PURPOSE Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) 5.4 and 6.4 mg/kg showed robust antitumor activity in multiple cancer indications; however, T-DXd 5.4 mg/kg has not been evaluated in patients with previously... Show morePURPOSE Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) 5.4 and 6.4 mg/kg showed robust antitumor activity in multiple cancer indications; however, T-DXd 5.4 mg/kg has not been evaluated in patients with previously treated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-mutant (HER2m; defined as single-nucleotide variants and exon 20 insertions) metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (mNSCLC).METHODS DESTINY-Lung02, a blinded, multicenter, phase II study, investigated T-DXd 5.4 mg/kg once every 3 weeks for the first time in previously treated (platinum-containing therapy) patients with HER2m mNSCLC and further assessed T-DXd 6.4 mg/kg once every 3 weeks in this population. The primary end point was confirmed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review.RESULTS One hundred fifty-two patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to T-DXd 5.4 or 6.4 mg/kg once every 3 weeks. As of December 23, 2022, the median duration of follow-up was 11.5 months (range, 1.1-20.6) with 5.4 mg/kg and 11.8 months (range, 0.6-21.0) with 6.4 mg/kg. Confirmed ORR was 49.0% (95% CI, 39.0 to 59.1) and 56.0% (95% CI, 41.3 to 70.0) and median duration of response was 16.8 months (95% CI, 6.4 to not estimable [NE]) and NE (95% CI, 8.3 to NE) with 5.4 and 6.4 mg/kg, respectively. Median treatment duration was 7.7 months (range, 0.7-20.8) with 5.4 mg/kg and 8.3 months (range, 0.7-20.3) with 6.4 mg/kg. Grade >= 3 drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 39 of 101 (38.6%) and 29 of 50 (58.0%) patients with 5.4 and 6.4 mg/kg, respectively. 13 of 101 (12.9%) and 14 of 50 (28.0%) patients had adjudicated drug-related interstitial lung disease (2.0% grade >= 3 in each arm) with 5.4 and 6.4 mg/kg, respectively.CONCLUSION T-DXd demonstrated clinically meaningful responses at both doses. Safety profile was acceptable and generally manageable, favoring T-DXd 5.4 mg/kg. Show less
Background Low-frequency variants play an important role in breast cancer (BC) susceptibility. Gene-based methods can increase power by combining multiple variants in the same gene and help... Show moreBackground Low-frequency variants play an important role in breast cancer (BC) susceptibility. Gene-based methods can increase power by combining multiple variants in the same gene and help identify target genes.Methods We evaluated the potential of gene-based aggregation in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium cohorts including 83,471 cases and 59,199 controls. Low-frequency variants were aggregated for individual genes' coding and regulatory regions. Association results in European ancestry samples were compared to single-marker association results in the same cohort. Gene-based associations were also combined in meta-analysis across individuals with European, Asian, African, and Latin American and Hispanic ancestry.Results In European ancestry samples, 14 genes were significantly associated (q < 0.05) with BC. Of those, two genes, FMNL3 (P = 6.11 x 10(-6)) and AC058822.1 (P = 1.47 x 10(-4)), represent new associations. High FMNL3 expression has previously been linked to poor prognosis in several other cancers. Meta-analysis of samples with diverse ancestry discovered further associations including established candidate genes ESR1 and CBLB. Furthermore, literature review and database query found further support for a biologically plausible link with cancer for genes CBLB, FMNL3, FGFR2, LSP1, MAP3K1, and SRGAP2C.Conclusions Using extended gene-based aggregation tests including coding and regulatory variation, we report identification of plausible target genes for previously identified single-marker associations with BC as well as the discovery of novel genes implicated in BC development. Including multi ancestral cohorts in this study enabled the identification of otherwise missed disease associations as ESR1 (P = 1.31 x 10(-5)), demonstrating the importance of diversifying study cohorts. Show less
Tan, D.S.W.; Kim, S.W.; Aix, S.P.; Sequist, L.V.; Smit, E.F.; Yang, J.C.H.; ... ; Kim, D.W. 2022
Introduction: Nazartinib, a novel third-generation EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor, previously demonstrated antitumor activity and manageable safety in patients with EGFR-mut ant advanced non-small... Show moreIntroduction: Nazartinib, a novel third-generation EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor, previously demonstrated antitumor activity and manageable safety in patients with EGFR-mut ant advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who received <= 3 prior lines of systemic ther-apy. Herein, we report phase 2 efficacy and safety of first-line nazartinib. Methods: This single-arm, open-label, global study enrolled treatment-naive adult patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC harboring EGFR-activating mutations (eg, L858R and/or ex19del). Patients with neurologically stable and controlled brain metastases were also eligible. Patients received oral nazartinib 150 mg once daily. The primary endpoint was Blinded Independent Review Committee (BIRC)-assessed overall response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Results: Forty-five patients received >= 1 dose of nazartinib. The median follow-up time from enrollment to data cutoff (November 1, 2019) was 30 months (range: 25-34). The BIRC-assessed ORR was 69% (95% CI, 53-82). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 18 months (95% CI, 15-not estimable [NE]). The median overall survival was NE. In patients with baseline brain metastases (n = 18), the ORR and median PFS (95% CIs) were 67% (41-87) and 17 months (11-21). Seventeen of 18 patients had brain metastases as non-target lesions; the CNS lesions were absent/normalized in 9 of 17 (53%). Only 2 of 27 patients without baseline brain metastases developed new brain metastases postbaseline. Most frequent adverse events (>= 25%, any grade, all-causality) were diarrhea (47%), maculopapular rash (38%), pyrexia (29%), cough, and stomatitis (27% each). Conclusions: First-line nazartinib demonstrated promising efficacy, including clinically meaningful antitumor activity in the brain, and manageable safety in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC. (C) 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Show less
Background: Protein truncating variants in ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, and PALB2 are associated with increased breast cancer risk, but risks associated with missense variants in these genes are... Show moreBackground: Protein truncating variants in ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, and PALB2 are associated with increased breast cancer risk, but risks associated with missense variants in these genes are uncertain. Methods: We analyzed data on 59,639 breast cancer cases and 53,165 controls from studies participating in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium BRIDGES project. We sampled training (80%) and validation (20%) sets to analyze rare missense variants in ATM (1146 training variants), BRCA1 (644), BRCA2 (1425), CHEK2 (325), and PALB2 (472). We evaluated breast cancer risks according to five in silico prediction-of-deleteriousness algorithms, functional protein domain, and frequency, using logistic regression models and also mixture models in which a subset of variants was assumed to be risk-associated. Results: The most predictive in silico algorithms were Helix (BRCA1, BRCA2 and CHEK2) and CADD (ATM). Increased risks appeared restricted to functional protein domains for ATM (FAT and PIK domains) and BRCA1 (RING and BRCT domains). For ATM, BRCA1, and BRCA2, data were compatible with small subsets (approximately 7%, 2%, and 0.6%, respectively) of rare missense variants giving similar risk to those of protein truncating variants in the same gene. For CHEK2, data were more consistent with a large fraction (approximately 60%) of rare missense variants giving a lower risk (OR 1.75, 95% CI (1.47-2.08)) than CHEK2 protein truncating variants. There was little evidence for an association with risk for missense variants in PALB2. The best fitting models were well calibrated in the validation set. Conclusions: These results will inform risk prediction models and the selection of candidate variants for functional assays and could contribute to the clinical reporting of gene panel testing for breast cancer susceptibility. Show less
A combination of genetic and functional approaches has identified three independent breast cancer risk loci at 2q35. A recent fine-scale mapping analysis to refine these associations resulted in 1 ... Show moreA combination of genetic and functional approaches has identified three independent breast cancer risk loci at 2q35. A recent fine-scale mapping analysis to refine these associations resulted in 1 (signal 1), 5 (signal 2), and 42 (signal 3) credible causal variants at these loci. We used publicly available in silico DNase I and ChIP-seq data with in vitro reporter gene and CRISPR assays to annotate signals 2 and 3. We identified putative regulatory elements that enhanced cell-type-specific transcription from the IGFBP5 promoter at both signals (30-to 40-fold increased expression by the putative regulatory element at signal 2, 2- to 3-fold by the putative regulatory element at signal 3). We further identified one of the five credible causal variants at signal 2, a 1.4 kb deletion (esv3594306), as the likely causal variant; the deletion allele of this variant was associated with an average additional increase in IGFBP5 expression of 1.3-fold (MCF-7) and 2.2-fold (T-47D). We propose a model in which the deletion allele of esv3594306 juxtaposes two transcription factor binding regions (annotated by estrogen receptor alpha ChIP-seq peaks) to generate a single extended regulatory element. This regulatory element increases cell-type-specific expression of the tumor suppressor gene IGFBP5 and, thereby, reduces risk of estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer (odds ratio = 0.77, 95% CI 0.74-0.81, p = 3.1 x 10(-31)). Show less
BACKGROUNDGenetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility is widely used, but for many genes, evidence of an association with breast cancer is weak, underlying risk estimates are imprecise, and... Show moreBACKGROUNDGenetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility is widely used, but for many genes, evidence of an association with breast cancer is weak, underlying risk estimates are imprecise, and reliable subtype-specific risk estimates are lacking.METHODSWe used a panel of 34 putative susceptibility genes to perform sequencing on samples from 60,466 women with breast cancer and 53,461 controls. In separate analyses for protein-truncating variants and rare missense variants in these genes, we estimated odds ratios for breast cancer overall and tumor subtypes. We evaluated missense-variant associations according to domain and classification of pathogenicity.RESULTSProtein-truncating variants in 5 genes (ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, and PALB2) were associated with a risk of breast cancer overall with a P value of less than 0.0001. Protein-truncating variants in 4 other genes (BARD1, RAD51C, RAD51D, and TP53) were associated with a risk of breast cancer overall with a P value of less than 0.05 and a Bayesian false-discovery probability of less than 0.05. For protein-truncating variants in 19 of the remaining 25 genes, the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval of the odds ratio for breast cancer overall was less than 2.0. For protein-truncating variants in ATM and CHEK2, odds ratios were higher for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive disease than for ER-negative disease; for protein-truncating variants in BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51C, and RAD51D, odds ratios were higher for ER-negative disease than for ER-positive disease. Rare missense variants (in aggregate) in ATM, CHEK2, and TP53 were associated with a risk of breast cancer overall with a P value of less than 0.001. For BRCA1, BRCA2, and TP53, missense variants (in aggregate) that would be classified as pathogenic according to standard criteria were associated with a risk of breast cancer overall, with the risk being similar to that of protein-truncating variants.CONCLUSIONSThe results of this study define the genes that are most clinically useful for inclusion on panels for the prediction of breast cancer risk, as well as provide estimates of the risks associated with protein-truncating variants, to guide genetic counseling. (Funded by European Union Horizon 2020 programs and others.) Show less
In breast cancer, high levels of homeobox protein Hox-B13 (HOXB13) have been associated with disease progression of ER-positive breast cancer patients and resistance to tamoxifen treatment. Since... Show moreIn breast cancer, high levels of homeobox protein Hox-B13 (HOXB13) have been associated with disease progression of ER-positive breast cancer patients and resistance to tamoxifen treatment. Since HOXB13 p.G84E is a prostate cancer risk allele, we evaluated the association between HOXB13 germline mutations and breast cancer risk in a previous study consisting of 3,270 familial non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer cases and 2,327 controls from the Netherlands. Although both recurrent HOXB13 mutations p.G84E and p.R217C were not associated with breast cancer risk, the risk estimation for p.R217C was not very precise. To provide more conclusive evidence regarding the role of HOXB13 in breast cancer susceptibility, we here evaluated the association between HOXB13 mutations and increased breast cancer risk within 81 studies of the international Breast Cancer Association Consortium containing 68,521 invasive breast cancer patients and 54,865 controls. Both HOXB13 p.G84E and p.R217C did not associate with the development of breast cancer in European women, neither in the overall analysis (OR = 1.035, 95% CI = 0.859-1.246, P = 0.718 and OR = 0.798, 95% CI = 0.482-1.322, P = 0.381 respectively), nor in specific high-risk subgroups or breast cancer subtypes. Thus, although involved in breast cancer progression, HOXB13 is not a material breast cancer susceptibility gene. Show less
Introduction: We report updated data from a phase 2 randomized study evaluating brigatinib in crizotinib-refractory anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive NSCLC.Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1... Show moreIntroduction: We report updated data from a phase 2 randomized study evaluating brigatinib in crizotinib-refractory anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive NSCLC.Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to take either oral brigatinib 90 mg once daily (arm A) or 180 mg once daily with a 7-day lead-in at 90 mg (arm B), stratified by central nervous system (CNS) metastases and best response to crizotinib. The primary end point was investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Secondary end points included independent review committee (IRC)-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), intracranial PFS (iPFS), and overall survival (OS). Exploratory analyses included CNS versus ex-CNS target lesion response and correlation of depth of response with PFS and OS.Results: Among 222 randomized patients (112 and 110 in arms A and B, respectively), 59 (27%) remained on brigatinib at analysis (median follow-up: 19.6 versus 24.3 months). At baseline, 71% and 67% had brain lesions among A and B arms, respectively. Investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate was 46% versus 56%. Median IRC-assessed PFS was 9.2 months (95% confidence interval: 7.4-12.8) versus 16.7 months (11.6-21.4). Median OS was 29.5 months (18.2-not reached) versus 34.1 months (27.7-not reached). IRC-confirmed intracranial objective response rate in patients with measurable baseline brain lesions was 50% (13 of 26) versus 67% (12 of 18); median duration of intracranial response was 9.4 versus 16.6 months. IRC-assessed iPFS was 12.8 versus 18.4 months. Across arms, median IRC-assessed PFS was 1.9, 5.5, 11.1, 16.7, and 15.6 months for patients with no, 1%-25%, 26%50%, 51%-75%, and 76%-100% target lesion shrinkage, respectively. No new safety findings were observed with longer follow-up.Conclusions: Brigatinib (180 mg once daily with lead-in) continues to demonstrate robust PFS, long iPFS and duration of intracranial response, and high intracranial objective response rate in crizotinib-refractory patients. Depth of response may be an important end point to capture in future targeted therapy trials. (C) 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. Show less
