Applications of large language models in cancer care: current evidence and future perspectives

The development of large language models (LLMs) is a recent success in the field of generative artificial intelligence (AI). They are computer models able to perform a wide range of natural language processing tasks, including content generation, question answering, or language translation. In recent months, a growing number of studies aimed to assess their potential applications in the field of medicine, including cancer care. In this mini review, we described the present published evidence for using LLMs in oncology. All the available studies assessed ChatGPT, an advanced language model developed by OpenAI, alone or compared to other LLMs, such as Google Bard, Chatsonic, and Perplexity. Although ChatGPT could provide adequate information on the screening or the management of specific solid tumors, it also demonstrated a significant error rate and a tendency toward providing obsolete data. Therefore, an accurate, expert-driven verification process remains mandatory to avoid the potential for misinformation and incorrect evidence. Overall, although this new generative AI-based technology has the potential to revolutionize the field of medicine, including that of cancer care, it will be necessary to develop rules to guide the application of these tools to maximize benefits and minimize risks

Tumor cell heterogeneity and resistance; report from the 2018 Coffey‐Holden Prostate Cancer Academy Meeting

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/147081/1/pros23729.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/147081/2/pros23729_am.pd

Natural history and imaging in men with high genetic risk for developing prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the most common malignancy and the second leading cause of cancer related deaths in the United States. Established risk factors for prostate cancer incidence include older age, African-American race, and positive family history. Prostate cancer has substantial inherited predisposition and certain genetic variants are associated with increased risk of disease. Screening and imaging should target high-risk populations based on their genetic predisposition

Efficacy and safety of PARP inhibitors in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials

Introduction: PARP inhibitors (PARPi) are a standard-of-care (SoC) treatment option for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). several clinical trials have shown the potential of combining PARPi with other anticancer agents. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of PARPi in patients with metastatic prostate cancer. methods: MEDLINE, cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, CINAHL, and web of science were searched on march 22nd, 2023, for phase 2 or 3 clinical trials. efficacy (progression-free survival [PFS], overall survival [OS], PSA decline >50% [PSA50], and objective response rate [ORR]) and safety outcomes were assessed in the included studies. results: seventeen clinical trials (PARPi monotherapy [n = 7], PARPi + androgen-receptor signaling inhibitors [ARSI] [n = 6], and PARPi + immune checkpoint inhibitors [ICI] [n = 4]) were included in the quantitative analyses. PARPi monotherapy improved radiographic PFS and OS over SoC in mCRPC patients with alterations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes but not in those with alterations in the ATM gene. Higher rates of PSA50 and ORR were reported in participants treated with PARPi + ARSI than in single-agent PARPi or PARPi + ICI. although the rate of high-grade adverse events was similar across all groups, treatment discontinuation was higher in patients treated with PARPi-based combinations than PARPi monotherapy. Conclusion: The efficacy of PARPi is not uniform across mCRPC patients with alterations in DNA damage repair genes, and optimal patient selection remains a clinical challenge. no unexpected safety signals for this class of agents emerged from this analysis

The Potential Role for Immunotherapy in Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer

Biochemically recurrent prostate cancer represents a stage of prostate cancer where conventional (continued on next page) computed tomography and technetium Tc 99m bone scan imaging are unable to detect disease after curative intervention despite rising prostate-specific antigen. There is no clear standard of care and no systemic therapy has been shown to improve survival. Immunotherapy-based treatments potentially are attractive options relative to androgen deprivation therapy due to the generally more favorable side-effect profile. Biochemically recurrent prostate cancer patients have a low tumor burden and likely lymph node-based disease, which may make them more likely to respond to immunotherapy

Somatic VHL Mutation in a Patient With MEN1-Associated Metastatic Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor Responding to Sunitinib Treatment: A Case Report.

Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) and von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) are autosomal-dominant diseases caused by germline mutations in tumor-suppressor genes. A patient with a germline MEN1 mutation and a somatic VHL mutation in the tumor has not been reported. Herein, we report on a patient with MEN1 and a metastatic nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (PNET) with a somatic VHL mutation. This patient underwent a pancreaticoduodenectomy for a grade 2 PNET obstructing her pancreatic duct. The patient developed liver and regional lymph node metastases as well as growth of a PNET in the remnant pancreas. As part of a clinical trial for mutation-targeted therapy, a biopsy of the metastatic tumor was obtained. The clinical diagnosis, confirmed by OncoVAR-NET and molecular profiling analysis, revealed MEN1 with a germline deletion in exon 2 and a c.402 deletion C, p.Phe134LeufsX51. In addition, a somatic mutation in the VHL gene-a nonsense mutation, c.529A\u3eT, p.Arg177Ter-was identified by hybrid capture sequencing. The mutations were confirmed by Sanger sequencing. Comparative genomic hybridization showed loss of heterozygosity in both the MEN1 and VHL genes. The patient was treated with sunitinib and had a partial response to treatment. This case illustrates not only that a second hit occurs in tumor suppressor genes but that somatic mutations are also possible in additional tumor suppressor genes. This suggests that targeted therapy selection should include analysis of somatic mutations even when the susceptibility gene is known

Anaplastic Features in Advanced Prostate Cancer With and Without DNA Damage Repair Mutations

Anaplastic prostate cancer has a poor prognosis with limited treatment options. Seven clinical features of anaplastic prostate cancer have been prospectively identified. In this phase II clinical trial, we identified mutations, including DNA damage repair (DDR) mutations, in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who were treated with durvalumab and olaparib and determined how many of them can be described as anaplastic, and we examined the overlap between anaplastic features and DDR mutations. Eligible patients with mCRPC received prior enzalutamide, abiraterone, or both. Patients were treated with durvalumab 1500 mg i.v. every 28 days and olaparib 300 mg p.o. every 12 hours until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients underwent mandatory baseline biopsies of metastatic lesions. Baseline characteristics were similar between anaplastic and nonanaplastic patients. Eleven patients (20%) displayed clear anaplastic features, and 43 (78.2%) lacked anaplastic features. In the anaplastic group, 2/11 (18.2%) had germline DRR mutations, and 4/11 (36.3%) had somatic DDR mutations. In the nonanaplastic group, 7/43 (16.3%) had germline mutations, and 13/43 (30.2%) had somatic mutations. Median progression-free survival (PFS) times in patients with anaplastic features (6.5 months) and without anaplastic features (5.1 months) were similar (hazard ratio 0.998, P = .996). Patients with and without anaplastic features appear to have similar total rates of DDR mutations and also similar rates of somatic and germline DDR mutations. Patients with anaplastic features have a trend toward improved PFS when treated with olaparib and durvalumab compared with nonanaplastic patients. Relationships between DNA-damage repair (DDR) mutations and anaplastic features, which confer poor prognosis, are unknown. Fifty-five patients with mCRPC treated with olaparib and durvalumab were classified into anaplastic and nonanaplastic groups and had similar rates of DDR mutations. Anaplastic patients had a trend toward improved progression-free survival when treated with olaparib and durvalumab compared with nonanaplastic patients