Do Lung Cancer Eligibility Criteria Align with Risk among Blacks and Hispanics?

Black patients have higher lung cancer risk despite lower pack years of smoking. We assessed lung cancer risk by race, ethnicity, and sex among a nationally representative population eligible for lung cancer screening based on Medicare criteria.We used data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2007-2012 to assess lung cancer risk by sex, race and ethnicity among persons satisfying Medicare age and pack-year smoking eligibility criteria for lung cancer screening. We assessed Medicare eligibility based on age (55-77 years) and pack-years (≥ 30). We assessed 6-year lung cancer risk using a risk prediction model from Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening trial that was modified in 2012 (PLCOm2012). We compared the proportions of eligible persons by sex, race and ethnicity using Medicare criteria with a risk cut-point that was adjusted to achieve comparable total number of persons eligible for screening.Among the 29.7 million persons aged 55-77 years who ever smoked, we found that 7.3 million (24.5%) were eligible for lung cancer screening under Medicare criteria. Among those eligible, Blacks had statistically significant higher (4.4%) and Hispanics lower lung cancer risk (1.2%) than non-Hispanic Whites (3.2%). At a cut-point of 2.12% risk for lung screening eligibility, the percentage of Blacks and Hispanics showed statistically significant changes. Blacks eligible rose by 48% and Hispanics eligible declined by 63%. Black men and Hispanic women were affected the most. There was little change in eligibility among Whites.Medicare eligibility criteria for lung cancer screening do not align with estimated risk for lung cancer among Blacks and Hispanics. Data are urgently needed to determine whether use of risk-based eligibility screening improves lung cancer outcomes among minority patients

Lung Cancer Risk by Race, Ethnicity and Sex Among Ever Smokers Eligible for Lung Cancer Screening Under Medicare.

<p>^† Significantly different compared to whites at 95% confidence level.</p><p>*Includes persons of races other than black, white and Hispanic.</p><p>**Eligibility based on age (55–77), pack-years (≤30) and any smoking within 15 years.</p><p>***Based on PLCO_m2102 model</p><p>Lung Cancer Risk by Race, Ethnicity and Sex Among Ever Smokers Eligible for Lung Cancer Screening Under Medicare.</p

Comparison of Medicare lung cancer screening eligibility* with varying cut-points for PLCOm2012 by race/ethnicity.

<p>*Eligibility based on age (55–77), pack—year (30) and any smoking within 15 years.</p

Differences by Race, Ethnicity and Sex in Percent of Ever Smokers Eligible between Medicare and Risk Criteria.

<p>Numbers are in units of 10,000 persons. 95% CI = 95% Confidence Interval.</p><p>^† Significant at 95% confidence limit.</p><p>*cut-point = 2.12% six year risk</p><p>**Eligibility based on age (55–77), pack-years (30) and ever smokers. Eligibility is calculated on 2.12% six-year risk for lung cancer. This cut-point was derived by increasing the risk until the total number of persons eligible was comparable to eligible population based on age and pack years.</p><p>Differences by Race, Ethnicity and Sex in Percent of Ever Smokers Eligible between Medicare and Risk Criteria.</p

Biomarkers of Angiogenesis and Clinical Outcomes to Cabozantinib and Everolimus in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma from the Phase III METEOR Trial

Purpose: Anti-angiogenic VEGF-receptor (VEGFR) inhibitors are approved for metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) and their efficacy is higher in high angiogenic tumors. As cabozantinib inhibits multiple tyrosine kinase receptors, including VEGFRs, we tested whether markers of angiogenesis, including microvascular density (MVD) and mast cell density (MCD), could predict benefit from cabozantinib versus everolimus, using RCC samples from the METEOR (NCT01865747) trial. Experimental design: MVD and MCD were studied in 430 patients (cabozantinib = 216, everolimus = 214) by double immunohistochemistry for CD31 (vascular marker) and tryptase (mast cell marker) coupled with automated image analysis. Results from evaluable cases (MVD = 360, MCD =325) were correlated with progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR). Results: MVD was positively correlated with MCD. In the whole cohort, high MVD and high MCD were associated with longer PFS; improved PFS was most evident in patients with high levels of both MCD and MVD. Cabozantinib was associated with improved PFS, OS, and ORR compared to everolimus, irrespective of MVD levels. Cabozantinib was also associated with improved ORR compared to everolimus, irrespective of MCD levels. For PFS and OS, the treatment effect for cabozantinib versus everolimus tended to be greater in tumors with low MCD. Conclusions: High MVD and high MCD are associated with improved outcome in mccRCC but don't predict efficacy to cabozantinib versus everolimus. The high efficacy of cabozantinib in low angiogenic tumors allows us to speculate that its anti-tumor activity is not exclusively mediated by VEGFR inhibition

Prepectoral versus subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction after skin-sparing mastectomy or nipple-sparing mastectomy (OPBC-02/ PREPEC): a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised, superiority trial.

