.6% of overall YLD in the United States, a rate comparable to ischemic heart disease at 1.63% and more than twice that for rheumatoid arthritis at 0.68%.
• Comorbidities are the rule. Various studies have estimated that 59%-87% of adults with OA have at least one additional significant chronic condition. The median number is two. One-third of OA patients have four or more additional comorbid conditions. The most common are cardiovascular disease, diabetes, obesity, metabolic syndrome, depression, anxiety, and falls and fractures.
• No effective treatments exist. There are no approved drugs that can prevent or even slow progression of OA to the point where total joint replacement is needed. Current medications are focused on pain relief and maintenance of functional independence. But these drugs are associated with significant risks of life-threatening side effects. NSAIDs have been linked to increased risk of cardiovascular events, GI bleeding, chronic kidney disease, and heart failure. And while opioids provide a small benefit in terms of pain relief, this is outweighed by the associated risks of falls, fractures, dependence, overdose, and death. All of these risks are accentuated in the presence of the common comorbid conditions associated with OA.
• OA increases the risk of dying prematurely. In a meta-analysis of individual patient data from the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study and the Johnston County (N.C.) Osteoarthritis Project conducted specifically for the white paper, investigators determined that OA was associated with a 23% increase in the risk of death independent of age, race, and sex. This excess mortality is attributable in part to the presence of the metabolic syndrome and other commonly comorbid conditions, reduced physical activity because of OA disability, and the use of NSAIDs and opioid analgesics for symptomatic control.
The OARSI initiative is supported by EMD Serono, Fidia Pharma, Flexion Therapeutics, Nordic Biosciences, and Spinifex. Dr. Hochberg reported having numerous financial relationships with industry.
LAS VEGAS – The Osteoarthritis Research Society International has submitted a 103-page white paper to the Food and Drug Administration, the gist of which is captured in its title: “Osteoarthritis: A Serious Disease.”
The purpose of the voluminous white paper is to persuade FDA officials that osteoarthritis (OA) meets the agency’s formal definition of a serious disease for which there are currently no satisfactory treatments. That recognition would result in removal of current regulatory barriers to development of new structure-modifying treatments for OA, instead allowing such efforts to fall within the agency’s accelerated approval program, Marc C. Hochberg, MD, a coauthor of the white paper, explained at the World Congress on Osteoarthritis.
OARSI would like to see novel investigational therapies be allowed to advance through the developmental pipeline on the basis of favorable changes in clinically relevant biomarkers – be they biochemical or imaging – as intermediate endpoints serving as surrogates for structural change endpoints and meaningful clinical outcomes.
There is an enormous unmet need for effective disease-modifying therapies for OA. Establishing a more flexible regulatory environment for drug development by designating OA as a serious disease is expected to rekindle pharmaceutical industry interest in developing such products, which at present is at an ebb, he continued at the congress sponsored by the Osteoarthritis Research Society International.
The FDA has defined a serious disease as “a disease or condition associated with morbidity that has substantial impact on day-to-day functioning. Short-lived and self-limiting morbidity will usually not be sufficient, but the morbidity need not be irreversible if it is persistent or recurrent. Whether a disease or condition is serious is a matter of clinical judgment, based on its impact on such factors as survival, day-to-day functioning, or the likelihood that the disease, if left untreated, will progress from a less severe condition to a more serious one.”
The white paper makes the case that OA fits that description to a T. Dr. Hochberg said the big picture regarding OA as described in the white paper is this: It’s the most common form of arthritis, affecting more than 250 million people worldwide. And its costs approach 2% of the gross national product in the United States and other developed countries.
“Osteoarthritis accounts for more functional limitation, work loss, and physical disability than any other chronic disease, including cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,” the rheumatologist said.
The white paper cites published data in support of these and other key points. At OARSI 2017, Dr. Hochberg presented highlights from the white paper, submitted to the FDA in December 2016:
• OA prevalence is relentlessly climbing. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention put the U.S. prevalence of OA at 46 million in 2004 and has projected that it will reach 63 million in 2020 and 78 million Americans by 2040. The rise is being driven by the aging of the baby boomers, the obesity epidemic, predisposing physical injuries, and sedentary behavior.
• OA is expensive for patients and society. The combined direct medical costs and indirect costs stemming from lost earnings from OA amount to an estimated $461 billion annually in the United States.
• OA exacts a steep toll in years lived with disability (YLD). Estimated YLD from OA jumped by 75% during 1990-2013. This increase in YLD was exceeded only by dementia at 84% and diabetes at 135%. OA accounts for 1.6% of overall YLD in the United States, a rate comparable to ischemic heart disease at 1.63% and more than twice that for rheumatoid arthritis at 0.68%.
• Comorbidities are the rule. Various studies have estimated that 59%-87% of adults with OA have at least one additional significant chronic condition. The median number is two. One-third of OA patients have four or more additional comorbid conditions. The most common are cardiovascular disease, diabetes, obesity, metabolic syndrome, depression, anxiety, and falls and fractures.
• No effective treatments exist. There are no approved drugs that can prevent or even slow progression of OA to the point where total joint replacement is needed. Current medications are focused on pain relief and maintenance of functional independence. But these drugs are associated with significant risks of life-threatening side effects. NSAIDs have been linked to increased risk of cardiovascular events, GI bleeding, chronic kidney disease, and heart failure. And while opioids provide a small benefit in terms of pain relief, this is outweighed by the associated risks of falls, fractures, dependence, overdose, and death. All of these risks are accentuated in the presence of the common comorbid conditions associated with OA.
• OA increases the risk of dying prematurely. In a meta-analysis of individual patient data from the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study and the Johnston County (N.C.) Osteoarthritis Project conducted specifically for the white paper, investigators determined that OA was associated with a 23% increase in the risk of death independent of age, race, and sex. This excess mortality is attributable in part to the presence of the metabolic syndrome and other commonly comorbid conditions, reduced physical activity because of OA disability, and the use of NSAIDs and opioid analgesics for symptomatic control.
The OARSI initiative is supported by EMD Serono, Fidia Pharma, Flexion Therapeutics, Nordic Biosciences, and Spinifex. Dr. Hochberg reported having numerous financial relationships with industry.
AT OARSI 2017
VIDEO: Rifamycin matches ciprofloxacin’s efficacy in travelers’ diarrhea with less antibiotic resistance
CHICAGO – An investigational antibiotic was just as effective as ciprofloxacin at curing travelers’ diarrhea but was associated with a significantly lower rate of colonization with extended spectrum beta-lactam–resistant Escherichia coli, a phase III trial has determined.
“Rifamycin was noninferior to ciprofloxacin on every endpoint in this trial,” Robert Steffen, MD, said at the annual Digestive Disease Week. “However, there was no increase in extended spectrum beta-lactamase–producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-E) associated with rifamycin, and significantly less new acquisition of these pathogens than in the ciprofloxacin group.”
Rifamycin is a poorly absorbed, broad-spectrum antibiotic in the same chemical family as rifaximin. It’s designed, both molecularly and in packaging, to become active only in the lower ileum and colon with limited systemic absorption. The drug is approved in Europe for infectious colitis, Clostridium difficile, diverticulitis, and also as supportive treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases and hepatic encephalopathy.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Subjects were randomized to 3 days of rifamycin 800 mg, or ciprofloxacin 1,000 mg. Follow-up visits occurred on days 2, 5, and 6, with a final follow-up by mail 4 weeks later. The primary endpoint was time to last unformed stool from the first dose of study medication. Secondary endpoints were clinical cure (24 hours with no clinical symptoms, fever, or watery stools, or 48 hours with no fever; and either no stools or only formed stools), need for rescue therapy, treatment failure, pathogen eradication in posttreatment stool, and the rate of ESBL-E colonization.
The time to last unformed stool was 43 hours in the rifamycin group and 37 hours in the ciprofloxacin group, which were not significantly different. The results were similar when broken down by infective organism, by gender, and by study location.
Rifamycin was also noninferior to ciprofloxacin in several secondary endpoints, including clinical cure (85% each), treatment failure (15% each), and need for rescue therapy (1% vs. 2.6%). The drugs were also virtually identical in the number of unformed stools per 24-hour interval, which fell precipitously from 5.5 on day 1, to 1 by day 5, and in complete resolution of gastrointestinal symptoms, which were about 75% resolved in each group by day 5.
Rifamycin was equally effective in eradicating all of the pathogens identified in the cohort. This included all pathogens in the E. coli group, all in the potentially invasive group (Shigella, Campylobacter, Salmonella, and Aeromonas), norovirus, giardia, and Cryptosporidium.
Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 12% of each group; none were serious. About 8% of each group experienced an adverse drug reaction.
Where the drugs did differ, and sharply so, was in antibiotic resistance, said Dr. Steffen, of the University of Zürich and the University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston. At baseline, about 16% of the group was infected with ESBL–E coli. At last follow-up, those species were present in 16% of the rifamycin group, but in 21% of the ciprofloxacin group. Similarly, there was less new ESBL–E. coli colonization in patients who had been negative at baseline (10% vs. 17%).
The findings are particularly important in light of the increasing worldwide emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, Dr. Steffen said. In fact, new guidelines released April 29 by the International Society of Travel Medicine recommend that antibiotics be reserved for moderate to severe cases of traveler’s diarrhea and not be used at all in milder cases (J Travel Med. 2017 Apr 29;24[suppl. 1]:S57-S74).
“The widespread use of ciprofloxacin and other antibiotics for travelers’ diarrhea has contributed to the rise of these resistant bacteria,” Dr. Steffen said in an interview. “We need to rethink the way we use these drugs and to focus instead on drugs that are not systemically absorbed. If rifamycin is eventually approved for this indication, it would be a good alternative to systemic antibiotics, curing the acute illness, and not contributing as much to the emergence of these worrisome pathogens.”
Digestive Disease Week® is jointly sponsored by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract (SSAT).
In a video interview at the meeting, Dr. Steffen spoke about the trial and concerns about antibiotic resistance that are addressed in the new guidelines and by this new study.
Dr. Falk Pharma GmbH of Freiburg, Germany, is developing rifamycin and conducted the study. Dr. Steffen has received consulting and travel fees from the company.
[email protected]
On Twitter @alz_gal
CHICAGO – An investigational antibiotic was just as effective as ciprofloxacin at curing travelers’ diarrhea but was associated with a significantly lower rate of colonization with extended spectrum beta-lactam–resistant Escherichia coli, a phase III trial has determined.
“Rifamycin was noninferior to ciprofloxacin on every endpoint in this trial,” Robert Steffen, MD, said at the annual Digestive Disease Week. “However, there was no increase in extended spectrum beta-lactamase–producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-E) associated with rifamycin, and significantly less new acquisition of these pathogens than in the ciprofloxacin group.”
Rifamycin is a poorly absorbed, broad-spectrum antibiotic in the same chemical family as rifaximin. It’s designed, both molecularly and in packaging, to become active only in the lower ileum and colon with limited systemic absorption. The drug is approved in Europe for infectious colitis, Clostridium difficile, diverticulitis, and also as supportive treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases and hepatic encephalopathy.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Subjects were randomized to 3 days of rifamycin 800 mg, or ciprofloxacin 1,000 mg. Follow-up visits occurred on days 2, 5, and 6, with a final follow-up by mail 4 weeks later. The primary endpoint was time to last unformed stool from the first dose of study medication. Secondary endpoints were clinical cure (24 hours with no clinical symptoms, fever, or watery stools, or 48 hours with no fever; and either no stools or only formed stools), need for rescue therapy, treatment failure, pathogen eradication in posttreatment stool, and the rate of ESBL-E colonization.
The time to last unformed stool was 43 hours in the rifamycin group and 37 hours in the ciprofloxacin group, which were not significantly different. The results were similar when broken down by infective organism, by gender, and by study location.
Rifamycin was also noninferior to ciprofloxacin in several secondary endpoints, including clinical cure (85% each), treatment failure (15% each), and need for rescue therapy (1% vs. 2.6%). The drugs were also virtually identical in the number of unformed stools per 24-hour interval, which fell precipitously from 5.5 on day 1, to 1 by day 5, and in complete resolution of gastrointestinal symptoms, which were about 75% resolved in each group by day 5.
Rifamycin was equally effective in eradicating all of the pathogens identified in the cohort. This included all pathogens in the E. coli group, all in the potentially invasive group (Shigella, Campylobacter, Salmonella, and Aeromonas), norovirus, giardia, and Cryptosporidium.
Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 12% of each group; none were serious. About 8% of each group experienced an adverse drug reaction.