Pathogenic sequence variants (PSV) in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) are associated with increased risk and severity of prostate cancer. Weevaluated whether PSVs inBRCA1/2 were associated with risk of... Show morePathogenic sequence variants (PSV) in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) are associated with increased risk and severity of prostate cancer. Weevaluated whether PSVs inBRCA1/2 were associated with risk of overall prostate cancer or high grade (Gleason 8+) prostate cancer using an international sample of 65 BRCA1 and 171 BRCA2 male PSV carriers with prostate cancer, and 3,388 BRCA1 and 2,880 BRCA2 male PSV carriers without prostate cancer. PSVs in the 30 region of BRCA2 (c.7914+) were significantly associated with elevated risk of prostate cancer compared with reference bin c.1001c.7913 [HR = 1.78; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.25-2.52; P = 0.001], as well as elevated risk of Gleason 8+ prostate cancer (HR = 3.11; 95% CI, 1.63-5.95; P = 0.001). c.756-c.1000 was also associated with elevated prostate cancer risk (HR = 2.83; 95% CI, 1.71-4.68; P = 0.00004) and elevated risk of Gleason 8+prostate cancer (HR = 4.95; 95% CI, 2.12-11.54; P = 0.0002). No genotype-phenotype associations were detected for PSVs in BRCA1. These results demonstrate that specific BRCA2 PSVs may be associated with elevated risk of developing aggressive prostate cancer.Significance: Aggressive prostate cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers may vary according to the specific BRCA2 mutation inherited by the at-risk individual. Show less
The European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020 is the update of similar evidence based position papers published in 2005 and 2007 and 2012. The core objective of the EPOS2020... Show moreThe European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020 is the update of similar evidence based position papers published in 2005 and 2007 and 2012. The core objective of the EPOS2020 guideline is to provide revised, up-to-date and clear evidence-based recommendations and integrated care pathways in ARS and CRS. EPOS2020 provides an update on the literature published and studies undertaken in the eight years since the EPOS2012 position paper was published and addresses areas not extensively covered in EPOS2012 such as paediatric CRS and sinus surgery. EPOS2020 also involves new stakeholders, including pharmacists and patients, and addresses new target users who have become more involved in the management and treatment of rhinosinusitis since the publication of the last EPOS document, including pharmacists, nurses, specialised care givers and indeed patients themselves, who employ increasing self-management of their condition using over the counter treatments. The document provides suggestions for future research in this area and offers updated guidance for definitions and outcome measurements in research in different settings.EPOS2020 contains chapters on definitions and classification where we have defined a large number of terms and indicated preferred terms. A new classification of CRS into primary and secondary CRS and further division into localized and diffuse disease, based on anatomic distribution is proposed. There are extensive chapters on epidemiology and predisposing factors, inflammatory mechanisms, (differential) diagnosis of facial pain, allergic rhinitis, genetics, cystic fibrosis, aspirin exacerbated respiratory disease, immunodeficiencies, allergic fungal rhinosinusitis and the relationship between upper and lower airways. The chapters on paediatric acute and chronic rhinosinusitis are totally rewritten. All available evidence for the management of acute rhinosinusitis and chronic rhinosinusitis with or without nasal polyps in adults and children is systematically reviewed and integrated care pathways based on the evidence are proposed. Despite considerable increases in the amount of quality publications in recent years, a large number of practical clinical questions remain. It was agreed that the best way to address these was to conduct a Delphi exercise. The results have been integrated into the respective sections. Last but not least, advice for patients and pharmacists and a new list of research needs are included. Show less
