Capivasertib, an AKT Kinase Inhibitor, as Monotherapy or in Combination With Fulvestrant in Patients With AKT1 E17K-Mutant, ER-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE:The activating mutation AKT1 E17K occurs in ~7% of ER+ metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We report, from a multipart, first-in-human, Phase I study (NCT01226316), tolerability and activity of capivasertib, an oral AKT inhibitor, as monotherapy or combined with fulvestrant in expansion cohorts of AKT1 E17K-mutant ER+ MBC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS:Patients with an AKT1 E17K mutation, detected by local (NGS) or central (plasma-based BEAMing) testing, received capivasertib 480 mg bid, 4 days on, 3 days off, weekly or 400 mg bid combined with fulvestrant at the labeled dose. Study endpoints included safety, objective response rate (ORR; RECIST v1.1), progression-free survival (PFS) and clinical benefit rate at 24 weeks (CBR24). Biomarker analyses were conducted in the combination cohort. RESULTS:From October 2013 to August 2018, 63 heavily pretreated patients received capivasertib (20 monotherapy, 43 combination). ORR was 20% with monotherapy, and within the combination cohort was 36% in fulvestrant-pretreated and 20% in fulvestrant-naïve patients, although this latter group may have had more aggressive disease at baseline. AKT1 E17K mutations were detectable in plasma by BEAMing (95%, 41/43), ddPCR (80%, 33/41) and NGS (76%, 31/41). A 50% decrease in AKT1 E17K at cycle 2 day 1 was associated with improved PFS. Combination therapy appeared more tolerable than monotherapy (most frequent grade ≥3 adverse events: rash [9% vs 20%], hyperglycemia [5% vs 30%], diarrhea [5% vs 10%]). CONCLUSIONS:Capivasertib demonstrated clinically meaningful activity in heavily pretreated AKT1 E17K-mutant ER+ MBC patients, including those with prior disease progression on fulvestrant. Tolerability and activity appeared improved by the combination

Adherence to antibiotic treatment guidelines and outcomes in the hospitalized elderly with different types of pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Few studies evaluated the clinical outcomes of Community Acquired Pneumonia (CAP), Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia (HAP) and Health Care-Associated Pneumonia (HCAP) in relation to the adherence of antibiotic treatment to the guidelines of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and the American Thoracic Society (ATS) in hospitalized elderly people (65years or older). METHODS: Data were obtained from REPOSI, a prospective registry held in 87 Italian internal medicine and geriatric wards. Patients with a diagnosis of pneumonia (ICD-9 480-487) or prescribed with an antibiotic for pneumonia as indication were selected. The empirical antibiotic regimen was defined to be adherent to guidelines if concordant with the treatment regimens recommended by IDSA/ATS for CAP, HAP, and HCAP. Outcomes were assessed by logistic regression models. RESULTS: A diagnosis of pneumonia was made in 317 patients. Only 38.8% of them received an empirical antibiotic regimen that was adherent to guidelines. However, no significant association was found between adherence to guidelines and outcomes. Having HAP, older age, and higher CIRS severity index were the main factors associated with in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The adherence to antibiotic treatment guidelines was poor, particularly for HAP and HCAP, suggesting the need for more adherence to the optimal management of antibiotics in the elderly with pneumonia.Background: Few studies evaluated the clinical outcomes of Community Acquired Pneumonia (CAP), Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia (HAP) and Health Care-Associated Pneumonia (HCAP) in relation to the adherence of antibiotic treatment to the guidelines of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and the American Thoracic Society (ATS) in hospitalized elderly people (65 years or older). Methods: Data were obtained from REPOSI, a prospective registry held in 87 Italian internal medicine and geriatric wards. Patients with a diagnosis of pneumonia (ICD-9 480-487) or prescribed with an antibiotic for pneumonia as indication were selected. The empirical antibiotic regimen was defined to be adherent to guidelines if concordant with the treatment regimens recommended by IDSA/ATS for CAP, HAP, and HCAP. Outcomes were assessed by logistic regression models. Results: A diagnosis of pneumonia was made in 317 patients. Only 38.8% of them received an empirical antibiotic regimen that was adherent to guidelines. However, no significant association was found between adherence to guidelines and outcomes. Having HAP, older age, and higher CIRS severity index were the main factors associated with in-hospital mortality. Conclusions: The adherence to antibiotic treatment guidelines was poor, particularly for HAP and HCAP, suggesting the need for more adherence to the optimal management of antibiotics in the elderly with pneumonia

Validity of the online PREDICT tool in older patients with breast cancer: a population-based study

BACKGROUND: Predicting breast cancer outcome in older patients is challenging, as it has been shown that the available tools are not accurate in older patients. The PREDICT tool may serve as an alternative tool, as it was developed in a cohort that included almost 1800 women aged 65 years or over. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of the online PREDICT tool in a population-based cohort of unselected older patients with breast cancer. METHODS: Patients were included from the population-based FOCUS-cohort. Observed 5- and 10-year overall survival were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method, and compared with predicted outcomes. Calibration was tested by composing calibration plots and Poisson Regression. Discriminatory accuracy was assessed by composing receiver-operator-curves and corresponding c-indices. RESULTS: In all 2012 included patients, observed and predicted overall survival differed by 1.7%, 95% confidence interval (CI)=−0.3–3.7, for 5-year overall survival, and 4.5%, 95% CI=2.3–6.6, for 10-year overall survival. Poisson regression showed that 5-year overall survival did not significantly differ from the ideal line (standardised mortality ratio (SMR)=1.07, 95% CI=0.98–1.16, P=0.133), but 10-year overall survival was significantly different from the perfect calibration (SMR=1.12, 95% CI=1.05–1.20, P=0.0004). The c-index for 5-year overall survival was 0.73, 95% CI=0.70–0.75, and 0.74, 95% CI=0.72–0.76, for 10-year overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: PREDICT can accurately predict 5-year overall survival in older patients with breast cancer. Ten-year predicted overall survival was, however, slightly overestimated

Which breast cancer decisions remain non-compliant with guidelines despite the use of computerised decision support?

Despite multidisciplinary tumour boards (MTBs), non-compliance with clinical practice guidelines is still observed for breast cancer patients. Computerised clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) may improve the implementation of guidelines, but cases of non-compliance persist. OncoDoc2, a guideline-based decision support system, has been routinely used to remind MTB physicians of patient-specific recommended care plans. Non-compliant MTB decisions were analysed using a multivariate adjusted logistic regression model. Between 2007 and 2009, 1624 decisions for invasive breast cancers with a global non-compliance rate of 8.3% were analysed. Patient factors associated with non-compliance were age>80 years (odds ratio (OR): 7.7; 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.7-15.7) in pre-surgical decisions; microinvasive tumour (OR: 5.2; 95% CI: 1.5-17.5), surgical discovery of microinvasion in addition to a unique invasive tumour (OR: 4.2; 95% CI: 1.4-12.5), and prior neoadjuvant treatment (OR: 4.2; 95% CI: 1.1-15.1) in decisions with recommendation of re-excision; age<35 years (OR: 4.7; 95% CI: 1.9-11.4), positive hormonal receptors with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 overexpression (OR: 15.7; 95% CI: 3.1-78.7), and the absence of prior axillary surgery (OR: 17.2; 95% CI: 5.1-58.1) in adjuvant decisions. Residual non-compliance despite the use of OncoDoc2 illustrates the need to question the clinical profiles where evidence is missing. These findings challenge the weaknesses of guideline content rather than the use of CDSSs