Where the drugs did differ, and sharply so, was in antibiotic resistance, said Dr. Steffen, of the University of Zürich and the University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston. At baseline, about 16% of the group was infected with ESBL–E coli. At last follow-up, those species were present in 16% of the rifamycin group, but in 21% of the ciprofloxacin group. Similarly, there was less new ESBL–E. coli colonization in patients who had been negative at baseline (10% vs. 17%).
The findings are particularly important in light of the increasing worldwide emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, Dr. Steffen said. In fact, new guidelines released April 29 by the International Society of Travel Medicine recommend that antibiotics be reserved for moderate to severe cases of traveler’s diarrhea and not be used at all in milder cases (J Travel Med. 2017 Apr 29;24[suppl. 1]:S57-S74).
“The widespread use of ciprofloxacin and other antibiotics for travelers’ diarrhea has contributed to the rise of these resistant bacteria,” Dr. Steffen said in an interview. “We need to rethink the way we use these drugs and to focus instead on drugs that are not systemically absorbed. If rifamycin is eventually approved for this indication, it would be a good alternative to systemic antibiotics, curing the acute illness, and not contributing as much to the emergence of these worrisome pathogens.”
Digestive Disease Week® is jointly sponsored by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract (SSAT).
In a video interview at the meeting, Dr. Steffen spoke about the trial and concerns about antibiotic resistance that are addressed in the new guidelines and by this new study.
Dr. Falk Pharma GmbH of Freiburg, Germany, is developing rifamycin and conducted the study. Dr. Steffen has received consulting and travel fees from the company.
[email protected]
On Twitter @alz_gal
CHICAGO – An investigational antibiotic was just as effective as ciprofloxacin at curing travelers’ diarrhea but was associated with a significantly lower rate of colonization with extended spectrum beta-lactam–resistant Escherichia coli, a phase III trial has determined.
“Rifamycin was noninferior to ciprofloxacin on every endpoint in this trial,” Robert Steffen, MD, said at the annual Digestive Disease Week. “However, there was no increase in extended spectrum beta-lactamase–producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-E) associated with rifamycin, and significantly less new acquisition of these pathogens than in the ciprofloxacin group.”
Rifamycin is a poorly absorbed, broad-spectrum antibiotic in the same chemical family as rifaximin. It’s designed, both molecularly and in packaging, to become active only in the lower ileum and colon with limited systemic absorption. The drug is approved in Europe for infectious colitis, Clostridium difficile, diverticulitis, and also as supportive treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases and hepatic encephalopathy.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Subjects were randomized to 3 days of rifamycin 800 mg, or ciprofloxacin 1,000 mg. Follow-up visits occurred on days 2, 5, and 6, with a final follow-up by mail 4 weeks later. The primary endpoint was time to last unformed stool from the first dose of study medication. Secondary endpoints were clinical cure (24 hours with no clinical symptoms, fever, or watery stools, or 48 hours with no fever; and either no stools or only formed stools), need for rescue therapy, treatment failure, pathogen eradication in posttreatment stool, and the rate of ESBL-E colonization.
The time to last unformed stool was 43 hours in the rifamycin group and 37 hours in the ciprofloxacin group, which were not significantly different. The results were similar when broken down by infective organism, by gender, and by study location.
Rifamycin was also noninferior to ciprofloxacin in several secondary endpoints, including clinical cure (85% each), treatment failure (15% each), and need for rescue therapy (1% vs. 2.6%). The drugs were also virtually identical in the number of unformed stools per 24-hour interval, which fell precipitously from 5.5 on day 1, to 1 by day 5, and in complete resolution of gastrointestinal symptoms, which were about 75% resolved in each group by day 5.
Rifamycin was equally effective in eradicating all of the pathogens identified in the cohort. This included all pathogens in the E. coli group, all in the potentially invasive group (Shigella, Campylobacter, Salmonella, and Aeromonas), norovirus, giardia, and Cryptosporidium.
Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 12% of each group; none were serious. About 8% of each group experienced an adverse drug reaction.
Where the drugs did differ, and sharply so, was in antibiotic resistance, said Dr. Steffen, of the University of Zürich and the University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston. At baseline, about 16% of the group was infected with ESBL–E coli. At last follow-up, those species were present in 16% of the rifamycin group, but in 21% of the ciprofloxacin group. Similarly, there was less new ESBL–E. coli colonization in patients who had been negative at baseline (10% vs. 17%).
The findings are particularly important in light of the increasing worldwide emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, Dr. Steffen said. In fact, new guidelines released April 29 by the International Society of Travel Medicine recommend that antibiotics be reserved for moderate to severe cases of traveler’s diarrhea and not be used at all in milder cases (J Travel Med. 2017 Apr 29;24[suppl. 1]:S57-S74).
“The widespread use of ciprofloxacin and other antibiotics for travelers’ diarrhea has contributed to the rise of these resistant bacteria,” Dr. Steffen said in an interview. “We need to rethink the way we use these drugs and to focus instead on drugs that are not systemically absorbed. If rifamycin is eventually approved for this indication, it would be a good alternative to systemic antibiotics, curing the acute illness, and not contributing as much to the emergence of these worrisome pathogens.”
Digestive Disease Week® is jointly sponsored by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract (SSAT).
In a video interview at the meeting, Dr. Steffen spoke about the trial and concerns about antibiotic resistance that are addressed in the new guidelines and by this new study.
Dr. Falk Pharma GmbH of Freiburg, Germany, is developing rifamycin and conducted the study. Dr. Steffen has received consulting and travel fees from the company.
[email protected]
On Twitter @alz_gal
AT DDW
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Clinical cure occurred in 85% of each group, but new beta-lactam–resistant E. coli colonization occurred in 16% of the rifamycin group and 21% of the ciprofloxacin group.
Data source: The randomized study comprised 835 subjects.
Disclosures: Dr. Falk Pharma GmbH of Freiburg, Germany, is developing the drug and sponsored the study. Dr. Steffen has received consulting and travel fees from the company.
Periconception smoking found to affect birth defect risk
SAN DIEGO – Smoking during the period of fetal organogenesis, during the first trimester of pregnancy, is associated with increased risk of some birth defects, results from a large retrospective analysis demonstrated.
Ms. Perry, a second-year medical student at the University of Cincinnati and her associates conducted a population-based retrospective cohort analysis of 1,436,036 live births in Ohio during 2006-2015. They compared the rates of major defects between births to nonsmoking mothers and those who smoked only during the 3-month preconception period and not in the first trimester; and in the preconception period plus throughout the first trimester. They used multivariate logistic regression to quantify the relationship between smoking and birth defects after adjustment for maternal race, age, pregestational diabetes, and socioeconomic factors.
The researchers observed that 23.3% of women smoked during pregnancy; 6.0% during preconception only and 17.3% smoked through the first trimester, as well. Smoking during the preconception period only, even without first trimester exposure, was associated with a 40% increased risk of gastroschisis (adjusted risk ratio, 1.4), but no other individual birth defects. However, smoking through the first trimester was associated with a modest but significantly increased risk of several defects, including gastroschisis (adjusted RR, 1.9), limb reduction (adjusted RR, 1.6), congenital diaphragmatic hernia (adjusted RR, 1.4), and cleft palate (adjusted RR, 1.2), even after adjustment for coexisting factors.
“It was surprising to see that, even when women stop smoking when they find out they are pregnant, and therefore are not smoking during the period of fetal organogenesis, there is still an increased risk of some congenital birth defects to the fetus,” Ms. Perry said. “My hope is that this study serves as a launching point for future research and public health efforts. It’s important to encourage smoking cessation in women of reproductive age, whether pregnant or not. Furthermore, it’s valuable to be able to explain to patients that along with adverse effects to their own health, smoking even before conception poses a risk to the fetus.”
She acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including its observational design. “There could exist unmeasurable influences that we were unable to adjust for,” Ms. Perry said. She reported having no financial disclosures.
SAN DIEGO – Smoking during the period of fetal organogenesis, during the first trimester of pregnancy, is associated with increased risk of some birth defects, results from a large retrospective analysis demonstrated.
Ms. Perry, a second-year medical student at the University of Cincinnati and her associates conducted a population-based retrospective cohort analysis of 1,436,036 live births in Ohio during 2006-2015. They compared the rates of major defects between births to nonsmoking mothers and those who smoked only during the 3-month preconception period and not in the first trimester; and in the preconception period plus throughout the first trimester. They used multivariate logistic regression to quantify the relationship between smoking and birth defects after adjustment for maternal race, age, pregestational diabetes, and socioeconomic factors.
The researchers observed that 23.3% of women smoked during pregnancy; 6.0% during preconception only and 17.3% smoked through the first trimester, as well. Smoking during the preconception period only, even without first trimester exposure, was associated with a 40% increased risk of gastroschisis (adjusted risk ratio, 1.4), but no other individual birth defects. However, smoking through the first trimester was associated with a modest but significantly increased risk of several defects, including gastroschisis (adjusted RR, 1.9), limb reduction (adjusted RR, 1.6), congenital diaphragmatic hernia (adjusted RR, 1.4), and cleft palate (adjusted RR, 1.2), even after adjustment for coexisting factors.
“It was surprising to see that, even when women stop smoking when they find out they are pregnant, and therefore are not smoking during the period of fetal organogenesis, there is still an increased risk of some congenital birth defects to the fetus,” Ms. Perry said. “My hope is that this study serves as a launching point for future research and public health efforts. It’s important to encourage smoking cessation in women of reproductive age, whether pregnant or not. Furthermore, it’s valuable to be able to explain to patients that along with adverse effects to their own health, smoking even before conception poses a risk to the fetus.”
She acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including its observational design. “There could exist unmeasurable influences that we were unable to adjust for,” Ms. Perry said. She reported having no financial disclosures.
SAN DIEGO – Smoking during the period of fetal organogenesis, during the first trimester of pregnancy, is associated with increased risk of some birth defects, results from a large retrospective analysis demonstrated.
Ms. Perry, a second-year medical student at the University of Cincinnati and her associates conducted a population-based retrospective cohort analysis of 1,436,036 live births in Ohio during 2006-2015. They compared the rates of major defects between births to nonsmoking mothers and those who smoked only during the 3-month preconception period and not in the first trimester; and in the preconception period plus throughout the first trimester. They used multivariate logistic regression to quantify the relationship between smoking and birth defects after adjustment for maternal race, age, pregestational diabetes, and socioeconomic factors.
The researchers observed that 23.3% of women smoked during pregnancy; 6.0% during preconception only and 17.3% smoked through the first trimester, as well. Smoking during the preconception period only, even without first trimester exposure, was associated with a 40% increased risk of gastroschisis (adjusted risk ratio, 1.4), but no other individual birth defects. However, smoking through the first trimester was associated with a modest but significantly increased risk of several defects, including gastroschisis (adjusted RR, 1.9), limb reduction (adjusted RR, 1.6), congenital diaphragmatic hernia (adjusted RR, 1.4), and cleft palate (adjusted RR, 1.2), even after adjustment for coexisting factors.
“It was surprising to see that, even when women stop smoking when they find out they are pregnant, and therefore are not smoking during the period of fetal organogenesis, there is still an increased risk of some congenital birth defects to the fetus,” Ms. Perry said. “My hope is that this study serves as a launching point for future research and public health efforts. It’s important to encourage smoking cessation in women of reproductive age, whether pregnant or not. Furthermore, it’s valuable to be able to explain to patients that along with adverse effects to their own health, smoking even before conception poses a risk to the fetus.”
She acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including its observational design. “There could exist unmeasurable influences that we were unable to adjust for,” Ms. Perry said. She reported having no financial disclosures.
AT ACOG 2017
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Smoking during only the preconception period was associated with a 40% increased risk of gastroschisis (adjusted RR, 1.4), while smoking during the first trimester of pregnancy was associated with a significantly increased risk of gastroschisis (adjusted RR, 1.9) and several other birth defects.
Data source: A retrospective cohort analysis of 1,436,036 live births in Ohio during 2006-2015.
Disclosures: Ms. Perry reported having no financial disclosures.
24/7 neurologist coverage improved community hospital stroke outcomes
BOSTON – Around-the-clock availability of a neurologist for acute stroke treatment significantly reduced door-to-needle times at a community-based primary stroke center serving as a regional tertiary referral center for western North Carolina.
The program involving the 24/7 availability of a neurologist in the hospital was implemented in October 2015 at Mission Hospital, a 763-bed hospital in Asheville, N.C., where nighttime emergency stroke coverage had historically been provided by a neurologist on-call from home. The implementation was partly in preparation for an application for Joint Commission–certified comprehensive stroke center status, which was approved in 2016.