Fanconi anemia (FA) is a genetically heterogeneous disorder with 22 disease-causing genes reported to date. In some FA genes, monoallelic mutations have been found to be associated with breast... Show moreFanconi anemia (FA) is a genetically heterogeneous disorder with 22 disease-causing genes reported to date. In some FA genes, monoallelic mutations have been found to be associated with breast cancer risk, while the risk associations of others remain unknown. The gene for FA type C, FANCC, has been proposed as a breast cancer susceptibility gene based on epidemiological and sequencing studies. We used the Oncoarray project to genotype two truncating FANCC variants (p.R185X and p.R548X) in 64,760 breast cancer cases and 49,793 controls of European descent. FANCC mutations were observed in 25 cases (14 with p.R185X, 11 with p.R548X) and 26 controls (18 with p.R185X, 8 with p.R548X). There was no evidence of an association with the risk of breast cancer, neither overall (odds ratio 0.77, 95% CI 0.44-1.33, p = 0.4) nor by histology, hormone receptor status, age or family history. We conclude that the breast cancer risk association of these two FANCC variants, if any, is much smaller than for BRCA1, BRCA2 or PALB2 mutations. If this applies to all truncating variants in FANCC it would suggest there are differences between FA genes in their roles on breast cancer risk and demonstrates the merit of large consortia for clarifying risk associations of rare variants. Show less
Cho, B.C.; Obermannova, R.; Bearz, A.; McKeage, M.; Kim, D.W.; Batra, U.; ... ; Dziadziuszko, R. 2019
Introduction: In an earlier report of the ASCEND-8 study (open-label, phase I, three-arm study, treatment-naive patients and pre-treated patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC), it was shown that... Show moreIntroduction: In an earlier report of the ASCEND-8 study (open-label, phase I, three-arm study, treatment-naive patients and pre-treated patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC), it was shown that ceritinib 450 mg with food had comparable exposure and better gastrointestinal tolerability than 750-mg fasted.Methods: Here, we report efficacy and updated safety data from primary efficacy analysis of the ASCEND-8 study. Key secondary endpoints were overall response rate and duration of response, assessed by blinded independent review committee (BIRC) using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1.Results: In total, 306 patients were randomized to ceritinib 450-mg fed (n = 108) or 600-mg fed (n = 87) or 750-mg fasted (n = 111), of which 304 patients were included in safety analysis and 198 treatment-naive patients (ALK receptor tyrosine kinase [ALK]-positive by immunohistochemistry) were included in the efficacy analysis (450-mg fed [n = 73], 600-mg fed [n = 51], and 750-mg fasted [n = 74]). The BIRC-assessed overall response rate was 78.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 66.9-86.9), 72.5% (95% CI: 58.3-84.1), and 75.7% (95% CI: 64.3-84.9), respectively; and the median duration of response (months) by BIRC was not estimable (NE) (95% CI: 11.2-NE), 20.7 (95% CI: 15.8-NE), and 15.4 (95% CI: 8.3-NE), respectively. Based on the safety analysis (n = 304), the 450-mg fed arm showed the highest median relative dose intensity (100% versus 78.5% versus 83.7%), lowest proportion of patients with dose reductions (24.1% versus 65.1% versus 60.9%), and lowest proportion of patients with gastrointestinal toxicities (75.9% versus 82.6% versus 91.8%).Conclusion: Ceritinib at a dose of 450 mg with food compared to 750-mg fasted showed consistent efficacy and less gastrointestinal toxicity. (C) 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. Show less
Background: BRCA1/2 mutations confer high lifetime risk of breast cancer, although other factors may modify this risk. Whether height or body mass index (BMI) modifies breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2... Show moreBackground: BRCA1/2 mutations confer high lifetime risk of breast cancer, although other factors may modify this risk. Whether height or body mass index (BMI) modifies breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers remains unclear.Methods: We used Mendelian randomization approaches to evaluate the association of height and BMI on breast cancer risk, using data from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 with 14 676 BRCA1 and 7912 BRCA2 mutation carriers, including 11 451 cases of breast cancer. We created a height genetic score using 586 height-associated variants and a BMI genetic score using 93 BMI-associated variants. We examined both observed and genetically determined height and BMI with breast cancer risk using weighted Cox models. All statistical tests were two-sided.Results: Observed height was positively associated with breast cancer risk (HR = 1.09 per 10 cm increase, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.0 to 1.17; P = 1.17). Height genetic score was positively associated with breast cancer, although this was not statistically significant (per 10 cm increase in genetically predicted height, HR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.93 to 1.17; P = .47). Observed BMI was inversely associated with breast cancer risk (per 5 kg/m(2) increase, HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.90 to 0.98; P = .007). BMI genetic score was also inversely associated with breast cancer risk (per 5 kg/m2 increase in genetically predicted BMI, HR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.76 to 0.98; P = .02). BMI was primarily associated with premenopausal breast cancer.Conclusion: Height is associated with overall breast cancer and BMI is associated with premenopausal breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Incorporating height and BMI, particularly genetic score, into risk assessment may improve cancer management. Show less
