Defining the critical hurdles in cancer immunotherapy

Scientific discoveries that provide strong evidence of antitumor effects in preclinical models often encounter significant delays before being tested in patients with cancer. While some of these delays have a scientific basis, others do not. We need to do better. Innovative strategies need to move into early stage clinical trials as quickly as it is safe, and if successful, these therapies should efficiently obtain regulatory approval and widespread clinical application. In late 2009 and 2010 the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC), convened an "Immunotherapy Summit" with representatives from immunotherapy organizations representing Europe, Japan, China and North America to discuss collaborations to improve development and delivery of cancer immunotherapy. One of the concepts raised by SITC and defined as critical by all parties was the need to identify hurdles that impede effective translation of cancer immunotherapy. With consensus on these hurdles, international working groups could be developed to make recommendations vetted by the participating organizations. These recommendations could then be considered by regulatory bodies, governmental and private funding agencies, pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions to facilitate changes necessary to accelerate clinical translation of novel immune-based cancer therapies. The critical hurdles identified by representatives of the collaborating organizations, now organized as the World Immunotherapy Council, are presented and discussed in this report. Some of the identified hurdles impede all investigators; others hinder investigators only in certain regions or institutions or are more relevant to specific types of immunotherapy or first-in-humans studies. Each of these hurdles can significantly delay clinical translation of promising advances in immunotherapy yet if overcome, have the potential to improve outcomes of patients with cancer

Prognostic model to predict postoperative acute kidney injury in patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery based on a national prospective observational cohort study.

Background: Acute illness, existing co-morbidities and surgical stress response can all contribute to postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery. The aim of this study was prospectively to develop a pragmatic prognostic model to stratify patients according to risk of developing AKI after major gastrointestinal surgery. Methods: This prospective multicentre cohort study included consecutive adults undergoing elective or emergency gastrointestinal resection, liver resection or stoma reversal in 2-week blocks over a continuous 3-month period. The primary outcome was the rate of AKI within 7 days of surgery. Bootstrap stability was used to select clinically plausible risk factors into the model. Internal model validation was carried out by bootstrap validation. Results: A total of 4544 patients were included across 173 centres in the UK and Ireland. The overall rate of AKI was 14·2 per cent (646 of 4544) and the 30-day mortality rate was 1·8 per cent (84 of 4544). Stage 1 AKI was significantly associated with 30-day mortality (unadjusted odds ratio 7·61, 95 per cent c.i. 4·49 to 12·90; P < 0·001), with increasing odds of death with each AKI stage. Six variables were selected for inclusion in the prognostic model: age, sex, ASA grade, preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate, planned open surgery and preoperative use of either an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker. Internal validation demonstrated good model discrimination (c-statistic 0·65). Discussion: Following major gastrointestinal surgery, AKI occurred in one in seven patients. This preoperative prognostic model identified patients at high risk of postoperative AKI. Validation in an independent data set is required to ensure generalizability

Therapeutic Potential of HDL in Cardioprotection and Tissue Repair

Epidemiological studies support a strong association between high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels and heart failure incidence. Experimental evidence from different angles supports the view that low HDL is unlikely an innocent bystander in the development of heart failure. HDL exerts direct cardioprotective effects, which are mediated via its interactions with the myocardium and more specifically with cardiomyocytes. HDL may improve cardiac function in several ways. Firstly, HDL may protect the heart against ischaemia/reperfusion injury resulting in a reduction of infarct size and thus in myocardial salvage. Secondly, HDL can improve cardiac function in the absence of ischaemic heart disease as illustrated by beneficial effects conferred by these lipoproteins in diabetic cardiomyopathy. Thirdly, HDL may improve cardiac function by reducing infarct expansion and by attenuating ventricular remodelling post-myocardial infarction. These different mechanisms are substantiated by in vitro, ex vivo, and in vivo intervention studies that applied treatment with native HDL, treatment with reconstituted HDL, or human apo A-I gene transfer. The effect of human apo A-I gene transfer on infarct expansion and ventricular remodelling post-myocardial infarction illustrates the beneficial effects of HDL on tissue repair. The role of HDL in tissue repair is further underpinned by the potent effects of these lipoproteins on endothelial progenitor cell number, function, and incorporation, which may in particular be relevant under conditions of high endothelial cell turnover. Furthermore, topical HDL therapy enhances cutaneous wound healing in different models. In conclusion, the development of HDL-targeted interventions in these strategically chosen therapeutic areas is supported by a strong clinical rationale and significant preclinical data.status: publishe