‘Whether you are gay or straight, I don’t like to see effeminate dancing’: effeminophobia in performance-level ballroom dance

This article discusses recent responses to performances of same-sex male ballroom dancing in order to consider the subtle difference which can exist between homophobia and effeminophobia. Given that the world of performance-level ballroom dancing is a gay-friendly environment, in which many participants are openly gay identified, this article will argue that a discourse of effeminophobia, rather than homophobia, underpins the world of performance-level ballroom dance. Performance-level ballroom dance is often read as camp not only because it represents exaggerated gender roles but because its official technique requires that the male dancer synthesise codes of masculinity and femininity in his dancing. What protects the gender-dissident male ballroom dancer from being read as effeminate is that he is paired with a female body performing excessive femininity. Without the foil of the hyper-feminine female partner, the same-sex couple draws attention to the fact that the male ballroom dancer is not dancing as a man but in accordance with ballroom’s queer construction of masculinity. Given that performance-level dance has struggled for so many years to be viewed as masculine sport, practitioners may, quite understandably, be anxious about any representation which suggests that ballroom dance may be an effeminate activity

Relationship between RET fusion partner and treatment outcomes in patients (pts) with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from the phase I/II ARROW study and real-world data (RWD)

Background: The ARROW study is assessing the anti-tumour activity of pralsetinib, a highly-selective RET inhibitor in advanced solid tumours, including RET fusion+ NSCLC. Prolonged overall survival (OS) was reported with RET inhibitor therapy in NSCLC pts with CCDC6 vs KIF5B RET fusions (Tan AC, et al. JTO 2020). We examined the relationship between RET fusion partner and treatment outcomes in pts with RET fusion+ NSCLC from ARROW and RWD. Methods: In phase 2 of ARROW, 233 pts with RET fusion+ NSCLC (KIF5B n=164, CCDC6 n=41, Other n=28) received 400mg/day pralsetinib until progression, intolerance or withdrawal. Primary endpoints: overall response rate (ORR) and safety. In Q4 2021, 67 pts with RET fusion+ NSCLC (KIF5B n=46, CCDC6 n=8, Other n=13) met eligibility criteria from the nationwide (US-based) de-identified Flatiron Health-FMI NSCLC clinico-genomic database. Cox regression analyses are reported. Results: Baseline characteristics by RET fusion partner were balanced across subgroups within ARROW. ORR was similar with KIF5B and CCDC6, but lower with Other RET fusions (Table); the same trend was seen in treatment-naïve and prior treatment subgroups. Disease control rate (DCR) was high in all pts, but lowest in the Other RET fusions subgroup. Median duration of response (DOR) and progression-free survival (PFS) were higher with CCDC6 vs KIF5B RET fusions irrespective of prior treatment. OS data are immature. In the RWD cohort, median OS was numerically longer in CCDC6 and Other RET fusions vs KIF5B RET-driven disease (52.8 and 38.5 vs 19.1 months); when adjusted for covariates including RET inhibitor usage (KIF5B n=12, CCDC6 n=5, Other n=5), OS HRs for CCDC6 and Other RET fusions vs KIF5B were 0.49 (95% CI: 0.08–3.11) and 0.41 (95% CI: 0.13–1.30), respectively. Conclusions: Pralsetinib is active in RET fusion+ NSCLC, regardless of fusion partner or prior treatment. CCDC6 RET-driven disease may have a better prognosis vs KIF5B

Nivolumab versus docetaxel in previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (CheckMate 017 and CheckMate 057): 3-year update and outcomes in patients with liver metastases

Abstract Background Long-term data with immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are limited. Two phase III trials demonstrated improved overall survival (OS) and a favorable safety profile with the anti-programmed death-1 antibody nivolumab versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced squamous (CheckMate 017) and nonsquamous (CheckMate 057) NSCLC. We report results from ≥3 years' follow-up, including subgroup analyses of patients with liver metastases, who historically have poorer prognosis among patients with NSCLC. Patients and methods Patients were randomized 1 : 1 to nivolumab (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) until progression or discontinuation. The primary end point of each study was OS. Patients with baseline liver metastases were pooled across studies by treatment for subgroup analyses. Results After 40.3 months' minimum follow-up in CheckMate 017 and 057, nivolumab continued to show an OS benefit versus docetaxel: estimated 3-year OS rates were 17% [95% confidence interval (CI), 14% to 21%] versus 8% (95% CI, 6% to 11%) in the pooled population with squamous or nonsquamous NSCLC. Nivolumab was generally well tolerated, with no new safety concerns identified. Of 854 randomized patients across both studies, 193 had baseline liver metastases. Nivolumab resulted in improved OS compared with docetaxel in patients with liver metastases (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50–0.91), consistent with findings from the overall pooled study population (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61–0.81). Rates of treatment-related hepatic adverse events (primarily grade 1–2 liver enzyme elevations) were slightly higher in nivolumab-treated patients with liver metastases (10%) than in the overall pooled population (6%). Conclusions After 3 years' minimum follow-up, nivolumab continued to demonstrate an OS benefit versus docetaxel in patients with advanced NSCLC. Similarly, nivolumab demonstrated an OS benefit versus docetaxel in patients with liver metastases, and remained well tolerated. Clinical trial registration CheckMate 017: NCT01642004; CheckMate 057: NCT01673867

Simultaneous detection of lung fusions using a multiplex RT-PCR next generation sequencing-based approach:A multi-institutional research study

Contains fulltext : 195300.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access

ULK1 inhibition overcomes compromised antigen presentation and restores antitumor immunity in LKB1-mutant lung cancer

Inactivating mutations in LKB1/STK11 are present in roughly 20% of nonsmall cell lung cancers (NSCLC) and portend poor response to anti-PD-1 immunotherapy. Unexpectedly, we found that LKB1 deficiency correlated with elevated tumor mutational burden (TMB) in NSCLCs from nonsmokers and genetically engineered mouse models, despite the frequent association between high-TMB and anti-PD-1 treatment efficacy. However, LKB1 deficiency also suppressed antigen processing and presentation, which are associated with compromised immunoproteasome activity and increased autophagic flux. Immunoproteasome activity and antigen presentation were restored by inhibiting autophagy through targeting the ATG1/ULK1 pathway. Accordingly, ULK1 inhibition synergized with PD-1 antibody blockade, provoking effector T-cell expansion and tumor regression in Lkb1-mutant tumor models. This study reveals an interplay between the immunoproteasome and autophagic catabolism in antigen processing and immune recognition, and proposes the therapeutic potential of dual ULK1 and PD-1 inhibition in LKB1-mutant NSCLC as a strategy to enhance antigen presentation and to promote antitumor immunity