A review of 2,022 Code Stroke activations in the emergency department from January 2012 through September 2016 that included only patients treated with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator revealed a significant decrease in door-to-neurologist time from an average of 7.1 minutes before the 24/7 in-hospital availability to 2.5 minutes after implementation. The analysis included 1,524 cases occurring prior to implementation and 498 cases occurring after.
The impact was most significant at night.
“Our nighttime reduction to the bedside went down from 13.6 minutes to 3.4 minutes, and our daytime reduction also improved from 5.2 minutes to 2.2 minutes,” said Dr. Schneider, a vascular neurologist at Mission Hospital.
Door-to-needle times were significantly reduced from 48.3 to 37.8 minutes overall, from 52 minutes to 40 minutes at night, and from 46.6 to 34.5 minutes during the day.
“We think that the trend toward significance at nighttime was mitigated by the fact there were just lesser numbers at night,” he said.
In-hospital mortality was reduced by 31% from 8.94% to 6.13%, he said.
Another variable that improved after the intervention was timing of prenotification by emergency medical services. The overall rate of prenotification did not improve (likely because of a ceiling effect; the rate of notification was already about 90%), but notifications improved from 12.5 minutes before arrival to 10.7 minutes.
There was no significant change in door-to-computed tomography times, which averaged about 15 minutes, Dr. Schneider said.
Though limited by a smaller number of postimplementation cases and lack of 3-month poststroke functional outcome data, the findings suggest that 24/7 in-hospital availability of a neurologist improves door to intravenous tissue plasminogen activator treatment times and in-hospital stroke mortality, Dr. Schneider concluded, noting that ongoing monitoring of outcomes will be necessary to assess for enduring impact.
Dr. Schneider reported having no disclosures.
BOSTON – Around-the-clock availability of a neurologist for acute stroke treatment significantly reduced door-to-needle times at a community-based primary stroke center serving as a regional tertiary referral center for western North Carolina.
The program involving the 24/7 availability of a neurologist in the hospital was implemented in October 2015 at Mission Hospital, a 763-bed hospital in Asheville, N.C., where nighttime emergency stroke coverage had historically been provided by a neurologist on-call from home. The implementation was partly in preparation for an application for Joint Commission–certified comprehensive stroke center status, which was approved in 2016.
A review of 2,022 Code Stroke activations in the emergency department from January 2012 through September 2016 that included only patients treated with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator revealed a significant decrease in door-to-neurologist time from an average of 7.1 minutes before the 24/7 in-hospital availability to 2.5 minutes after implementation. The analysis included 1,524 cases occurring prior to implementation and 498 cases occurring after.
The impact was most significant at night.
“Our nighttime reduction to the bedside went down from 13.6 minutes to 3.4 minutes, and our daytime reduction also improved from 5.2 minutes to 2.2 minutes,” said Dr. Schneider, a vascular neurologist at Mission Hospital.
Door-to-needle times were significantly reduced from 48.3 to 37.8 minutes overall, from 52 minutes to 40 minutes at night, and from 46.6 to 34.5 minutes during the day.
“We think that the trend toward significance at nighttime was mitigated by the fact there were just lesser numbers at night,” he said.
In-hospital mortality was reduced by 31% from 8.94% to 6.13%, he said.
Another variable that improved after the intervention was timing of prenotification by emergency medical services. The overall rate of prenotification did not improve (likely because of a ceiling effect; the rate of notification was already about 90%), but notifications improved from 12.5 minutes before arrival to 10.7 minutes.
There was no significant change in door-to-computed tomography times, which averaged about 15 minutes, Dr. Schneider said.
Though limited by a smaller number of postimplementation cases and lack of 3-month poststroke functional outcome data, the findings suggest that 24/7 in-hospital availability of a neurologist improves door to intravenous tissue plasminogen activator treatment times and in-hospital stroke mortality, Dr. Schneider concluded, noting that ongoing monitoring of outcomes will be necessary to assess for enduring impact.
Dr. Schneider reported having no disclosures.
BOSTON – Around-the-clock availability of a neurologist for acute stroke treatment significantly reduced door-to-needle times at a community-based primary stroke center serving as a regional tertiary referral center for western North Carolina.
The program involving the 24/7 availability of a neurologist in the hospital was implemented in October 2015 at Mission Hospital, a 763-bed hospital in Asheville, N.C., where nighttime emergency stroke coverage had historically been provided by a neurologist on-call from home. The implementation was partly in preparation for an application for Joint Commission–certified comprehensive stroke center status, which was approved in 2016.
A review of 2,022 Code Stroke activations in the emergency department from January 2012 through September 2016 that included only patients treated with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator revealed a significant decrease in door-to-neurologist time from an average of 7.1 minutes before the 24/7 in-hospital availability to 2.5 minutes after implementation. The analysis included 1,524 cases occurring prior to implementation and 498 cases occurring after.
The impact was most significant at night.
“Our nighttime reduction to the bedside went down from 13.6 minutes to 3.4 minutes, and our daytime reduction also improved from 5.2 minutes to 2.2 minutes,” said Dr. Schneider, a vascular neurologist at Mission Hospital.
Door-to-needle times were significantly reduced from 48.3 to 37.8 minutes overall, from 52 minutes to 40 minutes at night, and from 46.6 to 34.5 minutes during the day.
“We think that the trend toward significance at nighttime was mitigated by the fact there were just lesser numbers at night,” he said.
In-hospital mortality was reduced by 31% from 8.94% to 6.13%, he said.
Another variable that improved after the intervention was timing of prenotification by emergency medical services. The overall rate of prenotification did not improve (likely because of a ceiling effect; the rate of notification was already about 90%), but notifications improved from 12.5 minutes before arrival to 10.7 minutes.
There was no significant change in door-to-computed tomography times, which averaged about 15 minutes, Dr. Schneider said.
Though limited by a smaller number of postimplementation cases and lack of 3-month poststroke functional outcome data, the findings suggest that 24/7 in-hospital availability of a neurologist improves door to intravenous tissue plasminogen activator treatment times and in-hospital stroke mortality, Dr. Schneider concluded, noting that ongoing monitoring of outcomes will be necessary to assess for enduring impact.
Dr. Schneider reported having no disclosures.
AT AAN 2017
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Door-to-needle times were significantly reduced from 48.3 to 37.8 minutes overall, from 52 minutes to 40 minutes at night, and from 46.6 to 34.5 minutes during the day.
Data source: A review of 498 preintervention cases and 1,524 postintervention Code Stroke cases.
Disclosures: Dr. Schneider reported having no disclosures.
Androgen receptor screening not ready for triple-negative breast cancer
LAS VEGAS – Despite the early promise of antiandrogen therapy, it’s not time yet to routinely screen women with triple-negative breast cancer for androgen receptors, according to Tiffany A. Traina, MD, the head of research into the disease at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.
There’s no standardized test for androgen receptors in breast cancer, so people “are doing different kinds of testing.” In the literature, “the range of AR positivity is anywhere from 12% to 79%, which reflects how we are all over the map in methodology; you might just as well throw a dart at the board. I would encourage screening in the context of the ongoing trials,” Dr. Traina said.
More than a decade ago, Memorial Sloan Kettering found a subset of TNBC that had ARs, which was peculiar because the tumors weren’t otherwise responsive to hormones. Androgen exposure increased growth, but the AR antagonist flutamide (Eulexin)blocked it. “It was thought provoking. There are a lot of drugs in the prostate cancer world” such as flutamide that shut down androgens, she said (Oncogene. 2006 Jun 29;25[28]:3994-4008).
Several have been tried, and investigations are ongoing. The work matters because TNBC is a particularly bad diagnosis. Blocking androgens seems to give some women a few more months of life.
Dr. Traina was the senior author in an early proof-of-concept study for AR blockade that involved 26 women with metastatic TNBC who had been through up to eight prior chemotherapy regimens. The women received 150 mg daily of the prostate cancer AR antagonist bicalutamide (Casodex). Disease remained stable in five (19%) for more than 6 months. Median progression-free survival was 12 weeks, which was “not that far off from what you get with [standard] chemotherapies. This was encouraging, and it led to multiple other trials looking at targeted therapies,” she said (Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Oct 1; 19[19]: 5505-12).
Dr. Traina led a phase II investigation of the prostate cancer AR antagonist enzalutamide (Xtandi) in 118 women with advanced AR-positive TNBC. Her team created an androgen-driven gene signature as a potential biomarker of response. Median progression-free survival was 32 weeks in the 56 women (47%) who were positive for the gene signature, but 9 weeks in those who were not. There were two complete responses and five partial responses with enzalutamide. Currently, “we are looking at using enzalutamide for patients with AR-positive TNBC in the early stage after failure of standard therapies,” she said.
French investigators recently reported a 6-month clinical benefit – including one complete response – in 7 (21%) of 34 women with locally advanced or metastatic TNBC who were treated with 1,000 mg daily of abiraterone acetate (Zytiga), an androgen biosynthesis inhibitor approved for prostate cancer (Ann Oncol. 2016 May;27[5]:812-8).
“We still have a ways to go” before AR treatment reaches the clinic for routine breast cancer treatment, “but there’s reason for hope,” Dr. Traina said.
Dr. Traina reported funding, honoraria, and steering committing payments from a number of companies working on or marketing TNBC AR drugs, including Pfizer, Astellas, Innocrin, AstraZeneca, Eisai, and Merck.
LAS VEGAS – Despite the early promise of antiandrogen therapy, it’s not time yet to routinely screen women with triple-negative breast cancer for androgen receptors, according to Tiffany A. Traina, MD, the head of research into the disease at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.
There’s no standardized test for androgen receptors in breast cancer, so people “are doing different kinds of testing.” In the literature, “the range of AR positivity is anywhere from 12% to 79%, which reflects how we are all over the map in methodology; you might just as well throw a dart at the board. I would encourage screening in the context of the ongoing trials,” Dr. Traina said.
More than a decade ago, Memorial Sloan Kettering found a subset of TNBC that had ARs, which was peculiar because the tumors weren’t otherwise responsive to hormones. Androgen exposure increased growth, but the AR antagonist flutamide (Eulexin)blocked it. “It was thought provoking. There are a lot of drugs in the prostate cancer world” such as flutamide that shut down androgens, she said (Oncogene. 2006 Jun 29;25[28]:3994-4008).
Several have been tried, and investigations are ongoing. The work matters because TNBC is a particularly bad diagnosis. Blocking androgens seems to give some women a few more months of life.
Dr. Traina was the senior author in an early proof-of-concept study for AR blockade that involved 26 women with metastatic TNBC who had been through up to eight prior chemotherapy regimens. The women received 150 mg daily of the prostate cancer AR antagonist bicalutamide (Casodex). Disease remained stable in five (19%) for more than 6 months. Median progression-free survival was 12 weeks, which was “not that far off from what you get with [standard] chemotherapies. This was encouraging, and it led to multiple other trials looking at targeted therapies,” she said (Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Oct 1; 19[19]: 5505-12).
Dr. Traina led a phase II investigation of the prostate cancer AR antagonist enzalutamide (Xtandi) in 118 women with advanced AR-positive TNBC. Her team created an androgen-driven gene signature as a potential biomarker of response. Median progression-free survival was 32 weeks in the 56 women (47%) who were positive for the gene signature, but 9 weeks in those who were not. There were two complete responses and five partial responses with enzalutamide. Currently, “we are looking at using enzalutamide for patients with AR-positive TNBC in the early stage after failure of standard therapies,” she said.
French investigators recently reported a 6-month clinical benefit – including one complete response – in 7 (21%) of 34 women with locally advanced or metastatic TNBC who were treated with 1,000 mg daily of abiraterone acetate (Zytiga), an androgen biosynthesis inhibitor approved for prostate cancer (Ann Oncol. 2016 May;27[5]:812-8).
“We still have a ways to go” before AR treatment reaches the clinic for routine breast cancer treatment, “but there’s reason for hope,” Dr. Traina said.
Dr. Traina reported funding, honoraria, and steering committing payments from a number of companies working on or marketing TNBC AR drugs, including Pfizer, Astellas, Innocrin, AstraZeneca, Eisai, and Merck.
LAS VEGAS – Despite the early promise of antiandrogen therapy, it’s not time yet to routinely screen women with triple-negative breast cancer for androgen receptors, according to Tiffany A. Traina, MD, the head of research into the disease at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.
There’s no standardized test for androgen receptors in breast cancer, so people “are doing different kinds of testing.” In the literature, “the range of AR positivity is anywhere from 12% to 79%, which reflects how we are all over the map in methodology; you might just as well throw a dart at the board. I would encourage screening in the context of the ongoing trials,” Dr. Traina said.
