"The first ones now, will later be last":understanding the importance of historical context when reading ESMO-MCBS scores

SCOPUS: ed.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

EHA evaluation of the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale version 1.1 (ESMO-MCBS v1.1) for haematological malignancies

Objective Value frameworks in oncology have not been validated for the assessment of treatments in haematological malignancies, but to avoid overlaps and duplications it appears reasonable to build up experience on existing value frameworks, such as the European Society for Medical Oncology-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). Methods Here we present the results of the first feasibility testing of the ESMO-MCBS v1.1 for haematological malignancies based on the grading of 80 contemporary studies for acute leukaemia, chronic leukaemia, lymphoma, myeloma and myelodysplastic syndromes. The aims were (1) to evaluate the scorability of data, (2) to evaluate the reasonableness of the generated grades for clinical benefit using the current version and (3) to identify shortcomings in the ESMO-MCBS v1.1 that require amendments to improve the efficacy and validity of the scale in grading new treatments in the management of haematological malignancies. Results In general, the ESMO-MCBS v1.1 was found to be widely applicable to studies in haematological malignancies, generating scores that were judged as reasonable by European Hematology Association (EHA) experts. A small number of studies could either not be graded or were not appropriately graded. The reasons, related to the differences between haematological and solid tumour malignancies, are identified and described. Conclusions Based on the findings of this study, ESMO and EHA are committed to develop a version of the ESMO-MCBS that is validated for haematological malignancies. This development process will incorporate all of the usual stringencies for accountability of reasonableness that have characterised the development of the ESMO-MCBS including field testing, statistical modelling, evaluation for reasonableness and openness to appeal and revision. Applying such a scale will support future public policy decision-making regarding the value of new treatments for haematological malignancies and will provide insights that could be helpful in the design of future clinical trials

EHA evaluation of the ESMO—Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale version 1.1 (ESMO-MCBS v1.1) for haematological malignancies

Objective: Value frameworks in oncology have not been validated for the assessment of treatments in haematological malignancies, but to avoid overlaps and duplications it appears reasonable to build up experience on existing value frameworks, such as the European Society for Medical Oncology—Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). Methods: Here we present the results of the first feasibility testing of the ESMO-MCBS v1.1 for haematological malignancies based on the grading of 80 contemporary studies for acute leukaemia, chronic leukaemia, lymphoma, myeloma and myelodysplastic syndromes. The aims were (1) to evaluate the scorability of data, (2) to evaluate the reasonableness of the generated grades for clinical benefit using the current version and (3) to identify shortcomings in the ESMO-MCBS v1.1 that require amendments to improve the efficacy and validity of the scale in grading new treatments in the management of haematological malignancies. Results: In general, the ESMO-MCBS v1.1 was found to be widely applicable to studies in haematological malignancies, generating scores that were judged as reasonable by European Hematology Association (EHA) experts. A small number of studies could either not be graded or were not appropriately graded. The reasons, related to the differences between haematological and solid tumour malignancies, are identified and described. Conclusions: Based on the findings of this study, ESMO and EHA are committed to develop a version of the ESMO-MCBS that is validated for haematological malignancies. This development process will incorporate all of the usual stringencies for accountability of reasonableness that have characterised the development of the ESMO-MCBS including field testing, statistical modelling, evaluation for reasonableness and openness to appeal and revision. Applying such a scale will support future public policy decision-making regarding the value of new treatments for haematological malignancies and will provide insights that could be helpful in the design of future clinical trials

Impact of smoking status on the relative efficacy of the EGFR TKI/angiogenesis inhibitor combination therapy in advanced NSCLC-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND The ETOP 10-16 BOOSTER trial failed to demonstrate a progression-free survival (PFS) benefit for adding bevacizumab to osimertinib in second line. An exploratory subgroup analysis, however, suggested a PFS benefit of the combination in patients with a smoking history and prompted us to do this study. METHODS A systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the differential effect of smoking status on the benefit of adding an angiogenesis inhibitor to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy was carried out. All relevant randomized controlled trials appearing in main oncology congresses or in PubMed as of 1 November 2021 were used according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses statement. Primarily PFS according to smoking status, and secondarily overall survival (OS) were of interest. Pooled and interaction hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated by fixed or random effects models, depending on the detected degree of heterogeneity. Bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane tool for randomized controlled trials (RoB 2). RESULTS Information by smoking was available for 1291 patients for PFS (seven studies) and 678 patients for OS (four studies). The risk of bias was low for all studies. Combination treatment significantly prolonged PFS for smokers [n = 502, HR = 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.44-0.69] but not for nonsmokers (n = 789, HR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.66-1.27; treatment-by-smoking interaction P = 0.02). Similarly, a significant OS benefit was found for smokers (n = 271, HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.47-0.93) but not for nonsmokers (n = 407, HR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.82-1.42; treatment-by-smoking interaction P = 0.03). CONCLUSION In advanced EGFR-non-small-cell lung cancer patients, the addition of an angiogenesis inhibitor to EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy provides a statistically significant PFS and OS benefit in smokers, but not in non-smokers. The biological basis for this observation should be pursued and could determine whether this might be due to a specific co-mutational pattern produced by tobacco exposure