INTRODUCTION The emphasis on aesthetic outcomes and quality of life (QoL) has motivated surgeons to develop skin-sparing or nipple-sparing mastectomy (SSM/ NSM) for breast cancer treatment or prevention. During the same operation, a so-called immediate breast reconstruction is performed. The breast can be reconstructed by positioning of a breast implant above (prepectoral) or below (subpectoral) the pectoralis major muscle or by using the patients' own tissue (autologous reconstruction). The optimal positioning of the implant prepectoral or subpectoral is currently not clear. Subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is still standard care in many countries, but prepectoral IBBR is increasingly performed. This heterogeneity in breast reconstruction practice is calling for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) to guide treatment decisions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS International, pragmatic, multicentre, randomised, superiority trial. The primary objective of this trial is to test whether prepectoral IBBR provides better QoL with respect to long-term (24 months) physical well-being (chest) compared with subpectoral IBBR for patients undergoing SSM or NSM for prevention or treatment of breast cancer. Secondary objectives will compare prepectoral versus subpectoral IBBR in terms of safety, QoL and patient satisfaction, aesthetic outcomes and burden on patients. Total number of patients to be included: 372 (186 per arm). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This study will be conducted in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical approval has been obtained for the lead investigator's site by the Ethics Committee 'Ethikkommission Nordwest- und Zentralschweiz' (2020-00256, 26 March 2020). The results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed medical journal, independent of the results, following the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials standards for RCTs and good publication practice. Metadata describing the type, size and content of the datasets will be shared along with the study protocol and case report forms on public repositories adhering to the FAIR (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reuse) principles. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT04293146

Continuous versus intermittent extended adjuvant letrozole for breast cancer: final results of randomized phase III SOLE (Study of Letrozole Extension) and SOLE Estrogen Substudy

Background: Late recurrences in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancers remain an important challenge. Avoidance or delayed development of resistance represents the main objective in extended endocrine therapy (ET). In animal models, resistance was reversed with restoration of circulating estrogen levels during interruption of letrozole treatment. This phase III, randomized, open-label Study of Letrozole Extension (SOLE) studied the effect of extended intermittent letrozole treatment in comparison with continuous letrozole. In parallel, the SOLE estrogen substudy (SOLE-EST) analyzed the levels of estrogen during the interruption of treatment. Patients and methods: SOLE enrolled 4884 postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, lymph node-positive, operable breast cancer between December 2007 and October 2012 and among them, 104 patients were enrolled in SOLE-EST. They must have undergone local treatment and have completed 4-6 years of adjuvant ET. Patients were randomized between continuous letrozole (2.5 mg/day orally for 5 years) and intermittent letrozole treatment (2.5 mg/day for 9 months followed by a 3-month interruption in years 1-4 and then 2.5 mg/day during all of year 5). Results: Intention-to-treat population included 4851 women in SOLE (n = 2425 in the intermittent and n = 2426 in the continuous letrozole groups) and 103 women in SOLE-EST (n = 78 in the intermittent and n = 25 in the continuous letrozole groups). After a median follow-up of 84 months, 7-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 81.4% in the intermittent group and 81.5% in the continuous group (hazard ratio: 1.03, 95% confidence interval: 0.91-1.17). Reported adverse events were similar in both groups. Circulating estrogen recovery was demonstrated within 6 weeks after the stop of letrozole treatment. Conclusions: Extended adjuvant ET by intermittent administration of letrozole did not improve DFS compared with continuous use, despite the recovery of circulating estrogen levels. The similar DFS coupled with previously reported quality-of-life advantages suggest intermittent extended treatment is a valid option for patients who require or prefer a treatment interruption.SCOPUS: ar.jDecretOANoAutActifinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Activation of persons living with HIV for treatment, the great study Health behavior, health promotion and society

Background: Patient empowerment represents a potent tool for addressing racial, ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in health care, particularly for chronic conditions such as HIV infection that require active patient engagement. This multimodal intervention, developed in concert with HIV patients and clinicians, aims to provide HIV patients with the knowledge, skills, attitudes and tools to become more activated patients. Methods/design: Randomized controlled trial of a multimodal intervention designed to activate persons living with HIV. The intervention includes four components: 1) use of a web-enabled hand-held device (Apple iPod Touch) loaded with a Personal Health Record (ePHR) customized for HIV patients; 2) six 90-minute group-based training sessions in use of the device, internet and the ePHR; 3) a pre-visit coaching session; and 4) clinician education regarding how they can support activated patients. Outcome measures include pre- post changes in patient activation measure score (primary outcome), eHealth literacy, patient involvement in decision-making and care, medication adherence, preventive care, and HIV Viral Load. Discussion: We hypothesize that participants receiving the intervention will show greater improvement in empowerment and the intervention will reduce disparities in study outcomes. Disparities in these measures will be smaller than those in the usual care group. Findings have implications for activating persons living with HIV and for other marginalized groups living with chronic illness. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02165735, 6/13/2014