More than a decade ago, Memorial Sloan Kettering found a subset of TNBC that had ARs, which was peculiar because the tumors weren’t otherwise responsive to hormones. Androgen exposure increased growth, but the AR antagonist flutamide (Eulexin)blocked it. “It was thought provoking. There are a lot of drugs in the prostate cancer world” such as flutamide that shut down androgens, she said (Oncogene. 2006 Jun 29;25[28]:3994-4008).
Several have been tried, and investigations are ongoing. The work matters because TNBC is a particularly bad diagnosis. Blocking androgens seems to give some women a few more months of life.
Dr. Traina was the senior author in an early proof-of-concept study for AR blockade that involved 26 women with metastatic TNBC who had been through up to eight prior chemotherapy regimens. The women received 150 mg daily of the prostate cancer AR antagonist bicalutamide (Casodex). Disease remained stable in five (19%) for more than 6 months. Median progression-free survival was 12 weeks, which was “not that far off from what you get with [standard] chemotherapies. This was encouraging, and it led to multiple other trials looking at targeted therapies,” she said (Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Oct 1; 19[19]: 5505-12).
Dr. Traina led a phase II investigation of the prostate cancer AR antagonist enzalutamide (Xtandi) in 118 women with advanced AR-positive TNBC. Her team created an androgen-driven gene signature as a potential biomarker of response. Median progression-free survival was 32 weeks in the 56 women (47%) who were positive for the gene signature, but 9 weeks in those who were not. There were two complete responses and five partial responses with enzalutamide. Currently, “we are looking at using enzalutamide for patients with AR-positive TNBC in the early stage after failure of standard therapies,” she said.
French investigators recently reported a 6-month clinical benefit – including one complete response – in 7 (21%) of 34 women with locally advanced or metastatic TNBC who were treated with 1,000 mg daily of abiraterone acetate (Zytiga), an androgen biosynthesis inhibitor approved for prostate cancer (Ann Oncol. 2016 May;27[5]:812-8).
“We still have a ways to go” before AR treatment reaches the clinic for routine breast cancer treatment, “but there’s reason for hope,” Dr. Traina said.
Dr. Traina reported funding, honoraria, and steering committing payments from a number of companies working on or marketing TNBC AR drugs, including Pfizer, Astellas, Innocrin, AstraZeneca, Eisai, and Merck.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM ASBS 2017
MRD better measure of ALL remission than morphology
MONTREAL – In children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, minimal residual disease findings appear to be better at defining remission than morphology, Children’s Oncology Group investigators reported.
A study of outcomes of more than 9,000 children and young adults with B-lineage or T-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) showed that patients who would be defined as being in remission by morphology but have minimal residual disease (MRD) of 5% or greater have survival outcomes similar to those of patients who do get a morphologic remission. Additionally, patients with discordant morphologic and MRD findings have significantly worse outcomes than do patients who were in morphologic remission and had concordant MRD findings, said Sumit Gupta, MD, PhD, from the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto.
“Given that, however, although MRD is used to measure the depth of remission either using flow cytometry or PCR [polymerase chain reaction]-based methods, remission itself continues to be defined by basic morphological assessment, whether that’s in clinical practice or clinical trials,” he added.
To see whether the practice of declaring remissions by morphology still makes sense, Dr. Gupta and his colleagues in the Children’s Oncology Group looked at outcomes for children and young adults with discordant ALL remissions as assessed by morphology, compared with MRD.
They looked at data on 9,350 patients from the ages of 1 to 31 years who were enrolled in one of three Children’s Oncology Group trials for patients with newly diagnosed ALL. Two of the trials (AALL0331 and AALL0232) were for patients with B-lineage ALL, and one (AALL0434) was for patients with T-lineage ALL.
They looked at morphologic responses as assessed by local centers, with M1 responses defined as less than 5% leukemic blasts (remission), M2 defined as 5% to less than 25% blasts, and M3 as 25% or more blasts. MRD was measured by flow cytometry at one of two central labs.
They found that discordant results (M1 morphology but MRD of 5% or greater) occurred in only 0.9% of patients with B-ALL, but in 6.9% of patients with T-ALL (P less than .0001).
In multivariate analysis, significant predictors of discordance in patients with B-ALL were patients age 10 years or older (P = .03), white blood cell counts of 50,000/mcL or greater (P = .005), and neutral or unfavorable cytogenetics vs. favorable (P less than .0001 for each).
Among patients with T-ALL, the only significant predictor of discordant results was the early T-precursor phenotype, with an odds ratio of 4.7 (P less than .0001).
Comparing event-free survival (EFS) between patients with concordant remission findings (M1/MRD less than 5%), they investigators saw that for patients with B-ALL, the 5-year EFS was 87%, compared with 59% for patients with discordant findings (M1/MRD 5% or greater, P less than .0001 vs. concordant remissions), and 39% for patients with concordant results showing a lack of remission (P = .009 vs. discordant findings).
Similarly, respective EFS rates for patients with T-ALL were 88%, 80% (P = .011) and 63% (not significant).
In a subanalysis of EFS by risk category, they found no differences according to concordance/discordance among patients with standard-risk B-ALL but a significant difference among patients with high-risk disease.
Attempting to determine what was driving the intermediate outcomes of patients with discordant findings, “we hypothesized that maybe it’s a difference in their actual MRD levels.” Specifically, they found that while both discordant and concordant not-in-remission patients had MRD levels of 5% or higher, the MRD levels were higher among those patients who were conclusively not in remission, Dr. Gupta said.
Finally, they found that for those patients with known overall survival data, concordant in remission patients with B-ALL had a 94% rate out to 12 years, compared with 73% for those with discordant results (P less than .0001). There was no significant difference in OS among patients with T-ALL, however.
“Should MRD assessment actually replace morphology in defining remission in subjects with ALL? I think these data strongly support that,” Dr. Gupta said.
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Gupta reported having no conflicts of interest.
MONTREAL – In children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, minimal residual disease findings appear to be better at defining remission than morphology, Children’s Oncology Group investigators reported.
A study of outcomes of more than 9,000 children and young adults with B-lineage or T-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) showed that patients who would be defined as being in remission by morphology but have minimal residual disease (MRD) of 5% or greater have survival outcomes similar to those of patients who do get a morphologic remission. Additionally, patients with discordant morphologic and MRD findings have significantly worse outcomes than do patients who were in morphologic remission and had concordant MRD findings, said Sumit Gupta, MD, PhD, from the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto.
“Given that, however, although MRD is used to measure the depth of remission either using flow cytometry or PCR [polymerase chain reaction]-based methods, remission itself continues to be defined by basic morphological assessment, whether that’s in clinical practice or clinical trials,” he added.
To see whether the practice of declaring remissions by morphology still makes sense, Dr. Gupta and his colleagues in the Children’s Oncology Group looked at outcomes for children and young adults with discordant ALL remissions as assessed by morphology, compared with MRD.
They looked at data on 9,350 patients from the ages of 1 to 31 years who were enrolled in one of three Children’s Oncology Group trials for patients with newly diagnosed ALL. Two of the trials (AALL0331 and AALL0232) were for patients with B-lineage ALL, and one (AALL0434) was for patients with T-lineage ALL.
They looked at morphologic responses as assessed by local centers, with M1 responses defined as less than 5% leukemic blasts (remission), M2 defined as 5% to less than 25% blasts, and M3 as 25% or more blasts. MRD was measured by flow cytometry at one of two central labs.
They found that discordant results (M1 morphology but MRD of 5% or greater) occurred in only 0.9% of patients with B-ALL, but in 6.9% of patients with T-ALL (P less than .0001).
In multivariate analysis, significant predictors of discordance in patients with B-ALL were patients age 10 years or older (P = .03), white blood cell counts of 50,000/mcL or greater (P = .005), and neutral or unfavorable cytogenetics vs. favorable (P less than .0001 for each).
Among patients with T-ALL, the only significant predictor of discordant results was the early T-precursor phenotype, with an odds ratio of 4.7 (P less than .0001).
Comparing event-free survival (EFS) between patients with concordant remission findings (M1/MRD less than 5%), they investigators saw that for patients with B-ALL, the 5-year EFS was 87%, compared with 59% for patients with discordant findings (M1/MRD 5% or greater, P less than .0001 vs. concordant remissions), and 39% for patients with concordant results showing a lack of remission (P = .009 vs. discordant findings).
Similarly, respective EFS rates for patients with T-ALL were 88%, 80% (P = .011) and 63% (not significant).
In a subanalysis of EFS by risk category, they found no differences according to concordance/discordance among patients with standard-risk B-ALL but a significant difference among patients with high-risk disease.
Attempting to determine what was driving the intermediate outcomes of patients with discordant findings, “we hypothesized that maybe it’s a difference in their actual MRD levels.” Specifically, they found that while both discordant and concordant not-in-remission patients had MRD levels of 5% or higher, the MRD levels were higher among those patients who were conclusively not in remission, Dr. Gupta said.
Finally, they found that for those patients with known overall survival data, concordant in remission patients with B-ALL had a 94% rate out to 12 years, compared with 73% for those with discordant results (P less than .0001). There was no significant difference in OS among patients with T-ALL, however.
“Should MRD assessment actually replace morphology in defining remission in subjects with ALL? I think these data strongly support that,” Dr. Gupta said.
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Gupta reported having no conflicts of interest.
MONTREAL – In children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, minimal residual disease findings appear to be better at defining remission than morphology, Children’s Oncology Group investigators reported.
A study of outcomes of more than 9,000 children and young adults with B-lineage or T-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) showed that patients who would be defined as being in remission by morphology but have minimal residual disease (MRD) of 5% or greater have survival outcomes similar to those of patients who do get a morphologic remission. Additionally, patients with discordant morphologic and MRD findings have significantly worse outcomes than do patients who were in morphologic remission and had concordant MRD findings, said Sumit Gupta, MD, PhD, from the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto.
“Given that, however, although MRD is used to measure the depth of remission either using flow cytometry or PCR [polymerase chain reaction]-based methods, remission itself continues to be defined by basic morphological assessment, whether that’s in clinical practice or clinical trials,” he added.
To see whether the practice of declaring remissions by morphology still makes sense, Dr. Gupta and his colleagues in the Children’s Oncology Group looked at outcomes for children and young adults with discordant ALL remissions as assessed by morphology, compared with MRD.
They looked at data on 9,350 patients from the ages of 1 to 31 years who were enrolled in one of three Children’s Oncology Group trials for patients with newly diagnosed ALL. Two of the trials (AALL0331 and AALL0232) were for patients with B-lineage ALL, and one (AALL0434) was for patients with T-lineage ALL.
They looked at morphologic responses as assessed by local centers, with M1 responses defined as less than 5% leukemic blasts (remission), M2 defined as 5% to less than 25% blasts, and M3 as 25% or more blasts. MRD was measured by flow cytometry at one of two central labs.
They found that discordant results (M1 morphology but MRD of 5% or greater) occurred in only 0.9% of patients with B-ALL, but in 6.9% of patients with T-ALL (P less than .0001).
In multivariate analysis, significant predictors of discordance in patients with B-ALL were patients age 10 years or older (P = .03), white blood cell counts of 50,000/mcL or greater (P = .005), and neutral or unfavorable cytogenetics vs. favorable (P less than .0001 for each).
Among patients with T-ALL, the only significant predictor of discordant results was the early T-precursor phenotype, with an odds ratio of 4.7 (P less than .0001).
Comparing event-free survival (EFS) between patients with concordant remission findings (M1/MRD less than 5%), they investigators saw that for patients with B-ALL, the 5-year EFS was 87%, compared with 59% for patients with discordant findings (M1/MRD 5% or greater, P less than .0001 vs. concordant remissions), and 39% for patients with concordant results showing a lack of remission (P = .009 vs. discordant findings).
Similarly, respective EFS rates for patients with T-ALL were 88%, 80% (P = .011) and 63% (not significant).
In a subanalysis of EFS by risk category, they found no differences according to concordance/discordance among patients with standard-risk B-ALL but a significant difference among patients with high-risk disease.
Attempting to determine what was driving the intermediate outcomes of patients with discordant findings, “we hypothesized that maybe it’s a difference in their actual MRD levels.” Specifically, they found that while both discordant and concordant not-in-remission patients had MRD levels of 5% or higher, the MRD levels were higher among those patients who were conclusively not in remission, Dr. Gupta said.
Finally, they found that for those patients with known overall survival data, concordant in remission patients with B-ALL had a 94% rate out to 12 years, compared with 73% for those with discordant results (P less than .0001). There was no significant difference in OS among patients with T-ALL, however.