Biases in study design, implementation, and data analysis that distort the appraisal of clinical benefit and ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) scoring

BACKGROUND: The European Society for Medical Oncology-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) is a validated, widely used tool developed to score the clinical benefit from cancer medicines reported in clinical trials. ESMO-MCBS scores assume valid research methodologies and quality trial implementation. Studies incorporating flawed design, implementation, or data analysis may generate outcomes that exaggerate true benefit and are not generalisable. Failure to either indicate or penalise studies with bias undermines the intention and diminishes the integrity of ESMO-MCBS scores. This review aimed to evaluate the adequacy of the ESMO-MCBS to address bias generated by flawed design, implementation, or data analysis and identify shortcomings in need of amendment. METHODS: As part of a refinement of the ESMO-MCBS, we reviewed trial design, implementation, and data analysis issues that could bias the results. For each issue of concern, we reviewed the ESMO-MCBS v1.1 approach against standards derived from Helsinki guidelines for ethical human research and guidelines from the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use, the Food and Drugs Administration, the European Medicines Agency, and European Network for Health Technology Assessment. RESULTS: Six design, two implementation, and two data analysis and interpretation issues were evaluated and in three, the ESMO-MCBS provided adequate protections. Seven shortcomings in the ability of the ESMO-MCBS to identify and address bias were identified. These related to (i) evaluation of the control arm, (ii) crossover issues, (iii) criteria for non-inferiority, (iv) substandard post-progression treatment, (v) post hoc subgroup findings based on biomarkers, (vi) informative censoring, and (vii) publication bias against quality-of-life data. CONCLUSION: Interpretation of the ESMO-MCBS scores requires critical appraisal of trials to understand caveats in trial design, implementation, and data analysis that may have biased results and conclusions. These will be addressed in future iterations of the ESMO-MCBS.SCOPUS: re.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Report on the status of women occupying leadership roles in oncology.

While the global workforce is approaching gender parity, women occupy a small number of management level positions across most professions, including healthcare. Although the inclusion of women into the membership of many oncology societies has increased, the under-representation of women in leadership roles within international and national oncology societies remains relatively consistent. Moreover, the exact status of women participating as board members or presidents of oncology societies or as speakers at oncology congresses was undocumented to date. The database used in this analysis was derived from data collection performed by the European Society for Medical Oncology for the years 2015-2016 and data analyses performed using the Statistical Analysis Software V.9.3 and R language for statistical computing V.3.4.0 by Frontier Science Foundation-Hellas. The literature search was performed by the authors. We report the presence of a gender gap within oncology. Results regarding the under-representation of women occupying leadership roles in oncology show female participation as members of the board or presidents of national and international oncology societies and as invited speakers at oncology congresses remains below 50% in the majority of societies included in this analysis. Women in leadership positions of societies was associated with a higher percentage of female invited speakers at these societies' congresses (p=0.006). The full contribution that can be attained from using the potential of women in leadership roles is currently under-realised. Examples of how gender and minority participation in organisations improves outcomes and creativity are provided from science, clinical practice and industry that show outcomes are greatly improved by collective participation of both men and women. Although there are programmes in place in many oncology organisations to improve this disparity, the gender gap is still there. Ongoing discussion may help to create more awareness in the effort to accelerate the advancement of women within oncology

Gender-related challenges facing oncologists: the results of the ESMO Women for Oncology Committee survey.