“Should MRD assessment actually replace morphology in defining remission in subjects with ALL? I think these data strongly support that,” Dr. Gupta said.
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Gupta reported having no conflicts of interest.
FROM ASPHO 2017
Key clinical point: Patients with ALL determined to be in remission by both morphology and minimal residual disease had better outcomes than did those with discordant results.
Major finding: Event-free survival of B-ALL was 87% for patients with concordant remission findings vs. 59% for patients with discordant findings and 39% for concordant not-in-remission findings.
Data source: Retrospective review of data on 9,350 children and young adults with ALL.
Disclosures: The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Gupta reported having no conflicts of interest.
Two new biomarkers show breast cancer validity
BRUSSELS – A pair of breast cancer biomarkers look promising for making better prognosis assessments of selected patients, but acceptance of both into practice will need further documentation of their clinical utility, declared a senior breast cancer oncologist who served as discussant for the studies.
One of the markers is high intratumor heterogeneity of estrogen receptor density, a flag of poor prognosis when heterogeneity is high. The second marker is the phosphorylated signal transducer and activator of transcription (pSTAT) 3, which appeared to link with good prognosis in estrogen receptor–positive breast cancer.
The data on intratumor estrogen-receptor heterogeneity came from specimens collected from the low-risk breast cancer patients enrolled in the Stockholm Adjuvant Tamoxifen trial during 1976-1990 (Acta Oncol. 2007 July 8;46[2]:133-45). Enrolled patients had lymph node–negative disease and primary tumors smaller than 30 mm. During the trial, researchers preserved formalin-fixed tumor specimens in paraffin from 778 patients, which formed the basis for the current study, explained Linda S. Lindström, PhD, a cancer epidemiologist at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm. Slides from the specimens were restained for their estrogen receptor content in 2014 and assessed by two independent breast cancer pathologists. They scored the heterogeneity of estrogen receptor distribution as high, medium, or low, and Dr. Lindström and her associates calculated a hazard ratio for 25-year patient survival when they compared 593 specimens with high or low receptor heterogeneity. They adjusted the hazard ratios for several baseline variables including age, year of breast cancer diagnosis, HER2 status, Ki67 status, tumor grade, tumor size, randomization to tamoxifen or placebo treatment, and other factors.
“Routine clinical assessment of intratumor heterogeneity of estrogen receptor may identify patients at high long-term risk for fatal breast cancer that may potentially change clinical management, especially for patients with luminal A subtype tumors,” Dr. Lindström said.“I’d like to see the C statistic; will the prognostic model improve significantly with this added?” Dr. Linn wondered. “We need at least two more independent validations.”
The second biomarker study used two separate analyses of pSTAT3 expression. The first involved specimens collected from 3,074 patients with luminal breast cancer. Analysis of pSTAT3 gene signature expression showed that, the higher the expression levels were, associated with better relapse-free survival during follow-up out to as long as 8 years, reported Amir Sonnenblick, MD, an oncologist at the Sharret Institute of Oncology of Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center in Jerusalem.
Univariate analysis showed that binary pSTAT3 expression (positive or negative) significantly correlated with 10-year overall survival, with a hazard ratio of 0.66 (P = .04) for patients with positive expression, compared with those with no pSTAT3 expression, Dr. Sonnenblick said.
“pSTAT3 is associated with improved outcome in estrogen receptor–positive breast cancer. Future trials should take pSTAT3 status into account,” he concluded.
Dr. Linn cautioned that pSTAT3 expression should not be used to identify patients who can forgo chemotherapy, as the gene signature expression analysis showed that, even among patients with high pSTAT3 expression, long-term survival was still less than 90%.
Dr. Lindström and Dr. Sonnenblick had no disclosures. Dr. Linn has been an adviser to AstraZeneca, Cergentis, IBM Health, Novartis, Pfizer, Phillips Health, Roche, and Sanofi.
[email protected]
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
BRUSSELS – A pair of breast cancer biomarkers look promising for making better prognosis assessments of selected patients, but acceptance of both into practice will need further documentation of their clinical utility, declared a senior breast cancer oncologist who served as discussant for the studies.
One of the markers is high intratumor heterogeneity of estrogen receptor density, a flag of poor prognosis when heterogeneity is high. The second marker is the phosphorylated signal transducer and activator of transcription (pSTAT) 3, which appeared to link with good prognosis in estrogen receptor–positive breast cancer.
The data on intratumor estrogen-receptor heterogeneity came from specimens collected from the low-risk breast cancer patients enrolled in the Stockholm Adjuvant Tamoxifen trial during 1976-1990 (Acta Oncol. 2007 July 8;46[2]:133-45). Enrolled patients had lymph node–negative disease and primary tumors smaller than 30 mm. During the trial, researchers preserved formalin-fixed tumor specimens in paraffin from 778 patients, which formed the basis for the current study, explained Linda S. Lindström, PhD, a cancer epidemiologist at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm. Slides from the specimens were restained for their estrogen receptor content in 2014 and assessed by two independent breast cancer pathologists. They scored the heterogeneity of estrogen receptor distribution as high, medium, or low, and Dr. Lindström and her associates calculated a hazard ratio for 25-year patient survival when they compared 593 specimens with high or low receptor heterogeneity. They adjusted the hazard ratios for several baseline variables including age, year of breast cancer diagnosis, HER2 status, Ki67 status, tumor grade, tumor size, randomization to tamoxifen or placebo treatment, and other factors.
“Routine clinical assessment of intratumor heterogeneity of estrogen receptor may identify patients at high long-term risk for fatal breast cancer that may potentially change clinical management, especially for patients with luminal A subtype tumors,” Dr. Lindström said.“I’d like to see the C statistic; will the prognostic model improve significantly with this added?” Dr. Linn wondered. “We need at least two more independent validations.”
The second biomarker study used two separate analyses of pSTAT3 expression. The first involved specimens collected from 3,074 patients with luminal breast cancer. Analysis of pSTAT3 gene signature expression showed that, the higher the expression levels were, associated with better relapse-free survival during follow-up out to as long as 8 years, reported Amir Sonnenblick, MD, an oncologist at the Sharret Institute of Oncology of Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center in Jerusalem.
Univariate analysis showed that binary pSTAT3 expression (positive or negative) significantly correlated with 10-year overall survival, with a hazard ratio of 0.66 (P = .04) for patients with positive expression, compared with those with no pSTAT3 expression, Dr. Sonnenblick said.
“pSTAT3 is associated with improved outcome in estrogen receptor–positive breast cancer. Future trials should take pSTAT3 status into account,” he concluded.
Dr. Linn cautioned that pSTAT3 expression should not be used to identify patients who can forgo chemotherapy, as the gene signature expression analysis showed that, even among patients with high pSTAT3 expression, long-term survival was still less than 90%.
Dr. Lindström and Dr. Sonnenblick had no disclosures. Dr. Linn has been an adviser to AstraZeneca, Cergentis, IBM Health, Novartis, Pfizer, Phillips Health, Roche, and Sanofi.
[email protected]
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
BRUSSELS – A pair of breast cancer biomarkers look promising for making better prognosis assessments of selected patients, but acceptance of both into practice will need further documentation of their clinical utility, declared a senior breast cancer oncologist who served as discussant for the studies.
One of the markers is high intratumor heterogeneity of estrogen receptor density, a flag of poor prognosis when heterogeneity is high. The second marker is the phosphorylated signal transducer and activator of transcription (pSTAT) 3, which appeared to link with good prognosis in estrogen receptor–positive breast cancer.
The data on intratumor estrogen-receptor heterogeneity came from specimens collected from the low-risk breast cancer patients enrolled in the Stockholm Adjuvant Tamoxifen trial during 1976-1990 (Acta Oncol. 2007 July 8;46[2]:133-45). Enrolled patients had lymph node–negative disease and primary tumors smaller than 30 mm. During the trial, researchers preserved formalin-fixed tumor specimens in paraffin from 778 patients, which formed the basis for the current study, explained Linda S. Lindström, PhD, a cancer epidemiologist at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm. Slides from the specimens were restained for their estrogen receptor content in 2014 and assessed by two independent breast cancer pathologists. They scored the heterogeneity of estrogen receptor distribution as high, medium, or low, and Dr. Lindström and her associates calculated a hazard ratio for 25-year patient survival when they compared 593 specimens with high or low receptor heterogeneity. They adjusted the hazard ratios for several baseline variables including age, year of breast cancer diagnosis, HER2 status, Ki67 status, tumor grade, tumor size, randomization to tamoxifen or placebo treatment, and other factors.
“Routine clinical assessment of intratumor heterogeneity of estrogen receptor may identify patients at high long-term risk for fatal breast cancer that may potentially change clinical management, especially for patients with luminal A subtype tumors,” Dr. Lindström said.“I’d like to see the C statistic; will the prognostic model improve significantly with this added?” Dr. Linn wondered. “We need at least two more independent validations.”
The second biomarker study used two separate analyses of pSTAT3 expression. The first involved specimens collected from 3,074 patients with luminal breast cancer. Analysis of pSTAT3 gene signature expression showed that, the higher the expression levels were, associated with better relapse-free survival during follow-up out to as long as 8 years, reported Amir Sonnenblick, MD, an oncologist at the Sharret Institute of Oncology of Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center in Jerusalem.
Univariate analysis showed that binary pSTAT3 expression (positive or negative) significantly correlated with 10-year overall survival, with a hazard ratio of 0.66 (P = .04) for patients with positive expression, compared with those with no pSTAT3 expression, Dr. Sonnenblick said.
“pSTAT3 is associated with improved outcome in estrogen receptor–positive breast cancer. Future trials should take pSTAT3 status into account,” he concluded.
Dr. Linn cautioned that pSTAT3 expression should not be used to identify patients who can forgo chemotherapy, as the gene signature expression analysis showed that, even among patients with high pSTAT3 expression, long-term survival was still less than 90%.
Dr. Lindström and Dr. Sonnenblick had no disclosures. Dr. Linn has been an adviser to AstraZeneca, Cergentis, IBM Health, Novartis, Pfizer, Phillips Health, Roche, and Sanofi.
[email protected]
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
AT IMPAKT 2017 BREAST CANCER CONFERENCE
Key clinical point:
Major finding: High estrogen-receptor heterogeneity linked with worse outcomes; pSTAT3 expression linked with better outcomes.
Data source: A total of 593 patients enrolled in the Stockholm Adjuvant Tamoxifen trial, and 610 patients enrolled in the Breast International Group 2-98 trial.
Disclosures: Dr. Lindström and Dr. Sonnenblick had no disclosures. Dr. Linn has been an advisor to AstraZeneca, Cergentis, IBM Health, Novartis, Pfizer, Phillips Health, Roche, and Sanofi.
Endoscopic weight loss surgery cuts costs, side effects
Obese patients who underwent endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty had significantly fewer complications and shorter hospital stays than did those who had laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or laparoscopic band placement, according to results from a study of 278 adults. The data were presented at the annual Digestive Disease Week®.
Overall, 1% of patients who underwent endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) experienced adverse events, compared with 8% of those who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and 9% of those who underwent laparoscopic band placement (LAGB).
ESG, which reduces gastric volume by use of an endoscopic suturing system of full-thickness sutures through the greater curvature of the stomach, is becoming a popular weight-loss procedure for patients with a body mass index greater than 30 kg/m2 who are poor candidates for laparoscopic surgery or who would prefer a less invasive procedure, according to Reem Z. Sharaiha, MD, of Cornell University, New York.
Dr. Sharaiha and her colleagues randomized 91 patients to ESG, 120 to LSG, and 67 to LAGB. Patient demographic characteristics, including age, gender, and diabetes, were similar among the three groups. However, patients in the LSG group had a higher average BMI than did the LAGB and ESG groups (47.3 kg/m2, 45.7 kg/m2, and 38.8 kg/m2, respectively). In addition, the incidence of hypertension, and hyperlipidemia was significantly higher in each of the surgical groups compared to the ESG group (P less than .01).
The average postprocedure hospital stay was 0.13 days for ESG patients compared with 3.09 days for LSG patients and 1.68 days for LAGB patients. ESG also had the lowest cost of the three procedures, averaging $12,000 for the procedure compared to $22,000 for LSG and $15,000 for LAGB.
After 1 year, patients in the LSG group had the greatest percentage of total body weight loss (29.3%), followed by ESG patients (17.6%), and LAGB patients (14.5%). Rates of leaks, pulmonary embolism events, and 90-day readmission were not significantly different among the groups.
The study results do not imply that ESG will replace either LAGB or LSG for weight loss, Dr. Sharaiha noted, but the results suggest that ESG is a viable option for some patients.
Dr. Sharaiha had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.
Digestive Disease Week® is jointly sponsored by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract (SSAT).
Obese patients who underwent endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty had significantly fewer complications and shorter hospital stays than did those who had laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or laparoscopic band placement, according to results from a study of 278 adults. The data were presented at the annual Digestive Disease Week®.
Overall, 1% of patients who underwent endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) experienced adverse events, compared with 8% of those who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and 9% of those who underwent laparoscopic band placement (LAGB).
ESG, which reduces gastric volume by use of an endoscopic suturing system of full-thickness sutures through the greater curvature of the stomach, is becoming a popular weight-loss procedure for patients with a body mass index greater than 30 kg/m2 who are poor candidates for laparoscopic surgery or who would prefer a less invasive procedure, according to Reem Z. Sharaiha, MD, of Cornell University, New York.
Dr. Sharaiha and her colleagues randomized 91 patients to ESG, 120 to LSG, and 67 to LAGB. Patient demographic characteristics, including age, gender, and diabetes, were similar among the three groups. However, patients in the LSG group had a higher average BMI than did the LAGB and ESG groups (47.3 kg/m2, 45.7 kg/m2, and 38.8 kg/m2, respectively). In addition, the incidence of hypertension, and hyperlipidemia was significantly higher in each of the surgical groups compared to the ESG group (P less than .01).
The average postprocedure hospital stay was 0.13 days for ESG patients compared with 3.09 days for LSG patients and 1.68 days for LAGB patients. ESG also had the lowest cost of the three procedures, averaging $12,000 for the procedure compared to $22,000 for LSG and $15,000 for LAGB.
After 1 year, patients in the LSG group had the greatest percentage of total body weight loss (29.3%), followed by ESG patients (17.6%), and LAGB patients (14.5%). Rates of leaks, pulmonary embolism events, and 90-day readmission were not significantly different among the groups.
The study results do not imply that ESG will replace either LAGB or LSG for weight loss, Dr. Sharaiha noted, but the results suggest that ESG is a viable option for some patients.
Dr. Sharaiha had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.
Digestive Disease Week® is jointly sponsored by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract (SSAT).
Obese patients who underwent endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty had significantly fewer complications and shorter hospital stays than did those who had laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or laparoscopic band placement, according to results from a study of 278 adults. The data were presented at the annual Digestive Disease Week®.
Overall, 1% of patients who underwent endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) experienced adverse events, compared with 8% of those who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and 9% of those who underwent laparoscopic band placement (LAGB).
ESG, which reduces gastric volume by use of an endoscopic suturing system of full-thickness sutures through the greater curvature of the stomach, is becoming a popular weight-loss procedure for patients with a body mass index greater than 30 kg/m2 who are poor candidates for laparoscopic surgery or who would prefer a less invasive procedure, according to Reem Z. Sharaiha, MD, of Cornell University, New York.
Dr. Sharaiha and her colleagues randomized 91 patients to ESG, 120 to LSG, and 67 to LAGB. Patient demographic characteristics, including age, gender, and diabetes, were similar among the three groups. However, patients in the LSG group had a higher average BMI than did the LAGB and ESG groups (47.3 kg/m2, 45.7 kg/m2, and 38.8 kg/m2, respectively). In addition, the incidence of hypertension, and hyperlipidemia was significantly higher in each of the surgical groups compared to the ESG group (P less than .01).
The average postprocedure hospital stay was 0.13 days for ESG patients compared with 3.09 days for LSG patients and 1.68 days for LAGB patients. ESG also had the lowest cost of the three procedures, averaging $12,000 for the procedure compared to $22,000 for LSG and $15,000 for LAGB.
After 1 year, patients in the LSG group had the greatest percentage of total body weight loss (29.3%), followed by ESG patients (17.6%), and LAGB patients (14.5%). Rates of leaks, pulmonary embolism events, and 90-day readmission were not significantly different among the groups.
The study results do not imply that ESG will replace either LAGB or LSG for weight loss, Dr. Sharaiha noted, but the results suggest that ESG is a viable option for some patients.
Dr. Sharaiha had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.
Digestive Disease Week® is jointly sponsored by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract (SSAT).
FROM DDW
Key clinical point: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty is a viable option for patients seeking weight loss but wishing to avoid major surgery.
Major finding: After 1 year, 1% of patients who underwent endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty experienced adverse events, compared with 8% of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy patients, and 9% of laparoscopic band placement patients.
Data source: A randomized trial of 278 obese adults who underwent one of three weight loss procedures.
Disclosures: Dr. Sharaiha had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.
2017 Update on cervical disease
Vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and periodic cervical screening have significantly decreased the incidence of invasive cervical cancer. But cancers still exist despite the availability of these useful clinical tools, especially in women of reproductive age in developing regions of the world. In the 2016 update on cervical disease, I reviewed studies on 2 promising and novel immunotherapies for cervical cancer: HPV therapeutic vaccine and adoptive T-cell therapy. This year the focus is on remarkable advances in the field of genomics and related studies that are rapidly expanding our understanding of the molecular characteristics of cervical cancer. Rewards of this research already being explored include novel immunotherapeutic agents as well as the repurposed use of existing drugs.
But first, with regard to cervical screening and follow-up, 2 recent large studies have yielded findings that have important implications for patient management. One pertains to the monitoring of women who have persistent infection with high-risk HPV but cytology results that are negative. Its conclusion was unequivocal and very useful in the management of our patients. The other study tracked HPV screening performed every 3 years and reported on the diagnostic efficiency of this shorter interval screening strategy.
Read about persistent HPV infection and CIN
Persistent HPV infection has a higher risk than most clinicians might think
Elfgren K, Elfström KM, Naucler P, Arnheim-Dahlström L, Dillner J. Management of women with human papillomavirus persistence: long-term follow-up of a randomized clinical trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(3):264.e1-e7.
It is well known that most cases of cervical cancer arise from persistent HPV infection, with the highest percentage of cancers caused by high-risk types 16 or 18. What has been uncertain, however, is the actual degree of risk that persistent infection confers over time for the development of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) or worse when a woman's repeated cytology reports are negative. In an analysis of a long-term double-blind, randomized, controlled screening study, Elfgren and colleagues showed that all women whose HPV infection persisted up to 7 years developed CIN grade 2 (CIN2+), while those whose infection cleared in that period, or changed genotype, had no precancerous lesions out to 13 years of follow-up.
Related Article:
It is time for HPV vaccination to be considered part of routine preventive health care
Details of the study
Between 1997 and 2000, 12,527 Swedish women between the ages of 32 and 38 years who were undergoing organized cervical cancer screening agreed to participate in a 1:1-randomized prospective trial to determine the benefit of screening with HPV and cytology (intervention group) compared with cytology screening alone (control group). However, brush sampling for HPV was performed even on women in the control group, with the samples frozen for later testing. All participants were identified in the Swedish National Cervical Screening Registry.
Women in the intervention group who initially tested positive for HPV but whose cytology test results were negative (n = 341) were invited to return a year later for repeat HPV testing; 270 women returned and 119 had type-specific HPV persistence. Of those with persistent infection, 100 agreed to undergo colposcopy; 111 women from the control group were randomly selected to undergo sham HPV testing and colposcopy, and 95 attended. Women with evident cytologic abnormalities received treatment per protocol. Those with negative cytology results were offered annual HPV testing thereafter, and each follow-up with documented type-specific HPV persistence led to repeat colposcopy. A comparable number of women from the control group had repeat colposcopies.
Although some women were lost to clinical follow-up throughout the trial, all 195 who attended the first colposcopy were followed for at least 5 years in the Swedish registry, and 191 were followed in the registry for 13 years. Of 102 women with known HPV persistence at baseline (100 in the treatment group; 2 in the randomly selected control group), 31 became HPV negative, 4 evidenced a switch in HPV type but cleared the initial infection, 27 had unknown persistence status due to missed HPV tests, and 40 had continuously type-specific persistence. Of note, persistent HPV16 infection seemed to impart a higher risk of CIN development than did persistent HPV18 infection.
All 40 participants with clinically verified continuously persistent HPV infection developed CIN2+ within 7 years of baseline documentation of persistence (FIGURE 1). Among the 27 women with unknown persistence status, risk of CIN2+ occurrence within 7 years was 50%. None of the 35 women who cleared their infection or switched HPV type developed CIN2+.
Read about HPV-cytology cotesting
HPV−cytology cotesting every 3 years lowers population rates of cervical precancer and cancer
Silver MI, Schiffman M, Fetterman B, et al. The population impact of human papillomavirus/cytology cervical cotesting at 3-year intervals: reduced cervical cancer risk and decreased yield of precancer per screen. Cancer. 2016;122(23):3682−3686.
Current guidelines on screening for cervical cancer in women 30 to 65 years of age advise the preferred strategy of using cytology alone every 3 years or combining HPV testing and cytology every 5 years.1 These guidelines, based on data available at the time they were written, were meant to offer a reasonable balance between timely detection of abnormalities and avoidance of potential harms from screening too frequently. However, many patients are reluctant to postpone repeat testing to the extent recommended. Several authorities have in fact asked that screening intervals be revisited, perhaps allowing for a range of strategies, contending that the level of protection once provided by annual screening should be the benchmark by which evolving strategies are judged.2 Today, they point out, the risk of cancer doubles in the 3 years following an initial negative cytology result, and it also increases by lengthening the cotesting interval from 3 to 5 years. They additionally question the validity of using frequency of colposcopies as a surrogate to measure harms of screening, and suggest that many women would willingly accept the procedure's minimal discomfort and inconvenience to gain peace of mind.
The study by Silver and colleagues gives credence to considering a shorter cotesting interval. Since 2003, Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) has implemented 3-year cotesting. To determine actual clinical outcomes of cotesting at this interval, KPNC analyzed data on more than 1 million women in its care between 2003 and 2012. Although investigators expected that they might see decreasing efficiency in cotesting over time, they instead found an increased detection rate of precancerous lesions per woman screened in the larger of 2 study cohorts.
Related Article:
Women’s Preventive Services Initiative Guidelines provide consensus for practicing ObGyns
Details of the study
Included were all women 30 years of age or older enrolled in this study at KPNC between 2003 and 2012 who underwent HPV−cytology cotesting every 3 years. The population in its entirety (1,065,273 women) was deemed the "open cohort" and represented KPNC's total annual experience. A subset of this population, the "closed cohort," was designed to gauge the effect of repeated screening on a fixed population and comprised only those women enrolled and initially screened between 2003 and 2004 and then followed longitudinally until 2012.
For each cohort, investigators calculated the ratios of precancer and cancer diagnoses to the total number of cotests performed on the cohort's population. The 3-year testing periods were 2004−2006, 2007−2009, and 2010−2012. Also calculated in these periods were the ratios of colposcopic biopsies to cotests and the rates of precancer diagnoses (TABLE).
In the open cohort, the biopsy rate nearly doubled over the course of the study. Precancer diagnoses per number of cotests rose by 71.5% between the first and second testing periods (P = .001) and then eased off by 10% in the third period (P<.001). These corresponding increases throughout the study yielded a stable number of biopsies (16 to 22) needed to detect precancer.
In the closed long-term cohort, the biopsy rate rose, but not as much as in the open cohort. Precancer diagnoses per number of cotests rose by 47% between the first and second periods (P≤.001), but in the third period fell back by 28% (P<.001) to a level just above the first period results. The number of biopsies needed to detect a precancerous lesion in the closed cohort rose from 19 to 33 over the course of the study, suggesting there may have been some loss of screening efficiency in the fixed group.
Read about molecular profiling of cervical cancer
Molecular profiling of cervical cancer is revolutionizing treatment
The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Integratedgenomic and molecular characterization of cervical cancer. Nature. 2017;543(7645):378−384.
Effective treatments for cervical cancer could be close at hand, thanks to a recent explosion of knowledge at the molecular level about how specific cancers arise and what drives them other than HPV. The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network (TCGA) recently published the results of its genomic and proteomic analyses, which yielded distinct profiles for 178 cervical cancers with important patterns common to other cancers, such as uterine and breast cancer. These recently published findings on cervical cancer highlight areas of gene and protein dysfunction it shares with these other cancers, which could open the doors for new targets for treatments already developed or in the pipeline.
Related Article:
2016 Update on cervical disease
How molecular profiling is paying off for cervical cancer
Cancers develop in any given tissue through the altered function of different genes and signaling pathways in the tissue's cells. The latest extensive investigation conducted by the TCGA network has identified significant mutations in 5 genes previously unrecognized in association with cervical cancer, bringing the total now to 14.