Although women account for a growing proportion of the oncology workforce, there is evidence they are under-represented in leadership roles. To gain further insights into this issue and extend understanding of gender challenges, the European Society for Medical Oncology Women for Oncology (W4O) Committee undertook a survey of female and male oncologists in 2016. The 2016 W4O questionnaire included questions on (1) Demographics and professional environment, (2) Gender impact on career development, (3) Challenges for career progression and inappropriate behaviour experienced in the workplace, (4) Barriers for gender parity and (5) The gender gap. Between July and September 2016, the online survey was available to male and female clinical and academic oncology healthcare professionals in the EU and internationally. Responses were analysed from 462 oncologists, of whom 76.7 % were women. Of female respondents, 45.5 % had a managerial or leadership role, compared with 65 % of male respondents (p<0.001). Men were more likely to have leadership roles, even in clinical teams with more women than men. Women respondents were more likely to consider their gender had a major impact on their career than men: 35.9 % vs 20.9 % (p<0.001). The biggest challenge to career progression for women was work and family balance (64.2%). Of female respondents, 14.4 % believed there had been significant or major progress in closing the gender pay gap compared with 39.3 % of men (p<0.001). Of female participants, 37.7 % reported they had encountered unwanted sexual comments by a superior or colleague. New initiatives are needed to address under-representation of women oncologists in leadership roles, including greater and concrete promotion of work-life balance, development and leadership training for women, and more support for flexible working. The fact that over a third of women in the survey had encountered unwanted sexual comments at work is of great concern and must be urgently addressed

Expression of phosphorylated ribosomal protein S6 in mesothelioma patients - correlation with clinico-pathological characteristics and outcome: results from the European Thoracic Oncology Platform (ETOP) Mesoscape project

Pleural mesothelioma (PM) is an aggressive malignancy with poor prognosis. Although histology and pathologic stage are important prognostic factors, better prognostic biomarkers are needed. The ribosomal protein S6 is a downstream target of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway involved in protein synthesis and cell proliferation. In previous studies, low phosphorylated S6 (pS6) immunoreactivity was significantly correlated with longer progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in PM patients. We aimed to correlate pS6 expression to clinical data in a large multi-centre PM cohort as part of the European Thoracic Oncology Platform (ETOP) Mesoscape project. Tissue Micro Arrays (TMAs) of PM were constructed and expression of pS6 was evaluated by a semiquantitatively aggregate H-score. Expression results were correlated to patient characteristics as well as OS/PFS. pS6 IHC results of 364 patients from 9 centres, diagnosed between 1999 and 2017 were available. The primary histology of included tumours was epithelioid (70.3%), followed by biphasic (24.2%) and sarcomatoid (5.5%). TMAs included both treatment-naive and tumour tissue taken after induction chemotherapy. High pS6 expression (181 patients with H-score>1.41) was significantly associated with less complete resection. In the overall cohort, OS/PFS were not significantly different between pS6-low and pS6-high patients. In a subgroup analysis nonepithelioid (biphasic and sarcomatoid) patients with high pS6 expression showed a significantly shorter OS (p< 0.001, 10.7 versus 16.9 months) and PFS (p < 0.001, 6.2 versus 10.8 months). In subgroup analysis, in non-epithelioid PM patients high pS6 expression was associated with significantly shorter OS and PFS. These exploratory findings suggest a clinically relevant PI3K pathway activation in non-epithelioid PM which might lay the foundation for future targeted treatment strategies

Computer-Based Intensity Measurement Assists Pathologists in Scoring Phosphatase and Tensin Homolog Immunohistochemistry - Clinical Associations in NSCLC Patients of the European Thoracic Oncology Platform Lungscape Cohort.

Phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) loss is frequently observed in NSCLC and associated with both phosphoinositide 3-kinase activation and tumoral immunosuppression. PTEN immunohistochemistry is a valuable readout, but lacks standardized staining protocol and cutoff value. After an external quality assessment using SP218, 138G6 and 6H2.1 anti-PTEN antibodies, scored on webbook and tissue microarray, the European Thoracic Oncology Platform cohort samples (n = 2245 NSCLC patients, 8980 tissue microarray cores) were stained with SP218. All cores were H-scored by pathologists and by computerized pixel-based intensity measurements calibrated by pathologists. All three antibodies differentiated six PTEN+ versus six PTEN- cases on external quality assessment. For 138G6 and SP218, high sensitivity and specificity was found for all H-score threshold values including prospectively defined 0, calculated 8 (pathologists), and calculated 5 (computer). High concordance among pathologists in setting computer-based intensities and between pathologists and computer in H-scoring was observed. Because of over-integration of the human eye, pixel-based computer H-scores were overall 54% lower. For all cutoff values, PTEN- was associated with smoking history, squamous cell histology, and higher tumor stage (p &lt; 0.001). In adenocarcinomas, PTEN- was associated with poor survival. Calibration of immunoreactivity intensities by pathologists following computerized H-score measurements has the potential to improve reproducibility and homogeneity of biomarker detection regarding epitope validation in multicenter studies