Several highlights are featured in the TCGA's recently published work. One discovery is the amplification of genes CD274 and PDCD1LG2, which are involved with the expression of 2 cytolytic effector genes and are therefore likely targets for immunotherapeutic strategies. Another line of exploration, whole-genome sequencing, has detected an aberration in some cervical cancer tissue with the potential for immediate application. Duplication and copy number gain of BCAR4, a noncoding RNA, facilitates cell proliferation through the HER2/HER3 pathway, a target of the tyrosine-kinase inhibitor, lapatinib, which is currently used to treat breast cancer.
The integration of data from multiple layers of analysis (FIGURE 2) is helping investigators identify variations in cancers. DNA methylation, for instance, is a means by which cells control gene expression. An analysis of this process in cervical tumor tissue has revealed additional cancer subgroups in which messenger RNA increases the transition of epithelial cells to invasive mesenchymal cells. Targeting that process in these subgroups would likely enhance the effectiveness of novel small-molecule inhibitors and some standard cytotoxic chemotherapy.
Share your thoughts! Send your Letter to the Editor to [email protected]. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.
- Saslow D, Solomon D, Lawson HW, et al. American Cancer Society; American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology; American Society for Clinical Pathology. American Cancer Society, American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and American Society for Clinical Pathology screening guidelines for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer. Am J Clin Pathol. 2012;137(4):516–542.
- Kinney W, Wright TC, Dinkelspiel HE, DeFrancesco M, Thomas Cox J, Huh W. Increased cervical cancer risk associated with screening at longer intervals. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(2):311–315.
Dr. Einstein is Professor and Chair, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women’s Health, and Assistant Dean, Clinical Research Unit, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey.
Dr. Einstein has advised, but does not receive an honorarium from any companies. In specific cases his employer has received payment for his consultation from Photocure, Papivax, Inovio, PDS Biotechnologies, Natera, and Immunovaccine. If travel is required for meetings with any industry, the company pays for Dr. Einstein’s travel-related expenses. Also, his employers have received grant funding for research-related costs of clinical trials that Dr. Einstein has been the overall principal investigator or local principal investigator for the past 12 months from Baxalta, Photocure, Fujiboro, Eli Lilly, PDS Biotechnologies, and Becton-Dickinson.
Dr. Einstein is Professor and Chair, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women’s Health, and Assistant Dean, Clinical Research Unit, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey.
Dr. Einstein has advised, but does not receive an honorarium from any companies. In specific cases his employer has received payment for his consultation from Photocure, Papivax, Inovio, PDS Biotechnologies, Natera, and Immunovaccine. If travel is required for meetings with any industry, the company pays for Dr. Einstein’s travel-related expenses. Also, his employers have received grant funding for research-related costs of clinical trials that Dr. Einstein has been the overall principal investigator or local principal investigator for the past 12 months from Baxalta, Photocure, Fujiboro, Eli Lilly, PDS Biotechnologies, and Becton-Dickinson.
Dr. Einstein is Professor and Chair, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women’s Health, and Assistant Dean, Clinical Research Unit, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey.
Dr. Einstein has advised, but does not receive an honorarium from any companies. In specific cases his employer has received payment for his consultation from Photocure, Papivax, Inovio, PDS Biotechnologies, Natera, and Immunovaccine. If travel is required for meetings with any industry, the company pays for Dr. Einstein’s travel-related expenses. Also, his employers have received grant funding for research-related costs of clinical trials that Dr. Einstein has been the overall principal investigator or local principal investigator for the past 12 months from Baxalta, Photocure, Fujiboro, Eli Lilly, PDS Biotechnologies, and Becton-Dickinson.
Vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and periodic cervical screening have significantly decreased the incidence of invasive cervical cancer. But cancers still exist despite the availability of these useful clinical tools, especially in women of reproductive age in developing regions of the world. In the 2016 update on cervical disease, I reviewed studies on 2 promising and novel immunotherapies for cervical cancer: HPV therapeutic vaccine and adoptive T-cell therapy. This year the focus is on remarkable advances in the field of genomics and related studies that are rapidly expanding our understanding of the molecular characteristics of cervical cancer. Rewards of this research already being explored include novel immunotherapeutic agents as well as the repurposed use of existing drugs.
But first, with regard to cervical screening and follow-up, 2 recent large studies have yielded findings that have important implications for patient management. One pertains to the monitoring of women who have persistent infection with high-risk HPV but cytology results that are negative. Its conclusion was unequivocal and very useful in the management of our patients. The other study tracked HPV screening performed every 3 years and reported on the diagnostic efficiency of this shorter interval screening strategy.
Read about persistent HPV infection and CIN
Persistent HPV infection has a higher risk than most clinicians might think
Elfgren K, Elfström KM, Naucler P, Arnheim-Dahlström L, Dillner J. Management of women with human papillomavirus persistence: long-term follow-up of a randomized clinical trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(3):264.e1-e7.
It is well known that most cases of cervical cancer arise from persistent HPV infection, with the highest percentage of cancers caused by high-risk types 16 or 18. What has been uncertain, however, is the actual degree of risk that persistent infection confers over time for the development of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) or worse when a woman's repeated cytology reports are negative. In an analysis of a long-term double-blind, randomized, controlled screening study, Elfgren and colleagues showed that all women whose HPV infection persisted up to 7 years developed CIN grade 2 (CIN2+), while those whose infection cleared in that period, or changed genotype, had no precancerous lesions out to 13 years of follow-up.
Related Article:
It is time for HPV vaccination to be considered part of routine preventive health care
Details of the study
Between 1997 and 2000, 12,527 Swedish women between the ages of 32 and 38 years who were undergoing organized cervical cancer screening agreed to participate in a 1:1-randomized prospective trial to determine the benefit of screening with HPV and cytology (intervention group) compared with cytology screening alone (control group). However, brush sampling for HPV was performed even on women in the control group, with the samples frozen for later testing. All participants were identified in the Swedish National Cervical Screening Registry.
Women in the intervention group who initially tested positive for HPV but whose cytology test results were negative (n = 341) were invited to return a year later for repeat HPV testing; 270 women returned and 119 had type-specific HPV persistence. Of those with persistent infection, 100 agreed to undergo colposcopy; 111 women from the control group were randomly selected to undergo sham HPV testing and colposcopy, and 95 attended. Women with evident cytologic abnormalities received treatment per protocol. Those with negative cytology results were offered annual HPV testing thereafter, and each follow-up with documented type-specific HPV persistence led to repeat colposcopy. A comparable number of women from the control group had repeat colposcopies.
Although some women were lost to clinical follow-up throughout the trial, all 195 who attended the first colposcopy were followed for at least 5 years in the Swedish registry, and 191 were followed in the registry for 13 years. Of 102 women with known HPV persistence at baseline (100 in the treatment group; 2 in the randomly selected control group), 31 became HPV negative, 4 evidenced a switch in HPV type but cleared the initial infection, 27 had unknown persistence status due to missed HPV tests, and 40 had continuously type-specific persistence. Of note, persistent HPV16 infection seemed to impart a higher risk of CIN development than did persistent HPV18 infection.
All 40 participants with clinically verified continuously persistent HPV infection developed CIN2+ within 7 years of baseline documentation of persistence (FIGURE 1). Among the 27 women with unknown persistence status, risk of CIN2+ occurrence within 7 years was 50%. None of the 35 women who cleared their infection or switched HPV type developed CIN2+.
Read about HPV-cytology cotesting
HPV−cytology cotesting every 3 years lowers population rates of cervical precancer and cancer
Silver MI, Schiffman M, Fetterman B, et al. The population impact of human papillomavirus/cytology cervical cotesting at 3-year intervals: reduced cervical cancer risk and decreased yield of precancer per screen. Cancer. 2016;122(23):3682−3686.
Current guidelines on screening for cervical cancer in women 30 to 65 years of age advise the preferred strategy of using cytology alone every 3 years or combining HPV testing and cytology every 5 years.1 These guidelines, based on data available at the time they were written, were meant to offer a reasonable balance between timely detection of abnormalities and avoidance of potential harms from screening too frequently. However, many patients are reluctant to postpone repeat testing to the extent recommended. Several authorities have in fact asked that screening intervals be revisited, perhaps allowing for a range of strategies, contending that the level of protection once provided by annual screening should be the benchmark by which evolving strategies are judged.2 Today, they point out, the risk of cancer doubles in the 3 years following an initial negative cytology result, and it also increases by lengthening the cotesting interval from 3 to 5 years. They additionally question the validity of using frequency of colposcopies as a surrogate to measure harms of screening, and suggest that many women would willingly accept the procedure's minimal discomfort and inconvenience to gain peace of mind.
The study by Silver and colleagues gives credence to considering a shorter cotesting interval. Since 2003, Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) has implemented 3-year cotesting. To determine actual clinical outcomes of cotesting at this interval, KPNC analyzed data on more than 1 million women in its care between 2003 and 2012. Although investigators expected that they might see decreasing efficiency in cotesting over time, they instead found an increased detection rate of precancerous lesions per woman screened in the larger of 2 study cohorts.
Related Article:
Women’s Preventive Services Initiative Guidelines provide consensus for practicing ObGyns
Details of the study
Included were all women 30 years of age or older enrolled in this study at KPNC between 2003 and 2012 who underwent HPV−cytology cotesting every 3 years. The population in its entirety (1,065,273 women) was deemed the "open cohort" and represented KPNC's total annual experience. A subset of this population, the "closed cohort," was designed to gauge the effect of repeated screening on a fixed population and comprised only those women enrolled and initially screened between 2003 and 2004 and then followed longitudinally until 2012.
For each cohort, investigators calculated the ratios of precancer and cancer diagnoses to the total number of cotests performed on the cohort's population. The 3-year testing periods were 2004−2006, 2007−2009, and 2010−2012. Also calculated in these periods were the ratios of colposcopic biopsies to cotests and the rates of precancer diagnoses (TABLE).
In the open cohort, the biopsy rate nearly doubled over the course of the study. Precancer diagnoses per number of cotests rose by 71.5% between the first and second testing periods (P = .001) and then eased off by 10% in the third period (P<.001). These corresponding increases throughout the study yielded a stable number of biopsies (16 to 22) needed to detect precancer.
In the closed long-term cohort, the biopsy rate rose, but not as much as in the open cohort. Precancer diagnoses per number of cotests rose by 47% between the first and second periods (P≤.001), but in the third period fell back by 28% (P<.001) to a level just above the first period results. The number of biopsies needed to detect a precancerous lesion in the closed cohort rose from 19 to 33 over the course of the study, suggesting there may have been some loss of screening efficiency in the fixed group.
Read about molecular profiling of cervical cancer
Molecular profiling of cervical cancer is revolutionizing treatment
The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Integratedgenomic and molecular characterization of cervical cancer. Nature. 2017;543(7645):378−384.
Effective treatments for cervical cancer could be close at hand, thanks to a recent explosion of knowledge at the molecular level about how specific cancers arise and what drives them other than HPV. The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network (TCGA) recently published the results of its genomic and proteomic analyses, which yielded distinct profiles for 178 cervical cancers with important patterns common to other cancers, such as uterine and breast cancer. These recently published findings on cervical cancer highlight areas of gene and protein dysfunction it shares with these other cancers, which could open the doors for new targets for treatments already developed or in the pipeline.
Related Article:
2016 Update on cervical disease
How molecular profiling is paying off for cervical cancer
Cancers develop in any given tissue through the altered function of different genes and signaling pathways in the tissue's cells. The latest extensive investigation conducted by the TCGA network has identified significant mutations in 5 genes previously unrecognized in association with cervical cancer, bringing the total now to 14.
Several highlights are featured in the TCGA's recently published work. One discovery is the amplification of genes CD274 and PDCD1LG2, which are involved with the expression of 2 cytolytic effector genes and are therefore likely targets for immunotherapeutic strategies. Another line of exploration, whole-genome sequencing, has detected an aberration in some cervical cancer tissue with the potential for immediate application. Duplication and copy number gain of BCAR4, a noncoding RNA, facilitates cell proliferation through the HER2/HER3 pathway, a target of the tyrosine-kinase inhibitor, lapatinib, which is currently used to treat breast cancer.
The integration of data from multiple layers of analysis (FIGURE 2) is helping investigators identify variations in cancers. DNA methylation, for instance, is a means by which cells control gene expression. An analysis of this process in cervical tumor tissue has revealed additional cancer subgroups in which messenger RNA increases the transition of epithelial cells to invasive mesenchymal cells. Targeting that process in these subgroups would likely enhance the effectiveness of novel small-molecule inhibitors and some standard cytotoxic chemotherapy.
Share your thoughts! Send your Letter to the Editor to [email protected]. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.
Vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and periodic cervical screening have significantly decreased the incidence of invasive cervical cancer. But cancers still exist despite the availability of these useful clinical tools, especially in women of reproductive age in developing regions of the world. In the 2016 update on cervical disease, I reviewed studies on 2 promising and novel immunotherapies for cervical cancer: HPV therapeutic vaccine and adoptive T-cell therapy. This year the focus is on remarkable advances in the field of genomics and related studies that are rapidly expanding our understanding of the molecular characteristics of cervical cancer. Rewards of this research already being explored include novel immunotherapeutic agents as well as the repurposed use of existing drugs.
But first, with regard to cervical screening and follow-up, 2 recent large studies have yielded findings that have important implications for patient management. One pertains to the monitoring of women who have persistent infection with high-risk HPV but cytology results that are negative. Its conclusion was unequivocal and very useful in the management of our patients. The other study tracked HPV screening performed every 3 years and reported on the diagnostic efficiency of this shorter interval screening strategy.
Read about persistent HPV infection and CIN
Persistent HPV infection has a higher risk than most clinicians might think
Elfgren K, Elfström KM, Naucler P, Arnheim-Dahlström L, Dillner J. Management of women with human papillomavirus persistence: long-term follow-up of a randomized clinical trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(3):264.e1-e7.
It is well known that most cases of cervical cancer arise from persistent HPV infection, with the highest percentage of cancers caused by high-risk types 16 or 18. What has been uncertain, however, is the actual degree of risk that persistent infection confers over time for the development of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) or worse when a woman's repeated cytology reports are negative. In an analysis of a long-term double-blind, randomized, controlled screening study, Elfgren and colleagues showed that all women whose HPV infection persisted up to 7 years developed CIN grade 2 (CIN2+), while those whose infection cleared in that period, or changed genotype, had no precancerous lesions out to 13 years of follow-up.
Related Article:
It is time for HPV vaccination to be considered part of routine preventive health care
Details of the study
Between 1997 and 2000, 12,527 Swedish women between the ages of 32 and 38 years who were undergoing organized cervical cancer screening agreed to participate in a 1:1-randomized prospective trial to determine the benefit of screening with HPV and cytology (intervention group) compared with cytology screening alone (control group). However, brush sampling for HPV was performed even on women in the control group, with the samples frozen for later testing. All participants were identified in the Swedish National Cervical Screening Registry.
Women in the intervention group who initially tested positive for HPV but whose cytology test results were negative (n = 341) were invited to return a year later for repeat HPV testing; 270 women returned and 119 had type-specific HPV persistence. Of those with persistent infection, 100 agreed to undergo colposcopy; 111 women from the control group were randomly selected to undergo sham HPV testing and colposcopy, and 95 attended. Women with evident cytologic abnormalities received treatment per protocol. Those with negative cytology results were offered annual HPV testing thereafter, and each follow-up with documented type-specific HPV persistence led to repeat colposcopy. A comparable number of women from the control group had repeat colposcopies.
Although some women were lost to clinical follow-up throughout the trial, all 195 who attended the first colposcopy were followed for at least 5 years in the Swedish registry, and 191 were followed in the registry for 13 years. Of 102 women with known HPV persistence at baseline (100 in the treatment group; 2 in the randomly selected control group), 31 became HPV negative, 4 evidenced a switch in HPV type but cleared the initial infection, 27 had unknown persistence status due to missed HPV tests, and 40 had continuously type-specific persistence. Of note, persistent HPV16 infection seemed to impart a higher risk of CIN development than did persistent HPV18 infection.
All 40 participants with clinically verified continuously persistent HPV infection developed CIN2+ within 7 years of baseline documentation of persistence (FIGURE 1). Among the 27 women with unknown persistence status, risk of CIN2+ occurrence within 7 years was 50%. None of the 35 women who cleared their infection or switched HPV type developed CIN2+.
Read about HPV-cytology cotesting
HPV−cytology cotesting every 3 years lowers population rates of cervical precancer and cancer
Silver MI, Schiffman M, Fetterman B, et al. The population impact of human papillomavirus/cytology cervical cotesting at 3-year intervals: reduced cervical cancer risk and decreased yield of precancer per screen. Cancer. 2016;122(23):3682−3686.
Current guidelines on screening for cervical cancer in women 30 to 65 years of age advise the preferred strategy of using cytology alone every 3 years or combining HPV testing and cytology every 5 years.1 These guidelines, based on data available at the time they were written, were meant to offer a reasonable balance between timely detection of abnormalities and avoidance of potential harms from screening too frequently. However, many patients are reluctant to postpone repeat testing to the extent recommended. Several authorities have in fact asked that screening intervals be revisited, perhaps allowing for a range of strategies, contending that the level of protection once provided by annual screening should be the benchmark by which evolving strategies are judged.2 Today, they point out, the risk of cancer doubles in the 3 years following an initial negative cytology result, and it also increases by lengthening the cotesting interval from 3 to 5 years. They additionally question the validity of using frequency of colposcopies as a surrogate to measure harms of screening, and suggest that many women would willingly accept the procedure's minimal discomfort and inconvenience to gain peace of mind.
The study by Silver and colleagues gives credence to considering a shorter cotesting interval. Since 2003, Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) has implemented 3-year cotesting. To determine actual clinical outcomes of cotesting at this interval, KPNC analyzed data on more than 1 million women in its care between 2003 and 2012. Although investigators expected that they might see decreasing efficiency in cotesting over time, they instead found an increased detection rate of precancerous lesions per woman screened in the larger of 2 study cohorts.
Related Article:
Women’s Preventive Services Initiative Guidelines provide consensus for practicing ObGyns
Details of the study
Included were all women 30 years of age or older enrolled in this study at KPNC between 2003 and 2012 who underwent HPV−cytology cotesting every 3 years. The population in its entirety (1,065,273 women) was deemed the "open cohort" and represented KPNC's total annual experience. A subset of this population, the "closed cohort," was designed to gauge the effect of repeated screening on a fixed population and comprised only those women enrolled and initially screened between 2003 and 2004 and then followed longitudinally until 2012.
For each cohort, investigators calculated the ratios of precancer and cancer diagnoses to the total number of cotests performed on the cohort's population. The 3-year testing periods were 2004−2006, 2007−2009, and 2010−2012. Also calculated in these periods were the ratios of colposcopic biopsies to cotests and the rates of precancer diagnoses (TABLE).
In the open cohort, the biopsy rate nearly doubled over the course of the study. Precancer diagnoses per number of cotests rose by 71.5% between the first and second testing periods (P = .001) and then eased off by 10% in the third period (P<.001). These corresponding increases throughout the study yielded a stable number of biopsies (16 to 22) needed to detect precancer.
In the closed long-term cohort, the biopsy rate rose, but not as much as in the open cohort. Precancer diagnoses per number of cotests rose by 47% between the first and second periods (P≤.001), but in the third period fell back by 28% (P<.001) to a level just above the first period results. The number of biopsies needed to detect a precancerous lesion in the closed cohort rose from 19 to 33 over the course of the study, suggesting there may have been some loss of screening efficiency in the fixed group.
Read about molecular profiling of cervical cancer
Molecular profiling of cervical cancer is revolutionizing treatment
The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Integratedgenomic and molecular characterization of cervical cancer. Nature. 2017;543(7645):378−384.
Effective treatments for cervical cancer could be close at hand, thanks to a recent explosion of knowledge at the molecular level about how specific cancers arise and what drives them other than HPV. The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network (TCGA) recently published the results of its genomic and proteomic analyses, which yielded distinct profiles for 178 cervical cancers with important patterns common to other cancers, such as uterine and breast cancer. These recently published findings on cervical cancer highlight areas of gene and protein dysfunction it shares with these other cancers, which could open the doors for new targets for treatments already developed or in the pipeline.
Related Article:
2016 Update on cervical disease
How molecular profiling is paying off for cervical cancer
Cancers develop in any given tissue through the altered function of different genes and signaling pathways in the tissue's cells. The latest extensive investigation conducted by the TCGA network has identified significant mutations in 5 genes previously unrecognized in association with cervical cancer, bringing the total now to 14.
Several highlights are featured in the TCGA's recently published work. One discovery is the amplification of genes CD274 and PDCD1LG2, which are involved with the expression of 2 cytolytic effector genes and are therefore likely targets for immunotherapeutic strategies. Another line of exploration, whole-genome sequencing, has detected an aberration in some cervical cancer tissue with the potential for immediate application. Duplication and copy number gain of BCAR4, a noncoding RNA, facilitates cell proliferation through the HER2/HER3 pathway, a target of the tyrosine-kinase inhibitor, lapatinib, which is currently used to treat breast cancer.
The integration of data from multiple layers of analysis (FIGURE 2) is helping investigators identify variations in cancers. DNA methylation, for instance, is a means by which cells control gene expression. An analysis of this process in cervical tumor tissue has revealed additional cancer subgroups in which messenger RNA increases the transition of epithelial cells to invasive mesenchymal cells. Targeting that process in these subgroups would likely enhance the effectiveness of novel small-molecule inhibitors and some standard cytotoxic chemotherapy.
Share your thoughts! Send your Letter to the Editor to [email protected]. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.
- Saslow D, Solomon D, Lawson HW, et al. American Cancer Society; American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology; American Society for Clinical Pathology. American Cancer Society, American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and American Society for Clinical Pathology screening guidelines for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer. Am J Clin Pathol. 2012;137(4):516–542.
- Kinney W, Wright TC, Dinkelspiel HE, DeFrancesco M, Thomas Cox J, Huh W. Increased cervical cancer risk associated with screening at longer intervals. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(2):311–315.
- Saslow D, Solomon D, Lawson HW, et al. American Cancer Society; American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology; American Society for Clinical Pathology. American Cancer Society, American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and American Society for Clinical Pathology screening guidelines for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer. Am J Clin Pathol. 2012;137(4):516–542.
- Kinney W, Wright TC, Dinkelspiel HE, DeFrancesco M, Thomas Cox J, Huh W. Increased cervical cancer risk associated with screening at longer intervals. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(2):311–315.
Lifetime risk of hand OA comes close to 40%
Almost 40% of Americans can expect to develop hand osteoarthritis (OA) in their lifetimes, according to an analysis involving participants from an ongoing population-based, prospective cohort study.
The overall risk, 39.8%, is based on data from 2,218 eligible subjects in the Johnston County Osteoarthritis Project, but there is significant variation among various subgroups, said Jin Qin, ScD, of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and her associates (Arthritis Rheumatol. 2017 May 4. doi: 10.1002/art.40097).
This report is the first to estimate the lifetime risk of symptomatic hand OA, they noted, and “given the aging population and increasing life expectancy in the United States, it is reasonable to expect that more Americans will be affected by this painful and debilitating condition in the years to come.”
The study was funded by the CDC and the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases. The investigators did not include any disclosures in the report.
Almost 40% of Americans can expect to develop hand osteoarthritis (OA) in their lifetimes, according to an analysis involving participants from an ongoing population-based, prospective cohort study.
The overall risk, 39.8%, is based on data from 2,218 eligible subjects in the Johnston County Osteoarthritis Project, but there is significant variation among various subgroups, said Jin Qin, ScD, of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and her associates (Arthritis Rheumatol. 2017 May 4. doi: 10.1002/art.40097).
This report is the first to estimate the lifetime risk of symptomatic hand OA, they noted, and “given the aging population and increasing life expectancy in the United States, it is reasonable to expect that more Americans will be affected by this painful and debilitating condition in the years to come.”
The study was funded by the CDC and the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases. The investigators did not include any disclosures in the report.
Almost 40% of Americans can expect to develop hand osteoarthritis (OA) in their lifetimes, according to an analysis involving participants from an ongoing population-based, prospective cohort study.
The overall risk, 39.8%, is based on data from 2,218 eligible subjects in the Johnston County Osteoarthritis Project, but there is significant variation among various subgroups, said Jin Qin, ScD, of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and her associates (Arthritis Rheumatol. 2017 May 4. doi: 10.1002/art.40097).
This report is the first to estimate the lifetime risk of symptomatic hand OA, they noted, and “given the aging population and increasing life expectancy in the United States, it is reasonable to expect that more Americans will be affected by this painful and debilitating condition in the years to come.”
The study was funded by the CDC and the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases. The investigators did not include any disclosures in the report.
FROM ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATOLOGY