Podcasts about pten

En este episodio, nos sumergimos en la vía motora más determinante del sistema nervioso humano: el tracto corticoespinal. A través de un recorrido detallado por su evolución, desarrollo, anatomía y función, analizamos por qué esta vía representa la gran apuesta evolutiva por la motricidad fina y por qué su lesión tiene consecuencias tan devastadoras. Hablamos de neurofisiología, de plasticidad, de evaluación con TMS y DTI, de terapias intensivas, neuromodulación, farmacología, robótica y de las posibilidades —y límites— reales de su regeneración tras un ictus. Si te interesa entender en profundidad cómo se ejecuta el movimiento voluntario y qué ocurre cuando esa vía falla, este episodio es para ti. Referencias del episodio: 1. Alawieh, A., Tomlinson, S., Adkins, D., Kautz, S., & Feng, W. (2017). Preclinical and Clinical Evidence on Ipsilateral Corticospinal Projections: Implication for Motor Recovery. Translational stroke research, 8(6), 529–540. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12975-017-0551-5 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28691140/). 2. Cho, M. J., Yeo, S. S., Lee, S. J., & Jang, S. H. (2023). Correlation between spasticity and corticospinal/corticoreticular tract status in stroke patients after early stage. Medicine, 102(17), e33604. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000033604 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37115067/). 3. Dalamagkas, K., Tsintou, M., Rathi, Y., O'Donnell, L. J., Pasternak, O., Gong, X., Zhu, A., Savadjiev, P., Papadimitriou, G. M., Kubicki, M., Yeterian, E. H., & Makris, N. (2020). Individual variations of the human corticospinal tract and its hand-related motor fibers using diffusion MRI tractography. Brain imaging and behavior, 14(3), 696–714. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11682-018-0006-y (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30617788/). 4. Duque-Parra, Jorge Eduardo, Mendoza-Zuluaga, Julián, & Barco-Ríos, John. (2020). El Tracto Cortico Espinal: Perspectiva Histórica. International Journal of Morphology, 38(6), 1614-1617. https://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95022020000601614 (https://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0717-95022020000601614). 5. Eyre, J. A., Miller, S., Clowry, G. J., Conway, E. A., & Watts, C. (2000). Functional corticospinal projections are established prenatally in the human foetus permitting involvement in the development of spinal motor centres. Brain : a journal of neurology, 123 ( Pt 1), 51–64. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/123.1.51 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10611120/). 6. He, J., Zhang, F., Pan, Y., Feng, Y., Rushmore, J., Torio, E., Rathi, Y., Makris, N., Kikinis, R., Golby, A. J., & O'Donnell, L. J. (2023). Reconstructing the somatotopic organization of the corticospinal tract remains a challenge for modern tractography methods. Human brain mapping, 44(17), 6055–6073. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.26497 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37792280/). 7. Huang, L., Yi, L., Huang, H., Zhan, S., Chen, R., & Yue, Z. (2024). Corticospinal tract: a new hope for the treatment of post-stroke spasticity. Acta neurologica Belgica, 124(1), 25–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13760-023-02377-w (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37704780/). 8. Kazim, S. F., Bowers, C. A., Cole, C. D., Varela, S., Karimov, Z., Martinez, E., Ogulnick, J. V., & Schmidt, M. H. (2021). Corticospinal Motor Circuit Plasticity After Spinal Cord Injury: Harnessing Neuroplasticity to Improve Functional Outcomes. Molecular neurobiology, 58(11), 5494–5516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12035-021-02484-w (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34341881/). 9. Kwon, Y. M., Kwon, H. G., Rose, J., & Son, S. M. (2016). The Change of Intra-cerebral CST Location during Childhood and Adolescence; Diffusion Tensor Tractography Study. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 10, 638. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00638 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28066209/). 10. Lemon, R. N., Landau, W., Tutssel, D., & Lawrence, D. G. (2012). Lawrence and Kuypers (1968a, b) revisited: copies of the original filmed material from their classic papers in Brain. Brain : a journal of neurology, 135(Pt 7), 2290–2295. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/aws037 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22374938/). 11. Li S. (2017). Spasticity, Motor Recovery, and Neural Plasticity after Stroke. Frontiers in neurology, 8, 120. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2017.00120 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28421032/). 12. Liu, Z., Chopp, M., Ding, X., Cui, Y., & Li, Y. (2013). Axonal remodeling of the corticospinal tract in the spinal cord contributes to voluntary motor recovery after stroke in adult mice. Stroke, 44(7), 1951–1956. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.001162 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23696550/). 13. Liu, K., Lu, Y., Lee, J. K., Samara, R., Willenberg, R., Sears-Kraxberger, I., Tedeschi, A., Park, K. K., Jin, D., Cai, B., Xu, B., Connolly, L., Steward, O., Zheng, B., & He, Z. (2010). PTEN deletion enhances the regenerative ability of adult corticospinal neurons. Nature neuroscience, 13(9), 1075–1081. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.2603 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20694004/). 14. Schieber M. H. (2007). Chapter 2 Comparative anatomy and physiology of the corticospinal system. Handbook of clinical neurology, 82, 15–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0072-9752(07)80005-4 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18808887/). 15. Stinear, C. M., Barber, P. A., Smale, P. R., Coxon, J. P., Fleming, M. K., & Byblow, W. D. (2007). Functional potential in chronic stroke patients depends on corticospinal tract integrity. Brain : a journal of neurology, 130(Pt 1), 170–180. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awl333 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17148468/). 16. Usuda, N., Sugawara, S. K., Fukuyama, H., Nakazawa, K., Amemiya, K., & Nishimura, Y. (2022). Quantitative comparison of corticospinal tracts arising from different cortical areas in humans. Neuroscience research, 183, 30–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neures.2022.06.008 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35787428/). 17. Ward, N. S., Brander, F., & Kelly, K. (2019). Intensive upper limb neurorehabilitation in chronic stroke: outcomes from the Queen Square programme. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry, 90(5), 498–506. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2018-319954 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30770457/). 18. Welniarz, Q., Dusart, I., & Roze, E. (2017). The corticospinal tract: Evolution, development, and human disorders. Developmental neurobiology, 77(7), 810–829. https://doi.org/10.1002/dneu.22455 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27706924/).

Featuring an interview with Dr Rinath M Jesselsohn, including the following topics: Imlunestrant with or without abemaciclib in advanced breast cancer: Results of the Phase III EMBER-3 trial (0:00) Jhaveri KL et al. Imlunestrant with or without abemaciclib in advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2025;392(12):1189-202. Abstract  Jhaveri KL et al. Imlunestrant, an oral selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD), as monotherapy & combined with abemaciclib, for patients with ER+, HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC), pretreated with endocrine therapy (ET): Results of the Phase 3 EMBER-3 trial. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2024;Abstract GS1-01. Comprehensive genomic profiling of ESR1, PIK3CA, AKT1 and PTEN in HR-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: Prevalence along treatment course and predictive value for endocrine therapy resistance in real-world practice (7:00) Bhave MA et al. Comprehensive genomic profiling of ESR1, PIK3CA, AKT1, and PTEN in HR(+)HER2(-) metastatic breast cancer: Prevalence along treatment course and predictive value for endocrine therapy resistance in real-world practice. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2024;207(3):599-609. Abstract Camizestrant, a next-generation oral selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD), versus fulvestrant for postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (SERENA-2): A multi-dose, open-label, randomized, Phase II trial (10:25) Oliveira M et al. Camizestrant, a next-generation oral SERD, versus fulvestrant in post-menopausal women with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (SERENA-2): A multi-dose, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 2024;25(11):1424-39. Abstract Latest on SERDs: An education session at San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2024 (13:57) Jeselsohn RM. Latest on selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERDs). San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2024;Education Session 5. CME information and select publications

Světová výstava v japonské Ósace začne za tři dny, ovšem český národní pavilon poutá pozornost už teď. Jako vůbec první mezinárodní pavilon na letošním EXPO jej například navštívil japonský premiér Šigeru Išiba. Nosná konstrukce spirálovité stavby vznikala ve společnosti Stora Enso ve Ždírci nad Doubravou a moderní dřevěné panely pak také v rodinné firmě Novatop v Ptení na Prostějovsku.Všechny díly podcastu Seriál Radiožurnálu můžete pohodlně poslouchat v mobilní aplikaci mujRozhlas pro Android a iOS nebo na webu mujRozhlas.cz.

Bugün 9 nisan 2025 #doğatakvimi

BUFFALO, NY - March 25, 2025 – A new #review was #published in Oncotarget, Volume 16, on March 13, 2025, titled “Signaling pathway dysregulation in breast cancer." In this review article, Dinara Ryspayeva and colleagues from Brown University provide a detailed look at how breast cancer cells change the way they communicate and grow—helping tumors survive, spread, and resist treatment. The review highlights how certain gene mutations and disrupted signaling pathways influence therapy response across different types of breast cancer. It also outlines current treatment strategies and clinical trials, offering insights that could improve care for patients with aggressive or hard-to-treat cancers. Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women and a major cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. While many patients respond to treatment at first, some cancers return or stop responding. The review explores how signaling disruptions inside tumor cells are often behind these setbacks. The authors discuss several major pathways involved in breast cancer, including PI3K/Akt/mTOR, RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK, HER2, Wnt/β-catenin, Notch, NF-κB, and the DNA damage response (DDR). These pathways help control cell growth, division, DNA repair, and survival. When altered by mutations or other changes, they can promote tumor progression and resistance to treatment. One of the most disrupted pathways is PI3K/Akt/mTOR. It plays a central role in cell growth, but in many breast cancers—especially hormone receptor-positive and HER2-positive types—it becomes overactive due to gene mutations, or the loss of a tumor-suppressing protein called PTEN. “Up to 25–40% of BC cases exhibit variations that hyperactivate the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway, underscoring its critical role in oncogenesis.” Another key pathway, RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK, can also promote tumor growth. Even without mutations, it may become active when primary pathways are blocked, particularly in HER2-positive and triple-negative breast cancers. The review also highlights several new and emerging treatments aimed at blocking down these signaling pathways. Some drugs are already approved, while others are in clinical trials. The authors suggest that combining different treatments may help stop multiple pathways at once, making it harder for cancer cells to adapt. Matching treatments to each tumor's unique genetic changes could also improve patient outcomes. This comprehensive review gives researchers and clinicians a clearer understanding of how breast cancer resists treatment and where future therapies should focus. A better understanding of these disrupted signaling systems could lead to more personalized and effective treatments for patients facing aggressive or recurring disease. DOI - https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.28701 Correspondence to - Dinara Ryspayeva - dinara_ryspayeva@brown.edu Video short - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppFVGwdztHI Subscribe for free publication alerts from Oncotarget - https://www.oncotarget.com/subscribe/ About Oncotarget Oncotarget (a primarily oncology-focused, peer-reviewed, open access journal) aims to maximize research impact through insightful peer-review; eliminate borders between specialties by linking different fields of oncology, cancer research and biomedical sciences; and foster application of basic and clinical science. To learn more about Oncotarget, please visit https://www.oncotarget.com and connect with us: Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/Oncotarget/ X - https://twitter.com/oncotarget Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/oncotargetjrnl/ YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@OncotargetJournal LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/oncotarget Pinterest - https://www.pinterest.com/oncotarget/ Reddit - https://www.reddit.com/user/Oncotarget/ Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/0gRwT6BqYWJzxzmjPJwtVh MEDIA@IMPACTJOURNALS.COM

SPOILERS AHEAD! Hey all!  One thing both Mike and I love is the MCU... so when we sat down to record Boozy the other night we were both just buzzing about Captain America: Brave New World!  We had to record it because, well, we never get tired of hearing our own voices. This is a rare MAIN FEED bonus ep!  Want to talk Captain America?  Join us on Discord! Are you enjoying the show? www.patreon.com/ptebb   Connect with us on Discord, Facebook, Twitter, IG, etc… at www.ptebb.com   Don't forget – Leave us a 5 Star Rating and write us a review   Enjoy The Show!

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/NCPD/CPE/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/VMG865. CME/MOC/NCPD/CPE/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until February 5, 2026.Targeting PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN and Other Alterations in HR+, HER2- MBC: Navigating the Evidence and Guidance for Use In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an independent educational grant from AstraZeneca.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/NCPD/CPE/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/VMG865. CME/MOC/NCPD/CPE/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until February 5, 2026.Targeting PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN and Other Alterations in HR+, HER2- MBC: Navigating the Evidence and Guidance for Use In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an independent educational grant from AstraZeneca.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/NCPD/CPE/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/VMG865. CME/MOC/NCPD/CPE/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until February 5, 2026.Targeting PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN and Other Alterations in HR+, HER2- MBC: Navigating the Evidence and Guidance for Use In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an independent educational grant from AstraZeneca.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/NCPD/CPE/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/VMG865. CME/MOC/NCPD/CPE/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until February 5, 2026.Targeting PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN and Other Alterations in HR+, HER2- MBC: Navigating the Evidence and Guidance for Use In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an independent educational grant from AstraZeneca.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

Det er snøstorm og Jørgen hater de som er forberedt og tar skia fatt, Eirik forteller om et møte med PTen som burde vært psykolog, Torjus har nok en gang skjønt hvordan han skal bli rik med sitt nye TV-konsept; The cast. 

In this JCO Article Insights episode, Giselle de Souza Carvalho provides a summary on  "Navigating Treatment Pathways in Metastatic Hormone Receptor–Positive, HER2-Negative Breast Cancer: Optimizing Second-Line Endocrine and Targeted Therapies" by Bhardwarj, et al and "US Food and Drug Administration Approval Summary: Capivasertib With Fulvestrant for Hormone Receptor–Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2–Negative Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer With PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN Alterations" by Dilawari et al published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.  TRANSCRIPT Giselle Carvalho: Hello and welcome to JCO Article Insights episode for the December issue of the Journal of Clinical Oncology. I'm your host Giselle Carvalho, Medical Oncologist in Brazil focusing on breast cancer and melanoma skin cancers and one of the ASCO Editorial Fellows at JCO this year. Today, I will be discussing two articles. The first one is “Navigating Treatment Pathways in Metastatic Hormone Receptor–Positive, HER2-Negative Breast Cancer: Optimizing Second-Line Endocrine and Targeted Therapies,” and the second one is the “US FDA Approval Summary on Capivasertib with Fulvestrant  for HR-positive HER2-negative Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer with PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN Alteration.”  As we know, 65% to 70% of all breast cancers are HR-positive HER2-negative and this is also the most common subtype of metastatic breast cancer. The current standard of care for frontline therapy of patients with luminal metastatic disease is a CDK4/6 inhibitor in combination with endocrine therapy. However, as new endocrine and targeted therapies gain approval, choosing the best systemic therapy upon disease progression after frontline therapy is a topic of ongoing debate. Nearly 40 to 50% of HR-positive breast cancers have actionable genomic alterations and molecular testing should be a routine recommendation for patients with metastatic HR-positive HER2-negative disease. This can be performed repeating tissue biopsy at the time of progression or from archival tissue. Treatment options after progression on CDK4/6 inhibitors include alpelisib in combination with fulvestrant in patients with PIK3CA mutant tumors as seen in the SOLAR-1 trial, or capivasertib with fulvestrant in patients with a tumor mutation in (PI3K)–AKT–PTEN pathway as seen in the CAPItello-291 study, which will be discussed further.  In approximately 30% of patients, progression on frontline endocrine plus CDK4/6 inhibitor treatment is caused by endocrine resistance, frequently involving activating mutations in ESR1. For those tumors, elacestrant, an oral SERD is an option as demonstrated in the EMERALD trial. For patients with a BRCA mutation, PARP inhibitors represent another option. If no mutations are detected, everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, can be used based on the BOLERO-2 results. The phase 2 MAINTAIN and PACE trials, along with the phase 3 postMONARCH trial support changing the endocrine therapy backbone with or without switching the CDK4/6 inhibitor. In less resourced areas, fulvestrant monotherapy is still an option to delay cytotoxic chemotherapy, though its efficacy is limited when used as a single agent. Finally, after progression on at least one line of chemotherapy, antibody drug conjugates including sacituzumab govitecan or trastuzumab deruxtecan may be an option.  Now focusing on the PI3K AKT PTEN signaling pathway, activating mutations in PIK3CA and AKT1 and inactivating alterations in PTEN occur in approximately half of luminal breast cancers. In June 2023, the CAPItello-291 trial was published and treatment with fulvestrant plus capivasertib, a PTEN AKT inhibitor, demonstrated a 3.6 month PFS benefit compared to fulvestrant alone, regardless of the presence of AKT pathway alterations. However, for those with tumors without AKT pathway alteration, an exploratory analysis showed that although there was a numerical improvement in PFS, it did not meet statistical significance, indicating that the biomarker positive population primarily drove the positive results noted in the overall population. Therefore, capivasertib plus fulvestrant was approved by the US FDA in November 2023 exclusively for patients with PI3K/AKT1/PTEN tumor alterations after progression on an aromatized inhibitor with or without a CDK4/6 inhibitor. The approved schedule of capivasertib is slightly different from that of other agents used in breast cancer. It is 400 milligrams taken orally twice a day for four days per week every week in a 28-day cycle in combination with fulvestrant. Diarrhea, rash and hyperglycemia were the most commonly reported grade three or four adverse events in the interventional group. I would like to highlight that even though the CAPItello trial excluded patients with glycosylated hemoglobin levels higher than 8% or those diagnosed with diabetes who required insulin, hyperglycemia occurred in 19% of biomarker positive patients treated with capivasertib, with nearly 2% of this population experiencing grade 3 or 4 hyperglycemia and some patients experiencing life threatening outcomes such as diabetic ketoacidosis.  By way of comparison, hyperglycemia of any grade was three times higher with alpelisib therapy in the SOLAR-1 trial, occurring in 64% of the patients and grade three or higher hyperglycemia was seen in 37% of the patients. Diarrhea was the most common treatment related adverse event experienced by 77% of the biomarker positive population. Prompt use of the antidiarrheal drugs when needed, such as loperamide must be encouraged as untreated diarrhea can lead to dehydration and renal injury. Cutaneous rash occurred in 56% of the biomarker positive population in the interventional group and 15% experienced a grade 3 or 4 rash. Nearly half of the patients with cutaneous adverse reactions required treatment and this was the leading reason for dose reduction of capivasertib.  In the biomarker positive population, the improvement in medium PFS were 4.3 months by investigator assessment. Overall survival data from the CAPItello-291 trial is still immature, but quality of life data was recently published in September this year and was assessed by the 30 item QLQ C30 questionnaire and the QLQ BR23, the breast module. According to Oliveira et al, global health status and quality of life were maintained for a longer period with capivasertib fulvestrant than with placebo fulvestrant except for symptoms of diarrhea which were significantly worse in the capivasertib group. The median time of deterioration of global health status and quality of life was twice as long in the capivasertib group being almost 25 months versus 12 months in the placebo fulvestrant group. These data reinforced the use of capivasertib in combination with fulvestrant for the treatment of HR-positive HER2-negative advanced breast cancer patients with PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN tumor alterations who have progressed after an aromatase inhibitor-based therapy with or without a CDK4/6 inhibitor.  Thank you for listening to JCO Article Insights. This is Giselle Carvalho. Don't forget to give us a rating or review and be sure to subscribe so you never miss an episode. You can find all ASCO shows at asco.org/podcasts. See you next time.   The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions.  Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement.  

Predicting how influenza viruses will evolve, how deserts decompose matter despite the dry, what worms are revealing about a gene linked to autism, and what makes mice fearful of cat smells. Dr Chris Smith talks to the authors of the latest leading research in eLife... Get the references and the transcripts for this programme from the Naked Scientists website

Featuring perspectives from Dr Komal Jhaveri and Dr Hope S Rugo, including the following topics: Introduction: PI3K/AKT/PTEN Pathway and Resistance to Endocrine Therapy (0:00) First-Line Therapy for HR-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer (mBC) Harboring PI3K/AKT/PTEN Mutations (7:04) Treatment Options for Recurrent mBC with PI3K/AKT/PTEN Mutations (24:11) Beyond the Guidelines Survey (35:36) Faculty Case Presentations (51:27) CME information and select publications

Dr Komal Jhaveri from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, New York, and Dr Hope S Rugo from the UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center discuss treatment decision-making for HR-positive metastatic breast cancer in patients who harbor PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway mutations.

Dr Komal Jhaveri from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, New York, and Dr Hope S Rugo from the UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center discuss treatment decision-making for HR-positive metastatic breast cancer in patients who harbor PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway mutations, moderated by Dr Neil Love. Produced by Research To Practice. CME information and select publications here (https://www.researchtopractice.com/PI3KAKTPTENmBC24).

JCO PO author Dr. Amar U. Kishan, Professor, Executive Vice Chair, and Chief of Genitourinary Oncology Service in the Department of Radiation Oncology at the University of California, Los Angeles, shares insights into his JCO PO article, “Transcriptomic Profiling of Primary Prostate Cancers and Nonlocalized Disease on Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.”  Host Dr. Rafeh Naqash and Dr. Kishan discuss the relationship between Decipher genomic classifier scores and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT-based metastatic spread. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Hello and welcome to JCO Precision Oncology Conversations, where we bring you engaging conversations with authors of clinically relevant and highly significant JCO articles. I'm your host, Dr. Rafeh Naqash, Assistant Professor at the OU Health Stephenson Cancer Center at the University of Oklahoma. Today we are joined by Dr. Amar Kishan, Executive Vice Chair of the Department of Radiation Oncology at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, and also the corresponding and senior author of the JCO Precision Oncology article entitled, “Transcriptomic Profiling of Primary Prostate Cancers and Non Localized Disease on Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen (PSMA) Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.” Dr. Kishan, welcome to our podcast and thank you for joining us today. Dr. Amar Kishan: Thank you so much for that kind introduction and the invitation to be here today. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Well, it seems to me that there's a theme that people in the GU space, investigators in the GU space, are very interested in trying to understand risk predictors for prostate cancer. We had somebody, I believe from Huntsman Cancer Center a few months back on a previous podcast, where they were trying to do risk prediction modeling as well. Could you tell us why that's something that the GU community is very interested in? What's the background? Is it because there's no risk prediction approaches currently? And would this somehow influence management in the near future? Dr. Amar Kishan: Yeah, that's a great question. So, I think this goes back to the point that we're in the era of precision medicine now, and many cancers have these molecular stratification scores and all that. Prostate cancer has lagged a little bit behind in that regard, despite the fact that it's such a common cancer that affects so many people across the country and across the world. So, we do have risk stratification schemes for prostate cancer. These are based off clinical and pathologic variables, like the level of PSA, the size of the tumor on digital rectal examination, now, we're incorporating MRI imaging as well, and then what the cancer looks like under the microscope, the Gleason score. And now there have been revisions to the Gleason score, but it's really kind of the architecture, what the biopsy looks like. And this was kind of developed many, many years ago by Donald Gleason, a pathologist at the VA. What we're not necessarily taking into account routinely is kind of the biology of the cancer per se. You know, what are the molecular drivers? How could that influence ultimate outcome? And that's very important because we have these risk groups, low risk, very low risk, favorable intermediate risk, unfavorable intermediate risk, high risk, very high risk. But within each of those groups, based on the clinical kind of pathological characteristics, there's a huge heterogeneity in outpatients too, and our treatments are effective, but they can be morbid. Putting someone on hormone therapy for an extended period of time has a lot of side effects. Dose escalating radiotherapy or doing surgery and then radiation afterwards, these are big things that have a big impact on the patient, and I think we really need better risk stratification tools to understand who needs intensification and who we can de-escalate treatment for. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: I think those are absolutely valid points, perhaps not just for prostate cancer, more so for all cancers that we currently treat, especially in the current day and age, where we have a tendency to add more and more therapies, combination therapies for patients, and as you mentioned, risk stratification to help identify high risk versus low risk, where you can de intensify treatment, is of high value from a patient standpoint as well as from a financial toxicity standpoint. So then, going to this next part of the approach that you used, and from what I understand in this paper, you had the radiological aspect, which is the PSMA PET, which we'll talk about. Then you had the genomic aspect, where you did some genomic risk-based stratification. Then you had the transcriptomic score based on the Decipher score. So, could you go into some of the details, first, for the PSMA PET, when is it used? What is the utilization? What is it based on, the science behind the PSMA PET? And then we can talk about some of the other genomic transcriptomic predictors that you use in this study. Dr. Amar Kishan: Sure. Absolutely. So, a PSMA PET is an advanced molecular imaging tool. PSMA stands for prostate specific membrane antigen. It's a membrane protein that is expressed on the surface of prostate cancer cells. It is expressed elsewhere in the body as well. The utilization of this for imaging has been a revolution in the staging of prostate cancer, both upfront and in the recurrent setting. We basically had fairly recent approval for PSMA PET being used more routinely in upfront staging and recurrent staging in 2022. Essentially, what this is it gives us an ability to detect whether prostate cancer has spread at a time of diagnosis or try to localize the recurrence. Now, no imaging test is perfect, of course, and a PET has a resolution of about 3 mm. There are questions about the sensitivity of the PET. You get it on a patient with high-risk disease, the PET is negative; you do surgery, there are positive lymph nodes. That can happen, but it's far superior to the tools that we have had before. For instance, beforehand, all we would have is a contrast enhanced CT, bone scan, and MRI. And the sensitivity of those is far below that of a PSMA PET. And that has actually been shown in a randomized trial called the ProPSMA trial out of Australia, where they compared conventional upfront imaging versus PSMA upfront imaging with a crossover design, and there was better detection of disease with the PSMA PET. So that's been a revolution in how we stage prostate cancer. But I'm sure many of your listeners and others are aware of the concerns. When you get a new test and you're detecting disease that's extra prostatic, for instance, are you seeing truly significant new disease that we do need to change our management for, or are we just seeing stuff that wasn't there before that actually wouldn't impact anything? And what I mean by that is, let's say you're seeing things that would never have made a difference to the patient, but now you're saying they have metastatic disease. You're changing their entire treatment paradigm, all kinds of things like that. There's implications to this that hasn't been fully fleshed out. But very recently, like we're talking in July of 2024, essentially, there was a Lancet Oncology paper that looked at the long-term prognosis of patients who had extra prostatic disease on PSMA PET, judged by something called a PROMISE score, kind of gives a quantification on the volume of disease, the brightness of disease, and they correlated that with long term outcomes. And that was really the first time that we have long term follow up data that this extra prostatic disease on PSMA PET actually is prognostically important. So, we're getting there. I mean, now that it's approved and, in some sense, the cat is out of the bag, patients are coming in asking for a PSMA PET, etc. I'm sure everyone has experienced that, but I think we now do have good evidence that it actually is prognostically important as well. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Thank you for that explanation. And again, to put this into context for things that I've seen and that might also help the listeners in other tumors, so, for example, melanoma surveillance tends to be or while on treatment, patients tend to have more PET scans than what you see, maybe in individuals with lung cancer, where you get a baseline PET and then you have follow up CT scan based imaging is that something that you guys have shifted from in the prostate cancer space with the approval for PSMA PET, where follow up imaging, whether patient is on treatment or surveillance imaging, is PSMA PET based? Dr. Amar Kishan: Yeah, that's a good question. I think there's actually less robust data to support it as a means of treatment response. But in terms of evaluating a recurrence, then, yes, that has become kind of a standard tool. It's very complicated because all of the metrics that we have for, say, a treatment failing are based on conventionally detected metastases or something that shows up on a CT or bone scan. So, again, that question arises if someone is on systemic therapy and then you see something on a PSMA PET, are you going to abandon the therapy that you're on? It technically would be earlier than you would otherwise have done that, or what are you going to do? So, that hasn't been fully fleshed out, but it is used in that circumstance. So, I'd say less for treatment monitoring and more for evaluation of suspected recurrence. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Understood. And I'm guessing, as a futuristic approach, somebody out there may perhaps do a trial using PSMA PET based imaging to decide whether treatment change needs to be made or does not need to be made. Dr. Amar Kishan: Yeah. It is being incorporated into trials as we speak, I think. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Now, going to the second part of this paper is the Decipher score. Could you explain what the score is, what its components are, how it's calculated? Is it DNA, is it RNA, is it both combined? Is it tissue based; is it blood based? Dr. Amar Kishan: Yeah. So, the Decipher is also an approved test now, was approved in 2018. What it is, essentially, and how it's derived is based on the idea originally that patients might have a recurrence after surgery for prostate cancer. And it's just a PSA recurrence. It's this way. It's literally what we call a biochemical recurrence. That patient might not have any problems, whereas other patients with a recurrence might go on to develop metastatic disease. And we didn't have a good way of determining which patient is which. Get back to that prognostic problem that we have. So, some investigators, they looked at men that had radical prostatectomy from 1987 to 2001 at the Mayo Clinic that had archived tissue. They looked at FFPE, or basically paraffin embedded tissue. They extracted the RNA and then did a microarray analysis and looked at transcriptomic signatures and wanted to see, could this discern the patients who had mets, who had clinically significant recurrences from those that didn't? And out of that exercise came the Decipher Genomic Classifier, which basically is based on 22 genes. These are involved with cell proliferation, etc., but it's an RNA-based, tissue-based assay. So, if you wanted to order a Decipher on somebody, you would need to use a biopsy or prostatectomy specimen to do so. Essentially, that the samples, they would take the highest grade, highest Gleason grade specimen, send it to their lab. Their main lab is in California. The company is called Veracyte. And then they will do this RNA express analysis with a microarray and then return a score. The score is 0 to 1. Basically, 0 is the lowest, one is the highest, and it is a way of prognosticating the risk of metastasis. Originally, when you get a Decipher report, it actually will tell you the 5 and 10-year risks of distant metastasis, and we'll quantify that. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: And you said this is approved or has been approved in 2018. So, is this insurance reimbursable at this point? Dr. Amar Kishan: Most insurances do, not all, and the criteria for getting it can vary, so we can talk about it, but it was initially developed in this post-op setting. On the basis of a significant amount of validation studies, it has been moved to being used in the upfront setting as well. So, if you look at some of the ongoing NRG trials, for instance, they are stratifying patients based off the upfront Decipher score. And this is based off of validation studies that have been conducted looking at past RTOG trials and other trials. That said, sometimes it is not approved by commercial insurances in the upfront setting, because that wasn't where it was initially validated and derived. But honestly, here in 2024, that's very uncommon. It's much more common that it's approved. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Understood. And in your practice, or the medical oncologist practice at your institution or other institutions, is this something that is commonly used for some sort of treatment decision making that you've seen? Dr. Amar Kishan: Yeah. So, as a radiation oncologist, I do think it's a useful test, because my approach is, if we're talking about adding hormone therapy, for instance, which is oftentimes dominating the conversation, we know that it offers a relative benefit to a lot of patients. We've published on this; others have published on it. Let's say it reduces the chance of metastasis by about 40%. 10-year risk of metastasis has a ratio of 0.6. So, 40% reduction. But if your risk of metastasis is 2%, that benefit is not that much in absolute terms. And we don't historically have a great way of saying, what is your absolute risk of metastasis? And I think Decipher is one tool that does tell us that - it literally gives it on the report. Now, is that a holy grail? Is it 100% accurate? Nothing is 100% accurate. But it does give us some quantification. Then I can go back to the patient and say, yes, you will get a benefit from adding hormone therapy, but you're talking about going from 2% to 1%, and so they can decide if that's worth it to them. Conversely, it could be a situation where they really don't want hormone therapy, but it comes back that their risk of metastasis is 20%, and then there's actually a big absolute benefit. So that's how I use it as a radiation oncologist, and we would use it upfront. Now surgeons, and if I was consulting on a post operative patient, maybe it plays more of a role. And do we need to do post operative radiotherapy on this patient, or do we need to add hormone therapy in the postoperative situation? From the medical oncology perspective, there are emerging data that may be useful in the choice of systemic therapy for metastatic disease, but that is a little bit earlier in the investigational stage, I would say. So, when I'm working with medical oncologists, it's often still in this localized setting, and typically, do we add hormone therapy or not, and that type of thing. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Understood. And from a reporting standpoint, so the Decipher score, I'm guessing it's some sort of a report that comes back to the ordering physician and you basically see the score, it gives you a potential recurrence free survival percentage or a metastasis percentage of what is your risk for having metastasis in the next five years - is that how they generally do it? Because I've personally never seen one, so I'm just curious. Dr. Amar Kishan: Yeah, essentially, it comes back with a score, a numerical score, again, from 0 to 1, and it will basically give you the five-year risk of distant metastasis. The ten-year risk of distant metastasis. You can request an extended report that provides additional, not as well supported signatures that are out there, like ADT response signature, etc. But those maybe may have been published, but are not clinically validated as much, but the actual Decipher report, which goes to patients too, just has this kind of 5,10-year risk of distant metastasis. They have some estimations on prostate cancer specific mortality as well. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Sure. Now, the third part of this project, and correct me if I'm wrong, the grid database of the 265 genomic signature score. From what I understood, this is a different component than the Decipher score. Is that a fair statement? Dr. Amar Kishan: Yeah. No, that's exactly correct. And that was an exploratory part of this analysis, to be honest. Basically, I think our main focus in the paper was those advances that we've talked about PSMA and Decipher, those happened concurrently. People started developing PSMA PET, people started developing Decipher. And so, what we wanted to understand was, if you have a patient that has extra prosthetic disease on PSMA PET, are those biologically more aggressive cancers, is their Decipher score going to be higher? What can we learn about the biology of this? And we were the first, to my knowledge, where we actually had a large data set of patients that actually received PSMA PETs and Decipher. And that's kind of the gist of the paper. We have patients in the upfront setting, patients in the post radical prostatectomy setting, and we're essentially showing that there is this correlation. In the upfront setting, the odds of extra prosthetic disease are higher for higher Decipher scores, which is kind of maybe validating that this biology is capturing something that's akin to this ability to spread. And in the post-op setting, because we have time to failure, technically, we can calculate a hazard ratio rather than odds ratio. So, we have a hazard ratio that's significantly associated with an increased risk of spread for patients with higher Decipher. The grid portion, which is the genomic resource information database, was more of an exploratory part where I mentioned the Decipher score is based off this microarray, they're looking at 1.4 million transcripts. Only 22 are part of the Decipher, but you can request the rest of the signature data as well. And so, we wanted to look at other pathways, other signatures that have been published, like looking at DNA repair, neuroendocrine pathway, just to see if we could see any correlations there that's not necessarily as clinically actionable. These are more exploratory. But again, we were trying to just look at whether patients who had non localized disease on their PSMA PET, whether their primary had more aggressive biology. We did see that. So that's kind of loosely speaking things like PTEN loss, androgen receptor, DNA repair, metabolism, neuroendocrine signaling, which are thought to be portenders of aggressive disease. Those pathways were upregulated at the RNA level in patients who had non-localized disease. And that's kind of the take home from that. But I wouldn't say any of that is clinically actionable at this point. It's more kind of defining biology. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Some of the interesting correlations that you make here, at least in the figures that we see, you're looking at different local occurrences, nodal metastases, M1A and M1B disease. And one thing that I'm a little curious about is the Decipher score seems to be lower in pelvic nodal metastasis, that is, PSMA PET positive versus local recurrence, which has a slightly higher Decipher score. Is that just because of a sample size difference, or is there a biologically different explanation for that? Dr. Amar Kishan: Yeah, that's a good point. I would assume that's probably because of a sample size in this case, and it's a little bit complicated. It wasn't statistically different. And it was 0.76 on average for patients with local recurrence and 0.7 for patients with a pelvic nodal metastasis. Well, what I think is interesting is we can maybe think that in this post-op setting the time to failure could have been long in some of these cases. So, it is conceivable that an isolated nodal recurrence 10 years after the surgery, for instance, is not as aggressive a cancer as a local recurrence in a short time after the surgery. And that's not taken into account when you're just looking at median scores like we are in this fox and whiskers plot. But overall, I think what it's suggesting is that there are patients who have more indolent disease. That's actually pretty widespread there. There are pretty indolent cases that have these nodal metastases. So just because you have a nodal metastasis doesn't mean it's an incredibly aggressive cancer, biologically. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Now, the exploratory component, as you mentioned, is the grid part where you do look at TP53, which is a cell cycle gene, and higher TP53 associated with worse recurrences, from what I understand. Do you see that just from a cell cycle standpoint? Because from what I, again, see in the paper, there's a couple of other cell cycle related signatures that you're using. Is that just a surrogate for potential Gleason score? Have you guys done any correlations where higher Gleason score is associated with maybe higher cell cycle checkpoint, pathway related alterations and replication stress and DNA damage and perhaps more aggressive cancers? Dr. Amar Kishan: Yeah, that's a great question. We haven't done that in this paper, but it has been published before that there is this correlation loosely between grade and some of these parameters - so repair, metabolism, androgen receptor signaling. However, it's a very great point that you bring up, which is that it's pretty heterogeneous and that's why we need something like this as opposed to Gleason score. So, you can have Gleason 10 cancer. I mean, that would be pretty uncommon. But within the Gleason 9, at least, which we have published on and looked at, there's a heterogeneity. There are some that are biologically not that aggressive. And the converse Gleason 7, you can have some that are actually biologically aggressive. That's why it may be useful to move away from just the pathological architecture and get a little bit more into some of these pathways. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: What's the next step here? I know this perhaps isn't ready for primetime. How would you try to emphasize the message in a way that makes it interesting and clinically applicable for your colleagues in the GU community? Dr. Amar Kishan: Yeah. I think for me, what I would try to emphasize here and what I think is the main takeaway is this is kind of a validation that having extra prostatic disease on PSMA PET is likely suggestive of a more aggressive disease biology. And I think what this stresses to me is the importance of getting a PSMA PET, particularly in patients with high-risk prostate cancer. This isn't always happening. And I think if we see things on a PSMA PET, we really need to consider systemic therapy intensification. And what do I mean by that as a practical point? You have a high-risk prostate cancer patient. You get a PSMA PET, you see an isolated pelvic lymph node. If we believe the results of the study, that's a more aggressive biology likely. Whether we have the Decipher or whether we have genomic signatures, which we may or may not have, maybe that patient should get treated with something like an androgen receptor signaling inhibitor in addition to ADT, more akin to a clinically node positive case. So, intensify the systemic therapy, more aggressive disease. That's how I would incorporate it practically into my practice, that really what we're seeing on the PSMA PET is real. It's a reflection of biology that's aggressive. It's not just some Will Rogers effect where you're upstaging stuff needlessly. I think this is telling us some true biology. So that's kind of what my takeaway would be. I think future areas of investigation would be, honestly, to try to have a better idea of what's going on in these metastases. So, if you could design a study potentially, where your biopsy some of these and actually do sequencing and understand a little bit more of that. And so, we're looking into stuff like that. But my takeaway for like the everyday clinician would be to try to get a PSMA PET, if you can, and to intensify therapy on the basis of that, or at least consider it, discuss it in a multidisciplinary setting. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: And I'm guessing somebody out there, perhaps even you, are thinking or planning on doing a ctDNA MRD based correlation here, since that's up and coming in this space. Dr. Amar Kishan: That is up and coming, I think one of the challenges in prostate cancer is the amount of ctDNA can be low. But yes, you're right, that's certainly things that a lot of us are looking at, too. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Excellent. Well, thank you for the science discussion, Dr. Kishan, could you tell us a little bit about yourself, your career trajectory, where you started, what you're doing, and perhaps some advice for early career junior investigators, trainees, things that might have worked for you, that could also work for them as they are progressing in their careers. Dr. Amar Kishan: Sure. So, yeah, I'm a radiation oncologist at UCLA. I run the prostate cancer radiation program. Clinically. I'm also heavily involved in our research enterprise, so I kind of oversee the clinical and translational research aspect. That's what I do currently. So, I did my residency in radiation oncology at UCLA. Just on a personal note, my wife is from LA, her parents live in LA. We really wanted to stay in LA, so I was fortunate to be able to join the faculty here. I always liked GU oncology, so that was kind of a natural thing for me to kind of go into this position here and try to build the GU program. I've been very fortunate to have great collaborators. My message to students and trainees is to try to reach outside your department for mentorship as well. It's important to have people inside your department who can mentor you. But as a radiation oncologist, I work so closely with urology, so closely with medical oncology that I'm very fortunate to have individuals in those departments who have a vested interest in me and my success as well. I like working with them. It's important to be a team player. If they need help, you help them. If you need help, you ask for help from them. So, I think that's the single biggest thing that I would say to any trainee is don't be intimidated. Please reach outside of your department. Lots of people are willing to help and provide mentorship, and it's helpful to have that perspective. We are in a very multidisciplinary environment and era of practicing medicine. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Well, thank you again for those personal insights and especially for submitting your work to JCO PO. And we hope to see more of this work perhaps in the subsequent sessions for JCO PO, and maybe we'll bring you back again. And at that point, the Decipher and the PSMA PET scan will have more data, more implementation in the clinically relevant real-world setting. Dr. Amar Kishan: Thank you very much. And if I could just give one quick shout out. The first author of this work, which I presented, was Dr. John Nikitas, who is a trainee that works with me here at UCLA a PGY5 resident. So, I do want to give credit to him as well. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: And John, if you're listening to this hopefully, it's always great to get a shout out from your mentor. Thank you both again for putting in the work and effort to submit this manuscript. Thank you for listening to JCO Precision Oncology Conversations. Don't forget to give us a rating or review and be sure to subscribe so you never miss an episode. You can find all ASCO shows at asco.org/podcasts.   The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement.    Disclosures  Dr. Kishan Honoraria Company: Varian Medical Systems, Boston Scientific,  Janssen Oncology  Consulting or Advisory Role Company: Janssen, Boston Scientific, Lantheus  Research Funding Company: Janssen , Point Biopharma

We break down what's going on with these crazy markets and volatility, what you should do, and how to trade. We discuss the most active equity options for the day including PTEN, NU. We talk about earnings volatility this week in RDDT, RIVN, LYFT, UBER, HOOD. We also look at unusual options activity in CFG, GOTU, REAL. Uncle Mike Tosaw discusses managing draw downs while staying invested. With your hosts: Mark Longo, The Options Insider Media Group Mark "The Greasy Meatball" Sebastian, The Option Pit "Uncle" Mike Tosaw, St. Charles Wealth Management Options are not suitable for all investors and carry significant risk.  Option investors can rapidly lose the value of their investment in a short period of time and incur permanent loss by expiration date.  Certain complex options strategies carry additional risk.  There are additional costs associated with option strategies that call for multiple purchases and sales of options, such as spreads, straddles, among others, as compared with a single option trade. Prior to buying or selling an option, investors must read and understand the “Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options”, also known as the options disclosure document (ODD) which can be found at: www.theocc.com/company-information/documents-and-archives/options-disclosure-document Supporting documentation for any claims will be furnished upon request. If you are enrolled in our  Options Order Flow Rebate Program, The exact rebate will depend on the specifics of each transaction and will be previewed for you prior to submitting each trade. This rebate will be deducted from your cost to place the trade and will be reflected on your trade confirmation. Order flow rebates are not available for non-options transactions. To learn more, see our  Fee Schedule, Order Flow Rebate FAQ, and  Order Flow Rebate Program Terms & Conditions. Options can be risky and are not suitable for all investors. See the  Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options  to learn more. All investing involves the risk of loss, including loss of principal. Brokerage services for US-listed, registered securities, options and bonds in a self-directed account are offered by Open to the Public Investing, Inc., member FINRA & SIPC. See public.com/#disclosures-main for more information.

We're back with another episode of The Option Block brought to you by  Public.   We break down what's going on with these crazy markets and volatility, what you should do, and how to trade. We discuss the most active equity options for the day including PTEN, NU. We talk about earnings volatility this week in RDDT, RIVN, LYFT, UBER, HOOD. We also look at unusual options activity in CFG, GOTU, REAL. Uncle Mike Tosaw discusses managing draw downs while staying invested. With your hosts: Mark Longo, The Options Insider Media Group Mark "The Greasy Meatball" Sebastian, The Option Pit "Uncle" Mike Tosaw, St. Charles Wealth Management Options are not suitable for all investors and carry significant risk.  Option investors can rapidly lose the value of their investment in a short period of time and incur permanent loss by expiration date.  Certain complex options strategies carry additional risk.  There are additional costs associated with option strategies that call for multiple purchases and sales of options, such as spreads, straddles, among others, as compared with a single option trade. Prior to buying or selling an option, investors must read and understand the “Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options”, also known as the options disclosure document (ODD) which can be found at: www.theocc.com/company-information/documents-and-archives/options-disclosure-document Supporting documentation for any claims will be furnished upon request. If you are enrolled in our  Options Order Flow Rebate Program, The exact rebate will depend on the specifics of each transaction and will be previewed for you prior to submitting each trade. This rebate will be deducted from your cost to place the trade and will be reflected on your trade confirmation. Order flow rebates are not available for non-options transactions. To learn more, see our  Fee Schedule, Order Flow Rebate FAQ, and  Order Flow Rebate Program Terms & Conditions. Options can be risky and are not suitable for all investors. See the  Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options  to learn more. All investing involves the risk of loss, including loss of principal. Brokerage services for US-listed, registered securities, options and bonds in a self-directed account are offered by Open to the Public Investing, Inc., member FINRA & SIPC. See public.com/#disclosures-main for more information.

In this episode, we explore Autism developing in the embryo. We will review a couple Scientific papers discussing specific time frames of development within the embryo based on each trimester and specific cellular abnormal processes occurring. We will connect previous biological and environmental components and how it influences the creation of Autism and previous episodes of From the Spectrum podcast.Remember in the Cause of Autism episode- Light, Water, Magnetism, Periodic Elements, Vitamins, and Proteins because they are involved. During the episode, we review risk-genes and how this could be the wrong direction for Autism research. As a counter, I provide where research and funding needs to focus- pregnancy.Cause of Autism https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/from-the-spectrum-finding-superpowers-with-autism/id1737499562?i=1000662271496Eric Courchesne https://profiles.ucsd.edu/eric.courchesnePrenatal Origins of ASD: The When, What, and How of ASD Development https://www.cell.com/trends/neurosciences/fulltext/S0166-2236(20)30051-5?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0166223620300515%3Fshowall%3DtrueThe ASD Living Biology: from cell proliferation to clinical phenotype https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-018-0056-yLeukocytes and Melanin Pigmentation https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/81931995.pdfmTOR and PTEN https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9743803/Cancer Drug for "Autism" https://neurosciencenews.com/asd-cognition-cancer-pharmacology-26481/0:00 Autism and the Embryo; Review of previous developmental milestones, and the processes and "ingredients" used in our Biology5:45 Cellular processes; ASD Living Biology; becoming the complex living organism8:17 1st Trimester: Proliferation, neurogenesis, migration8:46 2nd Trimester: Neurite overgrowth, synaptogenesis and synaptic function9:12 3rd Trimester: Neural networks9:33 Epoch 1 and 213:04 Scientific Literature; risk-genes; send research and funding to pregnancy17:57 Abnormal brain development in the embryo21:39 Excitation and the risk-genes and consequences to the Nervous System24:36 Be cautious of research direction; MEDICATION and MEDICAL PARADIGM RANT29:32 Connecting Light and Abnormal Development across the Body- Example Melanin and Leukocytes33:12 Recap on the Past 3 episodes36:00 Reviews/Ratings and Contact InfoX: https://twitter.com/rps47586Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/fromthespectrum.podcastEmail: info.fromthespectrum@gmail.com

Welcome back to the pub!  This is the first of 4 episodes where Mike will be drinking nothing but Malort after losing his Oscar bet to Chris yet again!  Chris is hosting this game as another Chris is taking on Mike in a head to head matchup for the ages. Are you enjoying the show? www.patreon.com/ptebb Connect with us on Discord, Facebook, Twitter, IG, etc… at www.ptebb.com   Don't forget – Leave us a 5 Star Rating and write us a review   Enjoy The Show!

Olaf se Zikym komentují dění na pražské klubové scéně po zavření Kasárna Karlín a to nejen okolnosti zavření, ale také se pobavíme o tom, kde je ještě v Praze možné dělat kulturu. V reportech z akcí se podíváme na Žižkov, Smíchov, Krymskou ulici i zámek Ptení. Na závěr si popovídáme o mnoha deskách a tentokrát to bude hlavně o metalu a folku. Hodí se Ortel do Krtkova světa? Jak má vypadat správná sousedská akce? Je víc cool být radikál nebo hipster? Najdeme nějaké záchytné body v Časech bujarého hodokvasu? Jakou nahrávku Olaf málem nedoposlouchal a pak byl rád, že jí dal šanci? Jaké nahrávce dal Ziky šanci a naopak toho litoval? A na kvalitách jaké desky se jednomyslně shodneme? Pusť to!

In this episode, we explore three regions associated with social awareness- the medial Prefrontal Cortex, the Anterior Cingulate Cortex, and the Insula. We review the functions of each, the interactions between each region, and the inputs and bi-directional connections to some crucial areas of the brain. In large part, we will review adaptive responses and cover some scientific literature on these regions and the implications to Autism.https://molecularautism.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13229-024-00593-6https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9354837/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6766703/#:~:text=Schematic%20structure%20of%20different%20regions,and%20infralimbic%20cortex%20(IL).https://www.cell.com/neuron/fulltext/S0896-6273(12)01108-7?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0896627312011087%3Fshowall%3Dtruehttps://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-024-06016-9https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763409000815?via%3Dihub#aep-section-id15https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17470919.2023.2242095https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006322308011578(0:00) Intro; mPFC, ACC, and Insula(3:26) mPFC, Excitation / Inhibition; CNTNAP2, SHANK3, Neuroligin, and PTEN(7:42) Functions of mPFC and a primary dive into Adaptive Responses; Neuromodulators(13:52) ACC(15:23) the mPFC and ACC lead the way(19:29) Scientific Studies on Theory of Mind Task and Sensory Processing(21:52) Insula(26:49) Scientific Study: Eye Gaze, Social Attention, Social Cognition, Observational Learning(30:11) Social and Nonsocial Studies- different areas for Autistics versus Non-Autistic(32:38) A study using 6-week-old Infants, attentional biases and sensorimotor and different brain areas(35:05) Wrap Upemail: info.fromthespectrum@gmail.com

Vil du ha 90 dager med gratis prøvetid på BookBeat? https://www.bookbeat.com/no/vittig90Maria har fylleangst etter en needy tekst til PTen sin OG etter livepodden til Kaffeskål i helgen. Hun beklager til alle som satt på galleriet på sentrum scene den kvelden. Ingrid lar seg fascinere over en mystisk høytaler i en huske og påminner oss om hvorfor vi alle MÅ huske å låse dørene våre!!!!Vittig er en podkast fra BAFF. Produsent er Helle Aakesen.Vil du sende oss en hilsen, spørsmål, invitasjon på rulling eller kanskje en fiiiiiis?Send til: hei@vittigpod.no eller shoot us a DM on the gram @vittigpod

Dr. Neeraj Agarwal and Dr. Jeanny Aragon-Ching discuss promising combination therapies and other compelling advances in genitourinary cancers in advance of the 2024 ASCO Annual Meeting. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Hello and welcome to the ASCO Daily News Podcast. I'm Dr. Neeraj Agarwal, your guest host of the ASCO Daily News Podcast today. I'm the director of the Genitourinary Oncology Program and a professor of medicine at the University of Utah Huntsman Cancer Institute, and editor-in-chief of the ASCO Daily News. I'm delighted to be joined by Dr. Jeanny Aragon-Ching, a GU medical oncologist and the clinical program director of genitourinary cancers at the Inova Schar Cancer Institute in Virginia. Today, we will be discussing some key abstracts in GU oncology that will be featured at the 2024 ASCO Annual Meeting.  Our full disclosures are available in the transcript of this episode. Jeanny, it's great to have you on the podcast. Dr. Jeanny Aragon-Ching: Thank you so much, Dr. Agarwal. It's a pleasure to be here. Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: So, Jeanny, let's start with some bladder cancer abstracts. Could you tell us about the Abstract 4509 titled, “Characterization of Complete Responders to Nivolumab plus Gemcitabine Cisplatin versus Gemcitabine Cisplatin Alone in Patients with Lymph Node Only Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma from the CheckMate 901 Trial.”  Dr. Jeanny Aragon-Ching: Of course, Neeraj, I would be delighted to. First, I would like to remind our listeners that the CheckMate 901 trial was a randomized, open-label, phase 3 study, in which this particular sub-study looked at cisplatin-eligible patients with previously untreated, unresectable, or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who were assigned to receive the combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin, followed by up to 2 years of nivolumab or placebo. Based on the data presented at ESMO 2023 and subsequently published in the New England Journal of Medicine, which shows significantly improved progression-free survival and overall survival in patients receiving the combination of gemcitabine, cisplatin, and nivolumab, this regimen was approved in March 2024 as a first-line therapy for patients with unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma.  In the abstract that will be featured at ASCO this year, Dr. Matt Galsky and colleagues present a post-hoc analysis that aims to characterize a subset of patients with complete response as well as those with lymph node-only metastatic disease. In patients receiving the experimental treatment, 21.7% achieved a complete response, while 11.8% of the patients in the control arm achieved a complete response.  Among these complete responders, around 52% had lymph- node-only disease in both arms. Furthermore, when characterizing the subgroup of patients with lymph-node-only disease, those receiving the combination of gemcitabine-cisplatin plus nivolumab had a 62% reduction in the risk of progression or death and a 42% reduction in the risk of death compared to those treated with gemcitabine-cisplatin alone.  The median overall survival in the experimental arm in this subgroup was around 46.3 months, while it was only 24.9 months in the control arm. The ORR in patients with lymph-node-only disease receiving gem-cis plus nivo was about 81.5% compared to 64.3% in those treated with gem-cis alone. Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Thank you, Jeanny, for the excellent summary of this abstract. We can say that nivolumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin induced durable disease control and clinically meaningful improvements in OS and PFS compared to gem-cis alone in patients with lymph- node-only metastasis, and deserves to be considered as one of the options for these patients.  In a similar first-line metastatic urothelial carcinoma setting, Abstract 4502, also reported data on a recently approved combination of enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab. Can you tell us more about this abstract, Jeanny? Dr. Jeanny Aragon-Ching: Sure, Neeraj. So, as quick reminder to our audience, this regimen was tested in the EV-302 phase 3 trial, where patients with previously untreated, locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma were randomized to receive enfortumab vedotin, plus pembrolizumab or gemcitabine plus either cisplatin or carboplatin. These data were also first presented at ESMO 2023 and subsequently published in the New England Journal of Medicine. They showed that this immune based combination significantly improved both progression free survival and overall survival, which were the primary endpoints compared to chemotherapy. In this abstract, Dr. Shilpa Gupta from the Cleveland Clinic and colleagues present the results of patient reported outcomes based on quality-of-life questionnaires in this trial.  Time to pain progression and time to confirm deterioration were numerically longer in patients treated with EV plus pembro, and patients with moderate to severe pain at baseline receiving this combination had a meaningful improvement in the Brief Pain Inventory Short-Form worst pain from week 3 through 26. Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Thank you, Jeanny. This means that patients treated with EV plus pembro did not only have improved survival compared with platinum-based chemotherapy, but also improvement in their quality-of-life and functioning, further supporting the value of this combination for patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. This is terrific news for all of our patients.   Before we wrap up the bladder cancer section, would you like to tell our listeners about Abstract 4565, which provides the data on the efficacy of trastuzumab deruxtecan in patients with bladder cancer? Dr. Jeanny Aragon-Ching: Yes, Neeraj; this is timely given the recent FDA approval, which we will talk about. The abstract is titled, “Efficacy and Safety of Trastuzumab Deruxtecan in Patients with HER2 Expressing Solid Tumors: Results from the Bladder Cohort of the DESTINY-PanTumor02 Study.” And as a quick reminder, the DESTINY-PanTumor02 was a phase 2 open-label study where trastuzumab deruxtecan, an antibody-drug conjugate targeting HER2 expression on cancer cells, was evaluated in patients with HER2-expressing locally advanced or metastatic disease who previously received systemic treatment or who had no other treatment options. The expression of HER2 was evaluated on immunohistochemistry by local or central testing.   The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response rate by investigator assessment. Secondary endpoints included duration of response, progression free survival, disease control rate, and safety. The primary analysis, which was published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, showed an ORR of 37.1% and responses across all cohorts and the median duration of response was 11.3 months. Based on these results, fam-trastuzumab deruxtecan-nxki was just granted accelerated FDA approval for unresectable or metastatic HER2-positive solid tumors in April 2024.  So, back to this abstract; Dr. Wysocki and colleagues report the results of the bladder cancer cohort. This study included 41 patients with urothelial cancer and at a median follow up of around 12.6 months, the objective response rate among these patients was 39%, the median PFS was 7 months, and the duration of response median was 8.7 months. The disease control rate at 12 weeks was around 71%. Regarding the safety profile, 41.5% of patients experienced grade ≥3 drug related adverse events and interstitial lung disease or pneumonitis did occur in about 4 patients. Although there was no statistical comparison between different groups, the ORR was numerically highest among the HER2 3+ group with 56.3%.  Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Thank you, Jeanny. So, these data support consideration of trastuzumab deruxtecan as a salvage therapy option for pre-treated patients with HER2 expressing urothelial cancers and show that we are extending our treatment options to include therapies with novel mechanisms of action. This is definitely exciting news for patients with bladder cancer. Dr. Jeanny Aragon-Ching: Yes, absolutely, Neeraj. Now, let's switch gears a bit to prostate cancer. Could you tell us about Abstract 5005 which is titled, “EMBARK Post Hoc Analysis of Impact of Treatment Suspension on Health Quality-of-Life?” Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Of course, I'd be happy to. So, enzalutamide was recently granted FDA approval for the treatment of patients with non-metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer with biochemical recurrence at high-risk of metastasis, based on the results of the EMBARK trial, which was a phase 3 study where patients with high-risk biochemical recurrence were randomized to receive either enzalutamide with leuprolide, enzalutamide monotherapy, or placebo plus leuprolide. The primary endpoint was metastasis-free survival with secondary endpoints including overall survival and safety.  Results showed that patients receiving enzalutamide alone or enzalutamide plus leuprolide had significantly improved metastasis-free survival compared to those treated with leuprolide alone while preserving health-related quality-of-life.   One important aspect in the design of the trial was that patients who achieved undetectable PSA at week 37 underwent treatment suspension. The treatment was resumed if PSA rose to more than 2 ng/ml for patients who underwent radical proctectomy or when PSA rose to more than 5 ng/ml for those who did not undergo surgery.  In this abstract, Dr. Stephen Freedland and colleagues present a post-hoc analysis of health-related quality-of-life outcomes after treatment suspension between weeks 37 and 205. They found that treatment was suspended in 90.9% of patients receiving enzalutamide plus leuprolide, 85.9% of those receiving enzalutamide monotherapy, and 67.8% of those receiving leuprolide monotherapy. Among those patients who stayed on treatment suspension, a trend toward numerical improvement in health-related quality-of-life after week 37 was seen in all 3 arms and this reached clinically meaningful threshold at week 205 in pain questionnaires, physical well-being, urinary and bowel symptoms. For hormonal treatment side effects, all arms reached clinically meaningful improvement at the subsequent assessments of week 49 to week 97. However, patients slowly deteriorated, with clinically meaningful deterioration at week 205 relative to week 37 in patients receiving the combination of enzalutamide and leuprolide and those treated with leuprolide.    Concerning sexual activity, a clinically meaningful improvement was reported only in patients receiving enzalutamide plus leuprolide, possibly because sexual function was better preserved prior to suspension in the enzalutamide monotherapy arm and thus there was less opportunity for “improvement” while on suspension.  Dr. Jeanny Aragon-Ching: Thank you, Neeraj, for this great summary. This analysis confirms that treatment suspension in good responders might lead to a clinically meaningful improvements in health-related quality-of-life.   Now, moving on to patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, what can you tell us, about Abstract 5008 titled, “Baseline ctDNA analyses and associations with outcomes in taxane-naive patients with mCRPC treated with 177Lu-PSMA-617 versus change of ARPI in PSMAfore”?  Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Sure, Jeanny. The PSMAfore trial was a phase 3 study that compared the efficacy of 177Lu-PSMA-617 versus an ARPI switch in patients with mCRPC and prior progression on a first ARPI, and not previously exposed to docetaxel chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was rPFS and OS was an important secondary endpoint. The primary analysis presented at ESMO 2023 showed a significantly prolonged rPFS in patients receiving lutetium. In the abstract that will be featured at the 2024 ASCO Annual Meeting, Dr. Johann De Bono and colleagues present an exploratory analysis regarding the associations between baseline circulating tumor DNA and outcomes.  ctDNA fraction was evaluated in all samples as well as alterations in key prostate cancer drivers prevalent in more than 10% of participants.  The investigators sought to interrogate the association of ctDNA fraction or alterations with rPFS, PSA response, and RECIST response at data cutoff. They showed that median rPFS was significantly shorter in patients with a ctDNA fraction >1% compared to those with a fraction < 1% regardless of the treatment arm. Furthermore, ctDNA fraction >1% was also associated with worst RECIST response and PSA50 response. Regarding prostate cancer drivers, median rPFS was significantly shorter in patients with alterations in the AR, TP53 or PTEN in both treatment arms. There was no significant association between ctDNA alterations and PSA or objective responses. Dr. Jeanny Aragon-Ching: Thank you, Neeraj. So, these results show that the presence of a ctDNA fraction >1% or alterations in AR, P53 and PTEN were all associated with worse outcomes regardless of treatment with lutetium or change in the ARPI. These data are definitely important for counseling and prognostication of patients in the clinic and may guide the design of future clinical trials. Let's move on to kidney cancer. Neeraj, do you have any updates for us?  Dr. Neeraj Agarwal:  Sure. In Abstract 4512 titled, “A Multi-institution Analysis of Outcomes with First-Line Therapy for 99 Patients with Metastatic Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma,” Dr. Sahil Doshi and colleagues present a retrospective, multi-institutional study comparing survival outcomes, including time-to-treatment failure and overall survival, between different first-line treatment options in patients with metastatic chromophobe renal cell carcinoma, where limited clinical trial data exists to guide systemic therapy. They categorized patients into 4 treatment groups: and immune checkpoint inhibitors + targeted therapy doublets (such as ICI VEGF TKI); pure immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy and doublets (such as ipilimumab plus nivolumab); targeted therapy doublets (such as lenvatinib plus everolimus), and targeted monotherapy (such as sunitinib).  They identified 99 patients, of whom 54 patients received targeted monotherapy, 17 received ICI VEGF-TKI, 14 received targeted doublet, and 14 patients received only ICI therapies. So the patients treated with any doublet containing a targeted agent had a 52% decrease in the risk of treatment failure and a 44% decrease in the risk of death compared to those treated with targeted monotherapy. The median time to treatment failure was 15 months with IO-targeted doublet, and the median overall survival was 56 months. Dr. Jeanny Aragon-Ching: Thank you, Neeraj. So, these results show that targeted doublet regimens resulted in a longer time to treatment failure and overall survival compared to any monotherapy in patients with chromophobe metastatic RCC and definitely provides valuable insights on treatment selection, albeit I would say there's still a small number of patients that were included in this retrospective analysis. Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: I completely agree this is a relatively small number of patients, but I decided to highlight the abstract given how rare the cancer is, and it is highly unlikely that we'll see large randomized clinical trials in patients with metastatic chromophobe renal cell carcinoma.  So, before we wrap up the podcast, what would you like to tell us about Abstract 5009 which is titled, “A Phase II Trial of Pembrolizumab Platinum Based Chemotherapy as First Line Systemic Therapy in Advanced Penile Cancer: HERCULES (LACOG 0218) Trial.” Dr. Jeanny Aragon-Ching: I'm glad you brought this up, Neeraj. As our listeners may know, advanced penile squamous cell carcinoma has a poor prognosis with limited treatment options. From this perspective, the results of the LACOG 0218 trial are very important. As you mentioned, this was a phase 2 single-arm study evaluating the addition of pembrolizumab to platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic or locally advanced penile squamous cell carcinoma not amenable to curative therapy. Patients enrolled received chemotherapy, namely 5-Fluorouracil with cisplatin or carboplatin and pembrolizumab 200 mg IV every 3 weeks for 6 cycles, followed by pembrolizumab 200 mg IV every 3 weeks up to 34 cycles. The primary endpoint was confirmed overall response rate by investigator assessment.  In the 33 patients eligible for the efficacy analysis, the confirmed ORR by investigator assessment was 39.4% and included one complete response and 12 partial responses. The confirmed ORR was 75% in patients with high TMB and 55.6% in patients positive for HPV16, making TMB and HPV16 potential predictive biomarkers for efficacy in this study. Concerning the toxicity profile, any grade treatment-related adverse events were reported in around 92% of patients, and grade 3 or more treatment-related adverse events occurred in 51% of patients. 10.8% of patients discontinued treatment due to adverse events.  Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Thank you, Jeanny. I would like to add that HERCULES is the first trial to demonstrate the efficacy of an immune checkpoint inhibitor in advanced penile squamous cell carcinoma with a manageable safety profile. Thus, the combination of ICI with platinum-based chemotherapy is a promising treatment for advanced penile squamous cell carcinoma and warrants further investigation.  Dr. Jeanny Aragon-Ching: I agree, Neeraj. Any final remarks before we conclude today's podcast? Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Jeanny, I really want to thank you for your participation and valuable insights. Your contributions are always appreciated, and I sincerely thank you for taking the time to join us today. Dr. Jeanny Aragon-Ching: Thank you, Neeraj. It was a pleasure.  Dr. Neeraj Agarwal:  As we bring this podcast to an end, I would like to acknowledge the significant advances happening in the treatment of patients with genitourinary cancers. During our upcoming 2024 ASCO Annual Meeting, there will be an array of different studies featuring practice-changing data presented by researchers and physicians from around the globe. I urge our listeners to not only participate in this event to celebrate these achievements, but to also play a role in sharing these cutting-edge data with healthcare professionals worldwide. Through our collective efforts, we can surely optimize the benefits of patients on a global scale.   And thank you to our listeners for joining us today. You will find links to the abstracts discussed today on the transcript of this episode. Finally, if you value the insights that you hear on the ASCO Daily News Podcast, please take a moment to rate, review and subscribe wherever you get your podcast. Thank you very much.   Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement.   Find out more about today's speakers:  Dr. Neeraj Agarwal  @neerajaiims  Dr. Jeanny Aragon-Ching    Follow ASCO on social media:   @ASCO on Twitter     ASCO on Facebook     ASCO on LinkedIn       Disclosures:    Dr. Neeraj Agarwal:     Consulting or Advisory Role: Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Nektar, Lilly, Bayer, Pharmacyclics, Foundation Medicine, Astellas Pharma, Lilly, Exelixis, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Merck, Novartis, Eisai, Seattle Genetics, EMD Serono, Janssen Oncology, AVEO, Calithera Biosciences, MEI Pharma, Genentech, Astellas Pharma, Foundation Medicine, and Gilead Sciences    Research Funding (Institution): Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Pfizer, Exelixis, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Calithera Biosciences, Celldex, Eisai, Genentech, Immunomedics, Janssen, Merck, Lilly, Nektar, ORIC Pharmaceuticals, Crispr Therapeutics, Arvinas     Dr. Jeanny Aragon-Ching:  Honoraria: Bristol-Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Astellas Scientific and Medical Affairs Inc., Pfizer/EMD Serono  Consulting or Advisory Role: Algeta/Bayer, Dendreon, AstraZeneca, Janssen Biotech, Sanofi, EMD Serono, MedImmune, Bayer, Merck, Seattle Genetics, Pfizer, Immunomedics, Amgen, AVEO, Pfizer/Myovant, Exelixis,   Speakers' Bureau: Astellas Pharma, Janssen-Ortho, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Astellas/Seattle Genetics. 

HOST: MARK LONGO, THE OPTIONS INSIDER MEDIA GROUP CO-HOST: MARK SEBASTIAN, THE OPTION PIT CO-HOST: MIKE TOSAW, ST. CHARLES WEALTH MANAGEMENT ON THIS EPISODE, MARK, THE GREASY MEATBALL, AND UNCLE MIKE BREAK DOWN: THE LATEST IN THE OPTIONS MARKETS INCL AMD, THE OPTIONS CONFERENCE MOST ACTIVE EQUITY OPTIONS INCL INTC, TSLA EARNINGS VOLATILITY INCL DPZ, MCD, KO, PYPL, AMD, AMZN, SBUX, DASH, CVNA, EBAYQCOM, PTEN, MRNA, SHAK, AAPL, COIN, DKNG, CBOE UNUSUAL OPTIONS ACTIVITY IN AVTR, GILD, MLCO HEDGING APRECIATED VALUE USING A TRADITIONAL COLLAR  WHAT'S ON OUR RADAR FOR THE REST OF THE WEEK AND MUCH MORE The Option Block is brought to you by Public. Options are not suitable for all investors and carry significant risk.  Option investors can rapidly lose the value of their investment in a short period of time and incur permanent loss by expiration date.  Certain complex options strategies carry additional risk.  There are additional costs associated with option strategies that call for multiple purchases and sales of options, such as spreads, straddles, among others, as compared with a single option trade.   Prior to buying or selling an option, investors must read and understand the “Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options”, also known as the options disclosure document (ODD) which can be found at: www.theocc.com/company-information/documents-and-archives/options-disclosure-document   Supporting documentation for any claims will be furnished upon request.   If you are enrolled in our Options Order Flow Rebate Program, The exact rebate will depend on the specifics of each transaction and will be previewed for you prior to submitting each trade. This rebate will be deducted from your cost to place the trade and will be reflected on your trade confirmation. Order flow rebates are not available for non-options transactions. To learn more, see our Fee Schedule, Order Flow Rebate FAQ, and Order Flow Rebate Program Terms & Conditions.   Options can be risky and are not suitable for all investors. See the Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options to learn more.   All investing involves the risk of loss, including loss of principal. Brokerage services for US-listed, registered securities, options and bonds in a self-directed account are offered by Open to the Public Investing, Inc., member FINRA & SIPC. See public.com/#disclosures-main for more information.

HOST: MARK LONGO, THE OPTIONS INSIDER MEDIA GROUP CO-HOST: MARK SEBASTIAN, THE OPTION PIT CO-HOST: MIKE TOSAW, ST. CHARLES WEALTH MANAGEMENT ON THIS EPISODE, MARK, THE GREASY MEATBALL, AND UNCLE MIKE BREAK DOWN: THE LATEST IN THE OPTIONS MARKETS INCL AMD, THE OPTIONS CONFERENCE MOST ACTIVE EQUITY OPTIONS INCL INTC, TSLA EARNINGS VOLATILITY INCL DPZ, MCD, KO, PYPL, AMD, AMZN, SBUX, DASH, CVNA, EBAY, QCOM, PTEN, MRNA, SHAK, AAPL, COIN, DKNG, CBOE UNUSUAL OPTIONS ACTIVITY IN AVTR, GILD, MLCO HEDGING APRECIATED VALUE USING A TRADITIONAL COLLAR  WHAT'S ON OUR RADAR FOR THE REST OF THE WEEK AND MUCH MORE The Option Block is brought to you by Public. Options are not suitable for all investors and carry significant risk.  Option investors can rapidly lose the value of their investment in a short period of time and incur permanent loss by expiration date.  Certain complex options strategies carry additional risk.  There are additional costs associated with option strategies that call for multiple purchases and sales of options, such as spreads, straddles, among others, as compared with a single option trade.   Prior to buying or selling an option, investors must read and understand the “Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options”, also known as the options disclosure document (ODD) which can be found at: www.theocc.com/company-information/documents-and-archives/options-disclosure-document   Supporting documentation for any claims will be furnished upon request.   If you are enrolled in our Options Order Flow Rebate Program, The exact rebate will depend on the specifics of each transaction and will be previewed for you prior to submitting each trade. This rebate will be deducted from your cost to place the trade and will be reflected on your trade confirmation. Order flow rebates are not available for non-options transactions. To learn more, see our Fee Schedule, Order Flow Rebate FAQ, and Order Flow Rebate Program Terms & Conditions.   Options can be risky and are not suitable for all investors. See the Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options to learn more.   All investing involves the risk of loss, including loss of principal. Brokerage services for US-listed, registered securities, options and bonds in a self-directed account are offered by Open to the Public Investing, Inc., member FINRA & SIPC. See public.com/#disclosures-main for more information.

Dr. Angela DeMichele, Dr. Lynn Henry, and Dr. Harold Burstein present the latest breast cancer rapid recommendation update impacting two ASCO guidelines. This update focuses on the new option, capivasertib plus fulvestrant, for patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer with activating PIK3CA or AKT1 mutations or inactivating alterations in PTEN based on data from the recent CAPItello-291 trial. They discuss the updated recommendations on lines of endocrine treatment and selecting between the options for patients with activating PIK3CA mutations. Additionally, we discuss implications for clinicians and patients, and what ongoing research is occurring in the field. Read the latest update, “Endocrine and Targeted Therapy for Hormone Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer – Capivasertib-Fulvestrant: ASCO Rapid Guideline Update“ at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines. TRANSCRIPT This guideline, clinical tools, and resources are available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines. Read the full text of the guideline and review authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.24.00248 Brittany Harvey: Hello, and welcome to the ASCO Guidelines podcast, one of ASCO's podcasts delivering timely information to keep you up to date on the latest changes, challenges, and advances in oncology. You can find all the shows, including this one, at asco.org/podcasts.   My name is Brittany Harvey, and today I am interviewing Dr. Harold Burstein from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Dr. Angela DeMichele from the University of Pennsylvania, and Dr. Lynn Henry from the University of Michigan, co-chairs on “Endocrine and Targeted Therapy for Hormone Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer: Capivasertib–Fulvestrant: ASCO Rapid Guideline Update.” Thank you for being here, Dr. Burstein, Dr. DeMichele, and Dr. Henry. Dr. Harold Burstein: We're happy to be here.  Brittany Harvey: And before we discuss this guideline, I'd like to note that ASCO takes great care in the development of its guidelines and ensuring that the ASCO conflict of interest policy is followed for each guideline. The disclosures of potential conflicts of interest for the guideline panel, including our guests on this episode today, are available online with the publication of the guideline update in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, which is linked in the show notes.  So then, to kick us off, Dr. Burstein, could you first describe what prompted this rapid update, which provides updated recommendations for two ASCO guidelines: the biomarkers for systemic therapy in metastatic breast cancer guideline, and the endocrine treatment and targeted therapy for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer guideline? Dr. Harold Burstein: Thanks, Brittany. Well, this team has been working, as you mentioned, actually, on two guidelines, which are clearly evolving in parallel and kind of converging, actually, when you look at data, as we'll be talking about in the next few minutes. The particular catalyst here was a large randomized clinical trial which looked at a new targeted therapy in the space of estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. That drug is capivasertib. And the trial was the so-called CAPItello study. In that trial, patients who were receiving second-line therapy with fulvestrant were randomized to that treatment alone, or that plus capivasertib. So the data from that study were the first strong signal that we needed to update the guideline because they were important clinical data.   The other strong signal was that the drug was tested in a cohort of patients who had a specific set of mutations in their cancers. And that included PIK3CA mutations, a class of mutations for which we already had a targeted drug. But it also included some new potential targets, including mutations in the AKT gene itself, capivasertib is an AKT inhibitor, as well as loss of PTEN protein functionality, which potentially sensitizes tumors to the targeted action of this drug as well. So while we had a couple of guidelines catching up on the endocrine therapy space, which is increasingly looking like a targeted therapy space, it was clear that this major study, which had clinical and diagnostic implications, would sort of push them together and served as the impetus for updating both guidelines at the same time. Brittany Harvey: Understood. I appreciate that background information.   So then, Dr. DeMichele, based on this updated data that Dr. Burstein just described, what is the updated recommendation from the guideline panel regarding lines of endocrine treatment? Dr. Angela DeMichele: Well, I think this is where the biomarker evolution that Dr. Burstein just referred to really comes in because now we have the opportunity to perform genomic testing in patients who have ER-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer, on either the tumor or commonly from the blood. And we can now start to tailor treatment to the specific genomic abnormalities that that patient's tumor contains. So now our guideline really marries both the genomic abnormality with the therapeutic option. First-line treatment remains endocrine therapy plus a CDK 4/6 inhibitor. But things then really start to diverge once we enter second and third-line therapy because at that point, we now have the option to test for several genomic markers: ESR1 mutations, PIK3CA mutations, AKT1 mutations, and PTEN inactivation. And based on whether the tumor has one or any of those mutations, we can then select the therapy based on that.  So in the case of capivasertib, as you just heard, that is a therapy for patients whose tumors have PIK3CA mutations or activating mutations in AKT1 or loss of PTEN. But other patients who don't have one of those mutations may, in the second line, go on to another drug. For example, if they have an ESR1 mutation, they then may be eligible to take elacestrant. Patients who have no targetable mutations still have a targeted option in that they can use everolimus. And in all of these settings, the endocrine therapy partner for this line of therapy is typically fulvestrant. So now we're really starting to tailor therapy in the second- and third-line based on genomic changes. Brittany Harvey: Excellent. That information is helpful for choosing optimal therapy tailored to the individual patients, as you just described.  So then, Dr. Henry, what guidance does the expert panel provide regarding choosing a PIK3CA targeted option? Dr. Lynn Henry: Thank you. So for patients whose tumors are found to have an activating mutation in PIK3CA, we now have two drug options: either alpelisib or capivasertib in combination with fulvestrant. And the problem is, these drugs have not been compared head-to-head. We can't say that one is clearly better than the other, either in terms of efficacy or in terms of side effect profile. What we do have is information from two separate trials in which they were each tested against placebo. The efficacy appears to be fairly similar based on the data that we have. It does appear that the side effect profiles may be slightly different. And so, when you have a patient sitting in front of you and you're trying to decide how best to treat her, you really have to think about, what symptoms does my patient already have? What is she more or less likely to tolerate? So what we do know is that it appears that the rates of grade 3 diarrhea and rash were slightly higher with capivasertib. It looks like hyperglycemia was higher with alpelisib, as was treatment discontinuation. So really you have to make an individualized decision when you have a patient sitting in front of you about which drug you'd like to try. Of course, if someone doesn't tolerate one drug, you can always switch to the other one.  Brittany Harvey: I appreciate that analysis and to provide guidance without a head-to-head trial and to specifically provide options based on an individual patient's profile.   So then, Dr. DeMichele, what should clinicians know as they implement these new recommendations?  Dr. Angela DeMichele: Well, first of all, I think most clinicians now are becoming more familiar with the procedures required for doing genomic testing. But this is something that now has become the standard of care. And so, it is incumbent upon all of us who treat these patients to understand what the options for genomic testing are for that patient, which companies offer this testing, how to send a sample, and how to interpret the report that comes back. So, I think this has really added a level of complexity to the therapy for patients. I also think that one can't simply apply an algorithm to a patient. We have to really treat the whole patient and we have to take into consideration, as Dr. Henry said, the toxicities of these agents and the cost which is also a major issue. So I think that while it is more complex, really that doctor-patient relationship is so important in communicating what these genomic tests mean for a patient and for their options, and also important for the clinician to really understand what the different therapeutic agents might mean for a patient, and really try to pick the agent that's best for that patient. Using genomic testing is just one of several different features that they'll consider. Brittany Harvey: Absolutely. It's key to obtain the data needed to select appropriate patients and to recognize the complexity.   So then, Dr. Henry, in your view, how will this update impact patients with metastatic breast cancer? Dr. Lynn Henry: Yes, so as we've discussed, I think this is really exciting. Over the last few years, we have had quite a number of new medications that have become available for patients and have been FDA-approved. And so this is yet the latest in a series. For those patients whose tumors have a PIK3CA mutation, as we discussed, there are now two options. So you have a choice depending on which one is better covered by insurance, by which one you may tolerate better. But I think the other thing is now, although it's a smaller subset of patients, there are patients out there whose tumors have mutations in AKT1 or alterations in PTEN, and so there's an entirely new endocrine therapy-based option available for them that wasn't available before. So I think that thinking about the new data that are out there, the new drugs that are out there, really is exciting because there are new options available and hopefully there are more to come as well.    Brittany Harvey: Absolutely. It's great to have these new options.  So, finally, Dr. Burstein, Dr. Henry just mentioned what's to come. Could you touch on what some of the outstanding questions are regarding endocrine therapy for patients with metastatic breast cancer?  Dr. Harold Burstein: A couple of things to say. First, ER-positive metastatic breast cancer is the most common kind of metastatic breast cancer, roughly three quarters of metastatic cases of breast cancer will be hormone receptor-positive cancers. So this is a very big public health issue around the world, actually, breast cancer being the number one most commonly diagnosed cancer of women around the world. So minor or major improvements in treatment for advanced ER-positive breast cancer really have a tremendous impact.  The second thing is it's been remarkable to see the progress in the past decade. We've gone from simply targeting the hormonal access itself with medicines like tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors or an injectable selective estrogen receptor degrader like fulvestrant to incorporating targeted therapies at the same time. And this whole class of drugs called CDK4/6 inhibitors has emerged which we use in either first- or in second-line therapy. Those drugs have transformed our standard of care, improved survival for patients with advanced ER-positive disease, now with median survival nearly 50% longer than what we had seen in the past.  And if you've heard, we have a wealth of opportunities. We can target PIK3CA, we can target ESR1 mutations. Other drugs emerging in the space include PROTACs which is another way of degrading the estrogen receptor. And so there's going to be more progress in the years to come.   So one of the biggest challenges has been to try and understand, is there really an optimal way to use these drugs, or can we be smarter about the particular sequence of all these particular things that are happening.  So one example of this was a recent study that is on a drug, not as yet FDA-approved, called inavolisib, which is a PIK3CA targeted drug used in first line in combination with a CDK4/6 inhibitor and endocrine therapy. And that study, for a high-risk group of women with ER-positive metastatic disease, actually showed a dramatic improvement in overall survival, asking the question if combining some of these targeted therapies together might yet further improve outcomes.  And as you've heard from the diagnostic space, one of the other interesting things is that tumors evolve over time. And so acquisition of the estrogen receptor mutations, ESR1 mutations, which are typically not found early in the course of advanced breast cancer but otherwise later, now have targeted treatments. So there's a whole bunch of stuff going on all at the same time, including multiple ways of targeting things, serial testing to look for acquisition of ESR1 mutations and new pathways to explore. It's an embarrassment of riches in some respects because it has meant it's actually really hard to write a guideline as you've heard, which says, “Do this first, do this second, and do this third.” I suppose that's a good problem to have under the circumstances, but it's going to require really thoughtful clinical trials and careful analysis to help guide specific lines of treatment recommendations like that.  Brittany Harvey: Excellent. We'll look forward to these exciting, continuing developments for patients with metastatic breast cancer. And I want to thank you all so much for your work to develop this rapid recommendation update for these two guidelines. And thank you for taking the time on this podcast today. Dr. Harold Burstein: Thanks. Dr. Lynn Henry: Thank you so much.  Brittany Harvey: And thank you to all of our listeners for tuning in to the ASCO Guidelines podcast. To read the full guideline, go to www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines. You can also find many of our guidelines and interactive resources in the free ASCO guidelines app, available in the Apple App Store or the Google Play Store. If you have enjoyed what you heard today, please rate and review the podcast and be sure to subscribe so you never miss an episode. The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions.  Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experiences, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement.      

HOST: MARK LONGO, THE OPTIONS INSIDER MEDIA GROUP CO-HOST: ANDREW GIOVINAZZI, THE OPTION PIT CO-HOST: MIKE TOSAW, ST. CHARLES WEALTH MANAGEMENT ON THIS EPISODE, MARK, THE ROCK LOBSTER, AND UNCLE MIKE BREAK DOWN: THE LATEST IN THE OPTIONS MARKETS INCL APPL, TSLA, SILVER, NVDA MOST ACTIVE OPTIONS FOR THE DAY EARNINGS VOLATILITY INCL GGAL, TGT, BOX, FL, JWN, COST UNUSUAL OPTIONS ACTIVITY IN AIG, PTEN  A COLLAR STRATEGY WITH APPL WHAT'S ON OUR RADAR FOR THE REST OF THE WEEK AND MUCH MORE

In this discussion with Dr. Hope Rugo, we covered her study Capitello-291, which led to the approval of Capivasertib in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer with AKT1, PTEN, and PIK3CA mutations, which are seen in 40-50% of the cases. We touched base on sequencing of this therapy, and important clinical pearls around the side effect management associated with this drug.

Recently, the FDA granted approval to capivasertib in combination with fulvestrant for patients with hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer with one or more PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN alterations. In this interview, Editorial Board member Dr. Jason Mouabbi speaks with Dr. Carlos Doti, Head of Medical Affairs, US Oncology at AstraZeneca, about the significance of the approval, its dosing schedule, AstraZeneca's approach towards patient education and adverse event management, and the future of capivasertib in different treatment settings.

Dr Gradishar discusses the FDA approval of capivasertib plus fulvestrant for patients with advanced HR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer harboring PIK3CA, AKT1, or PTEN alterations.

Study Invitation - Everyone with a laptop can help us make an easy at home validated measure to de risk clinical trials.  Sign up now for this #SRFunded effort - #S10e122 #SRFFrazier  We need endpoints and assessment tools.  We can help make it happen with this study.  Let's get to 100 participants.     #SRFFrazier Grant 1 https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/syngap-research-fund-announces-srffrazier-grant-to-dr-thomas-frazier-of-john-carroll-university-301219503.html    How to join study! https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rbJ1zwX3UVDJzWq2oa8fWKL--Wik4gF-/view?usp=drive_link   Two papers already!! Development of informant-report neurobehavioral survey scales for PTEN hamartoma tumor syndrome and related neurodevelopmental genetic syndrome https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37045800/   Development of webcam-collected and artificial-intelligence-derived social and cognitive performance measures for neurodevelopmental genetic syndromes https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37534867/    Raise funds for SYNGAP1 Research via SRF https://syngap.fund/give https://syngap.fund/gt23 > https://givebutter.com/SwK5Gt   Register for the Dinner & Conference! 29 Days until the Conference - Join us! https://www.syngapresearchfund.org/professionals/syngap1-roundtable-2023-syngap-research-fund    #SyngapConf Conference Agenda! #S10e120 described the agenda… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9U-Ggz_K2I  Detailed Agenda is here https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iKD-ZpDICXcaU85oBj0uWVVWuGrLJWJl/view    Give all three of our podcasts 5 stars everywhere.   https://podcasts.apple.com/us/channel/syngap1-podcasts-by-srf/id6464522917    This is a podcast subscribe! https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/syngap10-weekly-10-minute-updates-on-syngap1/id1560389818 Episode 122 of #Syngap10 - November 1, 2023 #epilepsy #autism #intellectualdisability #id #anxiety #raredisease #epilepsyawareness #autismawareness #rarediseaseresearch #SynGAPResearchFund #CareAboutRare #PatientAdvocacy #GCchat #Neurology #GeneChat

References J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2022 Jul 15; 23(7): 607–612 Biomaterials. 2020 Apr; 238: 119836. Int J Nanomedicine. 2023;18:5265-5287 Child Ballad 100. 1775. Pentangle. 1972.Willie O' Winsbury https://youtu.be/nwqP_yoszCE?si=C0NH51euOOTlPYn9 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/dr-daniel-j-guerra/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/dr-daniel-j-guerra/support

ASCO: You're listening to a podcast from Cancer.Net. This cancer information website is produced by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, known as ASCO, the voice of the world's oncology professionals. The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guests' statements on this podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Cancer research discussed in this podcast is ongoing, so data described here may change as research progresses. In this podcast, Dr. Allison Kurian and genetic counselor Kristen Mahoney Shannon talk about what people should know about genetic testing and hereditary breast cancer, including what to expect when meeting with a genetic counselor, ways to reduce your risk of developing cancer, and talking about genetic test results with family.  Dr. Kurian is a Professor of Medicine and of Epidemiology and Population Health at Stanford University School of Medicine, and Director of the Stanford Women's Clinical Cancer Genetics Program. She is also the 2023 Cancer.Net Specialty Editor for Breast Cancer. Ms. Shannon is a senior genetic counselor and Director of the Cancer Center Genetics Program and Director of Genetic Counseling for the Massachusetts General Hospital Department of Medicine. She is also a 2023 Cancer.Net Advisory Panelist. View disclosures for Dr. Kurian and Ms. Shannon at Cancer.Net. Dr. Allison Kurian: I'm Allison Kurian. I am a professor of medicine, oncology, and epidemiology and population health at Stanford University. And I am speaking today with my colleague, Kristen Shannon, who will introduce herself. Kristen Shannon: Hi, it's great to be here. My name is Kristen Shannon. I am a genetic counselor and the director of cancer genetics at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston. And I have no financial relevant disclosures to report. Dr. Allison Kurian: Thank you, and I have no relevant financial disclosures either. Very good. So today we will be talking about breast cancer and inherited risk and genetic testing. And let me start by providing a definition of a genetic or hereditary condition. So the way we think about this is something that has a high risk for developing a disease, not a certainty, but a high risk, and runs in families, generally because of a genetic finding that we can identify. And that typically is identified through sequencing, testing of blood or saliva samples, and typically allows us to find a change that we know is clearly associated with disease. A good example for breast cancer are the genes BRCA1 and BRCA2, which some may have heard of, and we will talk about further. So that is just an example, and we will get into more of the details of this as we go on. But I think the point is something that runs in families often is seen with the trait, so for BRCA1 or BRCA2, that would be breast cancer or ovarian cancer, affecting people in every generation. And having what we call for these kinds of genes an autosomal dominant inheritance pattern, so inherited from either parent. And taking only 1 copy that is not functioning to give a person higher risk of the condition. So that's sort of a bit of the basics here on genetic or hereditary risk. And just to give a sense of how common hereditary breast cancer is, we think that in general this may account for, I would say, somewhere between 5% to perhaps 10% of cases of breast cancer. And Kristen, please jump in and tell me if you think differently. But that would be my ballpark. And I think probably the majority of those are the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes that I mentioned, although there are others that we are recognizing are playing more of a role than we thought, and we'll discuss those, too. So let me give you a chance to continue and respond, Kristen. Kristen Shannon: Yeah, no, I totally agree. And I was thinking that maybe I could talk a little bit about some of the features that are suggestive that there could be one of these inherited breast cancers in the family, because recognizing these signs of hereditary breast cancer can be super important for early detection and prevention of breast cancer. So first, multiple cases of breast cancer within the family, especially among close relatives like parents, siblings, children, those can be a sign that the cancer is inherited. Another important sign is early age of onset of disease. So breast cancer diagnosed at a young age, typically before the age of 50, might point towards hereditary risk. And it's not always the case, but it's something to be aware of. Also, if there is a history of ovarian cancer in the family, especially if you see it in conjunction with breast cancer cases, that's a significant sign that there could be something inherited in the family. And while it's rarer, male breast cancer can also be associated with hereditary gene mutations. So if there's a history of male breast cancer in the family, it's definitely something to think about in terms of hereditary risk. Multiple cancer types in the family can also be another clue. It's not always just breast and ovarian cancer. If you see a family history of both breast and ovarian cancer or pancreatic cancer or prostate cancer within the same family, that also might be a sign of an inherited cancer syndrome. For individuals of Ashkenazi Jewish descent, it's worth noting that they have a higher prevalence of certain gene mutations in specific genes, specifically BRCA1 and BRCA2, which Dr. Kurian has mentioned before. So a family of history of breast or ovarian cancer in an Ashkenazi Jewish individual should be noted as a higher sign that this cancer could be due to an inherited gene. And lastly, if someone has had breast cancer in both breasts, that's called bilateral breast cancer, and that might indicate hereditary risk. It's important, though, to remember that it's not just about any single sign in isolation. You really need to take a look at the bigger picture and the bigger context of the family. So if you notice any of these signs in your family, it's a good idea to seek guidance from a health care professional, like a genetic counselor or a medical oncologist, and they can help assess the family's risk and recommend genetic testing if needed. Dr. Kurian, did I forget anything or leave anything off? Dr. Allison Kurian: Perfect as always. I will just add a little bit here in terms of the specific gene names that we think about, because sometimes it helps people to have sort of a list in their minds, not that we expect you to remember the whole alphabet soup of these different genes. And let me just say that I think it's always a bit of a hodgepodge, some of these names. I used to wonder how people come up with these names, and often there's a bit of a history there. But I will just go through a few of them. We now have some practice guidelines, and they are basically put together by a group of experts who review all the evidence frequently and come up with recommendations. And so there is a list in these guidelines of basically which genes we think are appropriate to test for breast cancer in families, because there's enough evidence to suggest that. And so in addition to BRCA1 and BRCA2, the ones that I think of as the most important, and I'll want to hear Kristen's thoughts about this, too, but the ones that we see most often are called ATM. Sounds like a cash machine, unfortunately not, but ATM. CHEK2, C-H-E-K-2, and then one called PALB2, which stands for Partner and Localizer of BRCA2, and is a lot like BRCA2 in its risks. There are some other genes that give breast cancer risks that are less common. One of them, CDH1, is a gene that also causes an increased risk of stomach cancer. There are a few others that we always keep in mind. There's one called PTEN that's very rare that causes a syndrome called Cowden syndrome that I certainly haven't seen much of. Kristen may have seen more, but it's not something we see often and goes with a lot of other features in families. There are 2 genes that I think we recognize more in recent years and like to be sure we test, called RAD51C and RAD51D, and those both give increased risks. And then another one that I always think of as important here is TP53, and that is a gene that causes something called Li-Fraumeni syndrome, which has probably the highest cancer risks of which we know. There's another one, STK11, that gives some risk, NF1. We see these as being less frequent contributors. Those are the ones that I kind of keep in mind. And again, there will not be a quiz on the alphabet soup, but just so you're aware of what kinds of names you might hear. Kristen, please jump in if I've forgotten any or anything else you want to say. Kristen Shannon: No, I think that that's important. I think the only thing that I would add is that some people think when they go in for breast cancer genetic testing, they only are getting the BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene. And it's just important for people to realize that that's not really a complete test at this point, as you mentioned, Dr. Kurian. Dr. Allison Kurian: Totally agree, and thank you. Kristen Shannon: Should we move into how to prepare for a genetic counseling appointment? Dr. Allison Kurian: Please, yes. Kristen Shannon: Sure, okay. So preparing for a genetic counseling appointment for breast cancer risk can be helpful. First and foremost, we suggest that you gather your family health history. So reach out to your relatives and compile as much information as possible about your family's health background. Pay special attention to any instances of breast cancer and ovarian cancer, prostate cancer, pancreatic cancer in the family. And if any family members have had genetic testing, it's really helpful to jot down those test results as well and bring them with you to the appointment. The other thing is to think about your own personal medical history. You know, think about if you've had any past diagnosis, any treatments, surgeries, or medical conditions, especially those related to breast cancer, your genetic counseling appointment will include a discussion of those. The other thing is, you know, if you've had any medical tests related to cancer, it's important to gather those records if they're not already in your hospital's medical record system that you are going to. Another good idea is to just prepare a list of questions that you might want to have answered. So what do you want to know? Are there specific concerns or specific things you're curious about? It's also important to understand what you want to get out of this genetic counseling encounter. Do you want to just clarify your risk of having a gene? Do you want to consider genetic testing? Or do you want to talk about just managing your risk for breast cancer? That's super important to have that in mind before you actually go into your appointment. Lastly, I would consider bringing along a person, a supportive person with you to the appointment. Having someone with you can help provide emotional support because sometimes these visits can get emotionally charged, but it also can help to have someone remember important details that you will discuss with your health care provider. So it's really important to just arm yourself with information, questions, and support so that the appointment is as productive and informative as it can be. Do you have anything else you'd like to add, Dr. Kurian? Dr. Allison Kurian: It's wonderful to have your expert perspective on this. And I guess any thoughts about really what's inside the box? I think sometimes people just sort of wonder what's going to happen when I go in that room. Sometimes we have patients come in and say, “What are you guys going to do to me? Will there be surgery done?” And we reassure them that we are not doing anything that wild. And so maybe just a sense of kind of walking people through what will happen when they go to meet with genetic counselors. Kristen Shannon: Absolutely, thanks for bringing that up. So during the initial meeting, first you'll probably discuss your personal health history, again, any past diagnoses, surgeries, medical conditions. And then typically a genetic counselor or a medical professional will dive right into your family health history. So they'll ask a whole bunch of questions about your close and extended family members to build a really comprehensive picture of your family and the cancer diagnosis in it. They'll want to know if anyone in your family has had cancer, and they'll also want to know what type of cancer that person has had and also the age at which that person was diagnosed. So those are the 3 pieces of information that your health care provider will want to get from you. The genetic counselor will also probably ask you about what you want to get out of this encounter to make sure that you're both on the same page. Again, do you want genetic testing? You know that already. Or do you want to just talk through the process? So the big part of the initial meeting is really education. The genetic counselor will explain what Dr. Kurian described at the very outset of this discussion, what's the genetic basis of hereditary breast cancer, including all the specific genes that Dr. Kurian—the alphabet soup that we talked about. Talk about inheritance patterns and the implications of having a genetic mutation. The genetic counselor will probably also first assess your risk of having a mutation in one of the genes, and then they'll also talk to you often about genetic testing. So if genetic testing is on the table and you and the genetic counselor both agree that it's a good step, they'll walk you through the process of informed consent. And so this ensures that you understand what the testing entails, the potential outcomes, the implications of the test results. And then if you decide to go through with genetic testing, you will provide a blood or a saliva sample. And then it's a waiting game because these test results can take several weeks, usually about 3 to 4 weeks to get the test results back. When the test results come back, you'll typically have a follow-up appointment, either in-person or on the phone with your genetic counselor. And that's when they spend a lot of time interpreting the test results, explain what they mean for you and your health, as well as discussing the appropriate risk management strategies, if necessary. And if a gene mutation is identified, a genetic counselor will guide you on how to manage these risks. But it will depend on the specific mutation that is identified. And then the other thing that the genetic counselor can help with is just the emotional support. Some people have a harder time than others hearing this information. And also to talk about how to tell your family members about this. So in a nutshell, the initial meeting with the genetic counselor is about gathering information, assessing risk, and potentially deciding on whether or not you're going to have genetic testing. And then after that step, it's about interpreting the test results, talking about next steps, and providing emotional support. Dr. Allison Kurian: Thank you, Kristen. That was wonderful and very complete. And as I was listening to you, first of all, I was thinking about my general admiration for genetic counselors, which is huge. They taught me everything I know about this field. But so also kind of highlighting the key things that a meeting with a genetic counselor will do for you, as you so nicely did. And I think it's getting the right test ordered, making sure that the results make sense to you, and going beyond the patient. But I think those are sort of the key aspects that you communicated really well of the things that we want to get done there. Kristen Shannon: Well said, well said. And I couldn't agree more. Dr. Allison Kurian: And what do you think about the family part in terms of how that gets done? Kristen Shannon: Right, so discussing your genetic test results with family members can be hard and challenging, but it's really, really important. In terms of talking to your family members, I think first, determine the way you're going to notify your family members. So are you going to talk to them? Are you going to send them a letter or an email? And how you share the information may be different based on your relationship with that person. So for example, you may sit down over coffee with a close family member to talk about your test results, but you may choose to write a letter to someone that you don't have that much contact with. The next thing that I think is really important is to be prepared. So before you even start to have this conversation, make sure that you have a clear understanding of your genetic test results, the implications to you and to the family member. That's super important before you even start to have the conversation so that you can explain things to people in simple terms without too much medical jargon and make sure you keep it straightforward. It's really helpful to have a copy of your genetic test results and to provide that to your relatives if you're comfortable doing so, because then they can take that information with them to their genetic counseling or genetic testing appointment, which can be incredibly essential in terms of making sure that they get the correct test at the right time and the test results are interpreted correctly. The only other suggestion I have is just to keep in mind that family members are going to react very differently to this information. And some people will be very matter of fact about it. Some people might get a little distracted by this whole thing. So just to be patient with people and keep the conversation open. Allow them to call you if you're willing to do that so that the conversation can develop over time because, you know, really, in the end, the goal is to make sure that everyone in the family is well informed and makes decisions based on their own health and their well-being. Dr. Allison Kurian: Thank you. I couldn't agree more. And we sometimes, as people may have heard, call this “cascade genetic testing.” So a patient is tested. Somebody who's already had cancer maybe is tested. But then we have the opportunity to have this cascade of beneficial genetic testing, where we can get to people before they have cancer and work on prevention and screening, which I'll talk about in a minute. And I will say that, in general, we here in the United States, and certainly other places as well, don't do as well as we would like with cascade testing despite all best efforts of everyone. And so just to emphasize that family notification is super important, genetic counselors are wonderful at helping people to do that. And I think also additional strategies and interventions are underway to try to help make that easier. So if I may, I'll talk just a little bit about kind of what we do when we find something. Is that okay to do? Kristen Shannon: That sounds great. Talk about people, you know, what they can do about their test results. Dr. Allison Kurian: Good. Yeah, so I always think that's important. I'm an oncologist by training. I'm not a geneticist. And again, it's only thanks to the brilliance of genetic counselors like Kristen that I have learned what I have for the last 2 decades working in the field. But so I tend to think in terms of what can we do to treat this person differently if they have cancer to prevent or reduce the risk of a future cancer. And so what I would say is increasingly over the last few years for a person with breast cancer, as well as some additional cancers, it started to matter what these results are in terms of how we treat the person, whether we might give different medications. And that's really exciting because for years in this field, we didn't have that, and now we do. And so the drugs that are increasingly important are called PARP, P-A-R-P, inhibitors. And sometimes, if a person has a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation, we might even offer those drugs to treat a breast cancer or, in other cases, ovarian, prostate, or pancreatic cancer. So I think the testing can matter like never before in terms of what we might do to take care of people's cancer. Sometimes we might also choose a different surgery. So sometimes a woman who has a diagnosis of breast cancer might choose to do a more extensive breast surgery, she might choose a double mastectomy to reduce her risk of getting a second breast cancer. That's never required. She certainly doesn't have to do so extensive a surgery if she doesn't choose, but it is an option that some people might choose. And there might also be other cancer risks to manage in somebody who had breast cancer. BRCA1 and BRCA2, for example, give a high risk of ovarian cancer. And so we might talk with someone about the possibility of removing ovaries to prevent an ovarian cancer, which often is recommended with BRCA1, BRCA2, and other such gene mutations. I will say that I think for somebody who hasn't had cancer yet, or hopefully ever, particularly as we think about breast cancer, we're often thinking about intensive screening. So starting often earlier than a person would if she didn't have high risk and generally adding magnetic resonance imaging, MRI, to screening with mammogram alone. And that really is, I think, the cornerstone for women at high risk is adding that breast MRI screening. For pretty much all of the genes I mentioned, that would be clinically indicated and covered by insurance and important to do. MRI has no radiation, very effective at finding breast cancer early. So I think to summarize, it's really all about understanding risk based on a particular gene mutation, understanding if a different kind of treatment is needed for the cancer that a person has, understanding if any sort of preventive measure is needed for future cancer risk, and making sure that the screening we have for breast and for other cancers is appropriate to the level of risk. Anything to add there, Kristen? Kristen Shannon: No. No, I think that that's great. Dr. Allison Kurian: Absolutely. Yeah, so I think it's wonderful to have this opportunity to speak about the importance of genetic testing, which is I think more important than it ever has been at this time for the care of patients with breast cancer and their families. And so as we move into breast cancer awareness month, it's great to be able to talk about this. Thanks so much. Kristen Shannon: Thank you so much. I agree. And if you have any questions, I would suggest you reach out to your doctor or look up on the ASCO website for a referral to a genetic counselor. ASCO: Thank you, Dr. Kurian and Ms. Shannon. Learn more about hereditary breast cancer and genetic testing at www.cancer.net/hboc. Cancer.Net Podcasts feature trusted, timely, and compassionate information for people with cancer, survivors, and their families and loved ones. Subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts for expert information and tips on coping with cancer, recaps of the latest research advances, and thoughtful discussions on cancer care. And check out other ASCO Podcasts to hear the latest interviews and insights from thought leaders, innovators, experts, and pioneers in oncology. Cancer.Net is supported by Conquer Cancer, the ASCO Foundation, which funds lifesaving research for every type of cancer, helping people with cancer everywhere. To help fund Cancer.Net and programs like it, donate at CONQUER.ORG/Donate.

Road House Crossover September continues, as we are once again joined by Sleazy C from Podcasting After Dark to interview actor Marshall “Jimmy Reno" Teague. Long before “Dalton” ripped his throat out, Marshall began his career in the Navy before transitioning to law enforcement. While still a cop, he secretly began performing in local theatre. He eventually made the leap to Hollywood. He shares stories about landing his first agent, starring in 1st and Ten on HBO, Werewolf on FOX, and Babylon 5 on PTEN. He talks fondly about his close relationship with Chuck Norris, and, of course, dishes the dirt about starring in Road House, alongside the great Patrick Swayze, Jeff Healy, Terry Funk, and Ben Gazzara. This is part 3 of our Road House series with Podcasting After Dark- https://www.podcastingafterdark.com/ PART 1 - ROAD HOUSE AND THE JEFF HEALY BAND - https://shorturl.at/EJU39 PART 2 - THE BREAKDOWN - https://shorturl.at/cjxC6 OUR 4 YEAR ANNIVERSARY/FUNDRAISER for Momentum Wheels for Humanity will be live on our YouTube channel on 9/30 from 11:30am-3:30pm PT. CELEB GUESTS, MUSICAL PERFORMANCES AND AMAZING RAFFLE PRIZES! Be sure to subscribe tour channel here to be kept in the know! #MarshallTeague #roadhouse #1989movies  Dig our show? Please consider supporting us on Patreon for tons of bonus content and appreciation: www.patreon.com/twodollarlatefee Please follow/subscribe and rate us on Spotify and Apple Podcasts! Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/two-dollar-late-fee Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/ Instagram: @twodollarlatefee Subscribe to our YouTube Check out Jim Walker's intro/outro music on Bandcamp: jvamusic1.bandcamp.com Facebook: facebook.com/Two-Dollar-Late-Fee-Podcast Merch: https://www.teepublic.com/user/two-dollar-late-fee IMDB: https://www.imdb.com Two Dollar Late Fee is a part of the nutritious Geekscape Network Every episode is produced, edited, and coddled by Zak Shaffer (@zakshaffer) & Dustin Rubin (@dustinrubinvo) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Dr. Shannon Westin and her guest, Dr. Andreana Holowatyj, discuss the paper "Clinical Multigene Panel Testing Identifies Racial and Ethnic Differences in Germline Pathogenic Variants Among Patients With Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer," recently published in JCO. TRANSCRIPT The guest on this podcast episode has no disclosures to declare. Dr. Shannon Westin: Hello, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the JCO After Hours podcast, the podcast where we get in-depth on manuscripts and interesting papers that are published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. I am your host, Shannon Westin, and it's my pleasure to serve not only as a GYN Oncologist but as an Associate Editor for Social Media for the JCO. And as always, I'm super excited about the paper that we're going to discuss today. This is “Clinical Multigene Panel Testing Identifies Racial and Ethnic Differences in Germline Pathogenic Variants Among Patients With Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer.” This has been published in the JCO. And I am so excited to be accompanied by the last author, Dr. Andreana Holowatyj, who is an Assistant Professor of Medicine and Cancer Biology at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center.  Welcome. Dr. Andreana Holowatyj: Thank you, Dr. Westin, for having me. I'm really excited to get to talk about this paper. Dr. Shannon Westin: So are we. And please note that we do not have any conflicts of interest with this work.  So let's get started. First, early-onset colorectal cancer is any colorectal cancer diagnosed before age 50. So I just wanted to level set. Can you give us a bit of background on the incidence of early-onset colorectal cancer? Dr. Andreana Holowatyj: Sure. All of the attention recently has been drawn to the fact that in contrast to incidence of colorectal cancer decreasing among adults over age 50, we've seen over the last several decades, this uptick—alarming uptick, in fact, in colorectal cancers among individuals diagnosed younger than age 50 years, or, as you point out, we call early-onset colorectal cancer, largely with reasons that are unexplained overall, which has drawn a lot of concern and attention as to what are the factors driving this marked increase in early-onset colorectal cancer both in the United States and globally. Dr. Shannon Westin: And what do we know about the burden of early-onset colorectal cancer across different racial and ethnic groups? Are there disparities in survival like we've seen in some of the other cancer types? Dr. Andreana Holowatyj: Yeah. So recently, a paper published demonstrating this greater shift towards early-onset colorectal cancer, where now we're seeing approximately 1 in every 8 adults with colorectal cancer being diagnosed under age 50. Add to that prior studies have shown that the proportion of early-onset colorectal cancer cases or incidence is actually higher among individuals who identify as non-White compared to those who identify as non-Hispanic White. We previously published in JCO a paper that assessed disparities in survival among early-onset colorectal cancer patients and strikingly found that individuals who identify as non-Hispanic Black had poorer survival compared with non-Hispanic Whites, both in colon and rectal tumors, specifically for young individuals. However, and of striking interest, we did not see these survival disparities between Whites and individuals who identify as Hispanic, which further led us to question what may be some of the biological, environmental, and other factors that may actually be driving some of these disparities by race and ethnicity, both in incidence but also in outcomes. Dr. Shannon Westin: So that kind of brings us to this study. Will you walk us through what the objective of this study was? Dr. Andreana Holowatyj: Yeah. So the underlying question really is what could be the role of germline genetic features or germline predisposition in early-onset colorectal cancer disparities? We know from prior studies published in JCO and other journals that about 14%-25% of early-onset colorectal cancer cases have a germline predisposition. However, these populations have been of limited size and, more importantly, of limited diversity. So we really wanted to tackle that question to understand what is the prevalence and spectrum of germline genetic features in early-onset colorectal cancer by race and ethnicity. Are there differences? Where do these differences lie? And what can this information really tell us in better understanding the early-onset colorectal cancer burden? Dr. Shannon Westin: Well, now, well, just talk us through the design that you employed to achieve these objectives. Dr. Andreana Holowatyj: We were fortunate to partner with a nationwide clinical testing laboratory to identify individuals who were between the ages of 15 and 49 years when diagnosed with the first primary colorectal cancer over about a five-year study period. We were able to identify around 4,000, or specifically 3,980 individuals, who identified as non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic/Spanish or Latino, Asian, or Ashkenazi Jewish who had clinical multigene panel testing uniformly for 14 genes that have a known susceptibility to colorectal cancer overall, to really examine the prevalence and spectrum of genetic features across these self-identified racial/ethnic groups.  Dr. Shannon Westin: And what was the overall prevalence of germline mutations in this population? And did it differ kind of overall in the different racial and ethnic groups? Dr. Andreana Holowatyj: Overall, the prevalence of germline genetic features when assessing 14 colorectal cancer susceptibility genes in this population was pretty consistent with prior studies at 12.2%, seeing about 1 in every 8 patients present with germline genetic predisposition. However, when we teased these numbers apart across racial/ethnic groups, what we saw is the prevalence of these germline genetic features ranged from 9.5% in individuals who identified as Asian to 10.3% of individuals who identified as Black, 12.4% as White, 12.7% for individuals who identify as Ashkenazim, all the way up to 14% of individuals who identify as Hispanic within this population. So we saw a wide—a decently wide breadth of prevalence across these racial/ethnic groups overall. Dr. Shannon Westin: And of course, as a gynecologic oncologist, I'm always centering myself and thinking about Lynch Syndrome. So how did the prevalence of mutations in the mismatch repair gene differ between racial and ethnic backgrounds? Dr. Andreana Holowatyj: So really interesting question. Overall, about 7% of individuals in our cohort presented with a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant in the mismatch repair gene. But what we saw is that the prevalence of Lynch Syndrome varied from 3% or so of Ashkenazim individuals all the way up to 9.9% of Hispanic individuals. We saw that variance in MLH1 strongly differed across racial/ethnic groups, particularly in the Hispanic population, that accounted for some of these differences. Dr. Shannon Westin: And then were there any differences in some of the other germline mutations that you explored? Dr. Andreana Holowatyj: Yeah, we also observed differences in the prevalence of APC mutations, although largely attributable to the p.I1307K variant in Ashkenazim individuals, as well as CHEK2, monoallelic MUTYH, and PTEN. Dr. Shannon Westin: Okay. Interesting. I was intrigued about those findings for the monoallelic MUTYH variants. Do you think we should be potentially doing increased screening in specific populations based on your results? Dr. Andreana Holowatyj: Yeah, so I think to kind of put this into context, most people probably know that biallelic MUTYH variants yield MUTYH-associated adenomatous polyposis and, of course, confer a strong increased risk of colorectal cancer development. In monoallelic carriers of MUTYH variants, there really is limited evidence to guide clinical management, and this is an evolving area. Per NCCN guidelines, unaffected individuals with a monoallelic MUTYH pathogenic variant and a family history of colorectal cancer in a first-degree relative are recommended to get colonoscopy screening every five years beginning at age 40 or 10 years prior to the age of that first-degree relative of colorectal cancer diagnosis.  However, for individuals with a monoallelic MUTYH variant and no known family history of colorectal cancer, it's inconclusive as to whether specialized screening and surveillance are warranted. Current studies conducted in European or predominantly White populations have reported conflicting evidence as to whether there is an increased colorectal cancer risk for carriers of a monolithic MUTYH pathogenic variant. I don't think we're quite there yet to make a conclusive decision on whether increased screening is warranted in the population or not. I think the evidence is leaning towards potentially seeing not a strong increased colorectal cancer risk, but we'll have to wait and see on some additional studies to be conclusive in that area. Dr. Shannon Westin: I was also intrigued—the lack of difference in germline features between Blacks and Whites was stark. I mean, why do you—what do you think might have led to us not seeing a difference there? Dr. Andreana Holowatyj: I think there's potentially two avenues for this. I want to caveat the fact that this could be attributable to a limited sample size. Although we had about over 1,000—just over 1,000 individuals who identified as non-White, there's still potential selection bias in this cohort. However, we have included about a comparable number of individuals who identified Blacks and Hispanics herein, which does raise this question of we see differences in germline genetic features between Whites and Hispanics, but the lack of difference between individuals who identify as White and Black kind of yields possibly two avenues. If germline genetic features do contribute to racial/ethnic differences in early-onset colorectal carcinogenesis and outcomes, then there's a chance that we have not yet identified ancestry-specific variants associated with early-onset colorectal cancer. This has marked implications in the development and equitable design of multigene panel tests.  However, we also know that beyond genetics, the interplay with biology, social determinants of health, and behaviors could also underlie these distinct patterns. We recently demonstrated in a separate paper that we see actually differences in the tumor mutation burden between individuals who identify as Black or White, which is supporting the idea that a distinct tumor biology may be driving early-onset colorectal cancer disparities. And if there are no germline genetic features, then the question is really how does that interplay of the environment—some of these other complex interrelated factors, how could that be driving disparities in early-onset colorectal cancer incidence and outcomes, particularly for individuals who identify as Black? Dr. Shannon Westin: And I guess that kind of leads to my next question. The testing platform that you studied, is it all-inclusive? Are there other mutations that might be relevant, or just we don't know yet? Dr. Andreana Holowatyj: Yeah. So I think one of the advantages of this study is that all individuals had clinical multigene panel testing for the 14 genes that we evaluated overall. However, while that's a strength of the study, it's also a limitation, given that we only queried 14 genes with unknown colorectal cancer susceptibility, which really is a first step, yet a key step, in further studies and supporting further discovery of potential ancestry-specific variants or genes associated specifically with early-onset colorectal cancer predisposition. Dr. Shannon Westin: That makes a lot of sense. And I guess that's the next kind of natural question is so what do we do next, right? Where do we go? How do we move this forward? Dr. Andreana Holowatyj: Yeah. So I think one of the advantages of this approach and being fortunate to partner with the clinical testing laboratory is that the study was nationwide among individuals who, of course, had multigene panel sequencing. But at the same time, we were able to accumulate a sufficient number of cases to be able to study these patterns across population groups. I think the natural next step from multigene panel testing is based upon these findings to move into clinical exome sequencing to be able to not only move towards identifying genetic ancestry, since that's, of course, the biological construct—and I would be remiss if I didn't acknowledge that race and ethnicity is a social construct but was all that was available in the context of this present study—but also will allow us to query the entire exome and understand and dive deeper into some of these questions: variants of uncertain significance and also potential ancestry-specific variants. Dr. Shannon Westin: Well, great. Well, this is super intriguing, and I know this is going to get a lot of excitement and attention from our readership. So I just want to thank you again for taking the time to review this really important paper, “Clinical Multigene Panel Testing Identifies Racial and Ethnic Differences in Germline Pathogenic Variants Among Patients With Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer.” Again, I'm Shannon Westin, and I'm just so grateful that everyone came to listen to JCO After Hours. Please do check out our website for other podcasts you might have missed. Have a great one.  The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions.   Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement.  

Whole-genome sequencing data — which include information about mitochondrial DNA — offer clues to why mutations in the same gene can lead to autism or cancer.

Whole-genome sequencing data — which include information about mitochondrial DNA — offer clues to why mutations in the same gene can lead to autism or cancer.

Thanks for listening to Episode #72 The conversation is between Eric and Sampson. Sampson discussed learning Indiana history can be inspiring to black people and can give them a sense of pride in the state they are from. Sampson discussed how they were encouraged by their mother to look deeper into the history of Indiana and to find out more information than what was initially available. Sampson also discussed how seeing other black people from Indiana making waves and succeeding can be inspiring and can help someone make waves in Indianapolis. Sampson also discussed how stepping outside of one's neighborhood can help one see people doing different things, such as tech, business, law, music, and sports, which can be a source of inspiration for them. Finally, Sampson discussed how sports can be used to showcase passion, but that it cannot overshadow other things that people can be doing. Sampson's Website: Sampson Levingston | Through2Eyes | Indiana Youth Spotlight: Kahron's Korner Meet Kahron Garner, a 14-year-old 8th grader from Warren Township schools in Indiana. He's a total car fanatic and is super excited to launch his first podcast about cars! Kahron's love of cars started when he was just a little kid, playing with toy cars and watching car shows on TV. As he's grown up, his passion for cars has only gotten more assertive, and now he wants to share that enthusiasm with the world through his podcast. But Kahron's podcast isn't just about cars - he's also using it to raise awareness of a rare gene defect called PTEN. This is important to Kahron and his family; he wants to use his platform to help spread the word and educate people about this condition. If you're a car lover or just looking for a fun new podcast, tune in to Kahron's Korner and hear what Kahron says about all things cars. He's a true expert and a pro; you won't want to miss it. Link: https://youtube.com/@kahronskorner

Thanks for listening to Episode #71 The conversation between Eric and Soroya focuses on the importance of trademarking and intellectual property in the business world. Soroya, who is more knowledgeable on the subject, explains that people usually need access to the resources and information necessary to understand the implications of trademarking and intellectual property, leading to more protection for their creations. Soroya explains that this is true for artists and business owners. Intellectual property is the ownership of an idea or creation and should be appreciated and protected. Soroya Connection Info: Text Sgl to 66866 for free resources that Soroya shares with her community. Soroya website: https://www.sgarnerlaw.com/ Youth Spotlight: Kahron's Korner Meet Kahron Garner, a 14-year-old 8th grader from Warren Township schools in Indiana. He's a total car fanatic and is super excited to launch his first podcast about cars! Kahron's love of cars started when he was just a little kid, playing with toy cars and watching car shows on TV. As he's grown up, his passion for cars has only gotten more assertive, and now he wants to share that enthusiasm with the world through his podcast. But Kahron's podcast isn't just about cars - he's also using it to raise awareness of a rare gene defect called PTEN. This is important to Kahron and his family; he wants to use his platform to help spread the word and educate people about this condition. If you're a car lover or just looking for a fun new podcast, tune in to Kahron's Korner and hear what Kahron says about all things cars. He's a true expert and a pro; you won't want to miss it. TIMESTAMPS 0:00:00 Conversation between Eric Jones, Jr. and Siroya Garner on the Importance of Trademarking for Minority and Black Entrepreneurs 0:02:32 Heading: Understanding Trademarking and Intellectual Property 0:04:37 Heading: Understanding Intellectual Property and How to Protect It 0:06:47 Discussion on Intellectual Property Protection 0:09:46 Heading: The Importance of Trademarking for Podcasters 0:11:24 Heading: Protecting Intellectual Property for Creatives: An Interview with Attorney 0:13:54 Conversation with Attorney and Entrepreneur on Perseverance and Education 0:16:34 Conversation on Starting a Business: Steps to Take Before Trademarking 0:18:06 Heading: The Importance of Trademarking Before Filing with the Secretary of State 0:20:20 Discussion on Trademarking and LLCs for Entrepreneurs 0:24:43 Discussion on Trademarking and Intellectual Property Protection 0:28:14 Topic: Intellectual Property Rights in the Music Industry 0:30:10 Discussion on the Importance of Having the Right People on Your Team for Business Success 0:33:21 Discussion on Copyright Law and Work for Hire Agreements 0:37:05 Heading: Protecting Intellectual Property Rights in Business 0:38:47 Conversation on Trademarking a Brand Name 0:40:38 Heading: Legal Considerations for Naming and Branding a Product or Service 0:43:36 "The Benefits of Living Out Your Purpose: A Conversation with Attorney Soroya." 0:45:01 Conversation on Entrepreneurship and Ownership: Tips for Success 0:46:30 Heading: Strategies for Entrepreneurship Success: Advice from a Business Lawyer 0:51:16 Conversation with Attorney Soroya Garner on Trademark Protection and Branding 0:52:56 Conversation Between Eric and Legal Services Professional #entrepreneur #smallbusiness #podcast #howto #trademark

Dr. Rachna Shroff, chair-elect of the 2023 ASCO GI Cancers Symposium, and guest host Dr. Shaalan Beg discuss new research presented at GI23, including new data from SWOG 1815 in biliary tract cancers, advances in biomarker studies in mCRC such as the PARADIGM trial, and promising updates in ctDNA technology. She also highlights the exciting potential of AI in oncology. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Shaalan Beg:  Hello, and welcome to the ASCO Daily News Podcast. I'm Dr. Shaalan Beg, your guest host of the podcast today. I'm an adjunct associate professor at UT Southwestern's Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center and vice president of Oncology at Science 37. Today we'll be discussing key abstracts and other highlights from the 2023 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancer Symposium, which celebrated 20 years of transformative care in GI cancers. I'm delighted to welcome Dr. Rachna Shroff, the chair-elect of this milestone meeting. Dr. Shroff is the interim division chief of Hematology Oncology at the University of Arizona Cancer Center. She also serves as the associate dean for Clinical and Translational Research and is the chief of GI Medical Oncology. Our full disclosures are available in the transcript of this episode, and disclosures related to all episodes of the podcast are available on our transcripts at ASCO.org/podcasts. Dr. Shroff, it's great to have you back on the ASCO Daily News podcast. Dr. Rachna Shroff: Thank you so much for having me. I'm so excited to be here. Dr. Shaalan Beg: The ASCO GI Cancers Symposium has been heralded as one of the biggest conferences in the GI cancer space and has occupied this space for the past two decades. Some would say that this year's conference was probably the best GI Cancers Symposium to date. Can you comment on the 20th anniversary milestone and the impact of the symposium on GI cancers? Dr. Rachna Shroff: Absolutely, and that's so great to hear that that's the feedback that you've heard. I have to say GI ASCO is absolutely my favorite meeting of the year, so that is my full disclosure. But I think that this was a tremendous meeting, and I think it was so beautiful that it was also coinciding with the 20th anniversary. It meant so much to us to have Dr. Margaret Tempero open the meeting because she really was the impetus for creating a GI cancer-focused meeting that really brought together multidisciplinary expertise. And so to us, that is what this 20th anniversary represented—20 years of multiple different specialties coming together to discuss how to improve cancer care for patients with gastrointestinal malignancies. And it has been a transformative meeting to see the impact of research presented at this meeting and how it has been implemented over the course of 20 years. And I completely agree that this year in and of itself had some incredible pivotal data that there is no doubt will be practice-changing, and that is absolutely the purpose. I also think that the beauty of this meeting is the networking opportunities for all of us to come out of our individual silos, come together, and discuss cross-cutting care across the spectrum of GI malignancies. And I think that this meeting really did that quite well. Dr. Shaalan Beg: There were many practice-changing studies that made headlines this year, and for me, one of the most anticipated studies was a trial that you led for cholangiocarcinoma and much-anticipated results. The study finished enrollment at a record pace. Can you share your key findings of cholangiocarcinoma? And I'd really like to hear your perspective on cholangiocarcinoma studies. Dr. Rachna Shroff: Yes, it was actually a really big year in the hepatobiliary space, and I was proud to present SWOG 1815, LBA 490, which was the pivotal randomized phase 3 trial looking at gemcitabine, cisplatin, and nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine and cisplatin. This was a study that was opened across the entire NCTN and based on a single-arm phase 2 trial that had shown some promising early efficacy of the triplet chemotherapy regimen. As you mentioned, this study accrued 441 patients in two years. And it's really a testament to the fact that the cooperative group mechanism can and should be asking important questions in large, randomized studies and that it is even possible to do in what are historically thought of as, quote-unquote, “rare tumors.” The study was a randomization of two to one to the triplet chemotherapy versus the standard of care for newly diagnosed biliary tract cancer patients. And the primary endpoint was median overall survival. And while the median OS of the triplet regimen was numerically improved at 14 months compared to 12.7 months, this did not meet statistical significance. Other efficacy endpoints, including median progression-free survival and overall response rate, were also numerically improved but not statistically significant, with an overall response rate of 31% with the triplet regimen versus 22%. There were some prespecified stratification factors, including disease site and disease stage, and there may be some interesting signals that bear out of that in terms of perhaps gallbladder cancer and locally advanced patients may be benefiting from the triplet regimen a little bit more, but these are small numbers, and we would really need to explore that in a more rigorous prospective manner. The toxicities were, not surprisingly, there, especially hematologic toxicities. I will say for those of us that use this regimen in practice, we use it a little bit differently than what was done in SWOG 1815, but you can't deny that there were significantly higher grade 3-5 toxicities with anemia neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, though the treatment discontinuation rate did not differ. I think the next steps are really going to be the ongoing biomarker analyses. The study had archival tissue and prospective blood collection and we know that in the space of cholangiocarcinomas and biliary cancers, molecular complexities absolutely play a role in how patients do and how they respond to therapies. So that's going to be an important next step, I think, for this study. Dr. Shaalan Beg: Speaking of biomarkers and an impact on GI cancers, the other malignancy where biomarkers are having a much greater impact than other GI cancers is colon cancer. Another year where we continue to see advances in our understanding of molecularly targeted treatments for colon cancer. What caught your eye? Dr. Rachna Shroff: Well, there were a lot of really interesting studies happening in this space and as a biliary person, one of the first things I got excited about was seeing Abstract 139 that looked at pemigatinib, which is the drug we are very familiar with in cholangiocarcinoma. This was a single-arm phase two study looking at the use of the FGFR inhibitor pemigatinib in metastatic colorectal cancer patients who had FGFR alterations. And so this was a study that was opened through the ACCRU mechanism. It was multicenter with assignment two-stage design and it was specifically for patients with FGF and FGFR-altered metastatic colorectal cancer who had progressed on standard therapies. There was a prespecified interim analysis for futility after 12 evaluable patients and so 14 patients were enrolled in the first stage of the study and evaluated for the primary endpoint of objective response. What was seen and the study was subsequently stopped is that there was really not much efficacy, there was no evidence of safety signals, but this did not seem to be a very active drug in patients with FGFR alterations with no objective response noted. So, the study was stopped with the recognition that perhaps the FGFR translocation or fusion patient population may be something to explore since they did not look at that in this study. The other kind of study that I think is really important was important work of Dr. Raghav and colleagues through SWOG. This was SWOG 1613 Abstract 140. This was the first real study that was investigating targeting HER-2 overexpressed and amplified metastatic colorectal cancer who had RAS wild-type tumors. And it was based on, obviously, some early signals of the effectiveness of HER-2 targeting in metastatic colorectal cancer. And this was a large study looking at pertuzumab and trastuzumab in these patients. They were compared to cetuximab and irinotecan, and the initial plan was for a much larger study. Unfortunately, accrual was really slow so the study was really kind of reformatted and a total of 54 patients were randomized, 26 to the trastuzumab arm and 28 to the CetIri or cetuximab and irinotecan arm. What was seen was that you can absolutely use HER-2 targeting therapies with trastuzumab and pertuzumab in these patients. It was safe and there were some obvious signs of efficacy in terms of overall response rate with an overall response rate of 31% compared to the CetIri arm. Crossover was allowed from the CetIri arm to trastuzumab and pertuzumab. So just that's important to keep in mind when they start to follow out the survival data. But unfortunately, because this study did not accrue, it was stopped early and it's really hard to understand in terms of power calculations the impact of trastuzumab pertuzumab. Of course, we can't talk about this without recognizing that the FDA approval based on the MOUNTAINEER study for tucatinib and trastuzumab came through during GI ASCO. So clearly HER-2 targeting is here to stay in colorectal cancer. Dr. Shaalan Beg: So technology is advancing every year and it's important that we are aware of these advances and how they impact our patients. Probably one of the most exciting technologies in oncology in general is the evolution of ctDNA. And it's been amazing to watch that field unfold as we understand how to use circulating biomarkers for early detection of cancer, for minimal residual disease detection, even as a biomarker of response. What caught your eye when it comes to the use of ctDNA in GI cancers, and how do you see this space develop in the next couple of years? Dr. Rachna Shroff: I completely agree. I think the technology of ctDNA is so incredibly exciting and as somebody who does not actively see and treat colorectal cancer, I'm a little bit envious of my colleagues in that space because the strides that have been made in terms of understanding the utility of ctDNA, especially in colorectal cancer, has just been tremendous and even for the last two to three years. One perfect example of integrating that sort of technology into treatment paradigms is the PARADIGM trial, Abstract 11, which was looking at the concept of hyperselection of patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer who were on the PARADIGM trial which basically looked at frontline FOLFOX with panitumumab versus bevacizumab in patients with RAS wild type left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer. So, you know, the initial data from PARADIGM had demonstrated a longer median overall survival 37.9 months versus 34.3 months, but very smartly, the investigators had also collected baseline plasma ctDNA in the biomarker component of this study and used a custom panel that looked at gene alterations for hyperselection and that included KRAS, NRAS, PTEN, and extracellular domain EGFR mutations HER-2 and MET amplifications, as well as some fusions like ALK, RET, and NTRK. And so out of the 802 patients in the full set, 91% - 733 patients - actually had pretreatment samples for ctDNA, which is really in and of itself, I think, tremendous. And when you break it down, about 28% had at least one gene alteration, and that was across each of those different genes that they were looking at. In the 72% of patients who were defined as hyperselected without any gene alterations, the OS was actually longer with panitumumab versus bev, and that actually was independent of sidedness with hazard ratios that kind of ranged from 0.76 to 0.82. And OS was similar or inferior with panitumumab versus bevacizumab again, regardless of sidedness in patients with any of these gene alterations. And so I think it's a really interesting concept that you can use ctDNA to define negative hyperselection rather than looking at left sided and right sided to really help select patients with frontline therapy in terms of using panitumumab versus bevacizumab. And with the speed with which ctDNA can be obtained, this actually seems like something that could be implemented into clinical practice, which is, I think, really the important component of that. There were a number of other really interesting abstracts. Abstract 5, presented by Dr. Cohen and colleagues, really looked at the kinetics of circulating cell-free DNA and how that kind of relates to minimal residual disease detection rates. And this was in patients with resected stages one through three colorectal cancer. And so, this was a retrospective study, so we have to keep that in mind. And it was multi-institutional in really over 16,000 patients with stages 1 through 3 colorectal cancer. But the complete dataset had about 417 patients and basically the patients' circulating cell-free DNA levels, the total cfDNA, were compared to the ctDNA MRD positivity rates and they looked at very specific time points after surgery. What the authors generally found was that the postoperative cfDNA correlated well with ctDNA positivity and that there was really the ability to see plasma cfDNA levels kind of track and follow with the very specific MRD windows that were being looked at, which really, again, just kind of talks about leveraging this technology in terms of real-world and real-time application and better understanding and informing us of minimal residual disease post what is thought to be curative resection. The last one that I thought was really interesting in relation to ctDNA was actually looking at anal cancer and following ctDNA in patients who were treated with definitive chemoradiation. This was a study that was looking at 31 patients with anal squamous cell carcinoma who were treated with definitive chemo radiation and underwent ctDNA response. The majority of these patients had stage 3 disease and the majority of them received the standard 5-FU Mitomycin with radiation. The patients had ctDNA testing performed in 25 of these patients at baseline and then a smaller number over the course of time, some during chemoradiation. And then they looked again at 30 days post chemoradiation. And at baseline, 88% of patients had detectable ctDNA with those with stage three disease having numerically higher baseline ctDNA levels. And basically what they found was that over the course of treatment, ctDNA levels decreased among the patients with detectable ctDNA. And then ctDNA that tested during chemo radiation showed a drop in decline and were going into molecular remission at a time point in which it was subsequently confirmed that they had a clinical complete response. So, the suggestion here is that the time to molecular ctDNA remission was significantly shorter than being able to see that clinical complete response, which suggests that using surveillance ctDNA monitoring could be an earlier response assessment for patients with anal squamous cell carcinoma who are undergoing definitive therapy. Now, obviously this needs to be confirmed in a larger manner, but again, really suggests that we could be understanding how we're doing with treatment in more of a real-time fashion, which I just think is incredible for those of us who are making sure that we are doing and taking the right approaches for these patients. Dr. Shaalan Beg: One of the major transformative announcements that took place only a couple of months before the GI Cancer Symposium was the announcement of ChatGPT. And we heard a lot of discussion on how it can be used for improving cancer care, improving drug development, and in general, artificial intelligence and machine learning. We've been hearing these buzzwords for such a long time, to the point that a lot of people are probably just filtering it out and then this tool comes up and it makes it real. And we're seeing different people apply these technologies in different ways. But there is tremendous potential in how this technology can improve clinical trials, drug development, and early diagnosis. And luckily, we had already secured a keynote speaker, Dr. Matthew Lundgren from Nuance Communications, and he was invited to talk about artificial intelligence, machine learning, and how it applies to cancer care. I'm really curious to hear what your highlights were from his address and how you see this impacting your day-to-day, or just the ecosystem of which we're all part of. Dr. Rachna Shroff: Yeah, I will say that his keynote was really one of the highlights of the entire meeting for me. And that is coming from somebody who doesn't really know– I know who I'm speaking to, but somebody who does not truly understand the way AI is moving. And so, I was joking with him that it was like AI 101. And I really, really appreciated the way he was able to kind of speak to a crowd that he doesn't normally speak to and help us really understand the way in which artificial intelligence can be integrated into healthcare, and specifically oncology. To me, I think what were the most salient takeaways from his address was really about how this is just a rapidly evolving field and we need to be a little bit ahead of the eight ball when it comes to thinking how we can smartly leverage artificial intelligence like you mentioned, to improve our clinical research efforts, to improve access, and to improve fully integrating AI into our EMR, so that we can really leverage that technology and ensure that we are capturing every potential patient for a clinical trial and be smarter about how we're even approaching things. I mean, I loved him talking about the prior authorizations and that sort of thing, and the ways in which we can decrease the burden on health care providers and really let us focus on the areas that we need to focus on. The one thing that I thought was a really important point, though, and I think a number of people asked him, was about how using this technology has the potential to create more gaps and disparities and how can we be smart to ensure that we don't broaden those gaps. And I think that is a really important point that we all need to think about because we know that especially when we think through clinical trials, there's already underrepresentation of certain populations and certain geographic regions. And so, I think that was a really important takeaway for me is how can we make sure that we work and partner with those who are creating these technologies to ensure that we aren't taking two steps forward and four steps back. Dr. Shaalan Beg: It really calls into question how we define productivity and what our value in the entire delivery system really is. And I think from people who are in middle school or high school to people who are in college and even folks who are in the field as you and I are, it's forcing us to rethink what we bring to the table in a way that we've never been challenged to ask that question ever before. Dr. Rachna Shroff: Absolutely. Dr. Shaalan Beg: So, thank you very much, Dr. Shroff. This was wonderful. Thank you for sharing your insights with us today. And we thank you and Dr. George Chang, the chair of the ASCO GI Cancers Symposium, and everyone who worked so hard to develop a robust program this year.  Dr. Rachna Shroff: Thank you. It was so wonderful to be able to speak about it. And thank you to all of the attendees for making it such a memorable meeting. Dr. Shaalan Beg: And thank you to all our listeners for your time today. You'll find links to the abstracts discussed today on the transcript of this episode. Finally, if you value the insights that you hear on the ASCO Daily News podcast, please take a moment to rate, review, and subscribe wherever you get your podcast. Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experiences, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Find out more about today's speakers: Dr. Shaalan Beg @ShaalanBeg Dr. Rachna Shroff @rachnatshroff Follow ASCO on social media:  @ASCO on Twitter  ASCO on Facebook  ASCO on LinkedIn  Disclosures: Dr. Shaalan Beg: Employment: Science 37 Consulting or Advisory Role: Ipsen, Array BioPharma, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Cancer Commons, Legend Biotech, Foundation Medicine Research Funding (Inst.): Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Merck Serono, Five Prime Therapeutics, MedImmune, Genentech, Immunesensor, Tolero Pharmaceuticals Dr. Rachna Shroff: Consulting or Advisory Role: Exelixis, Merck, QED Therapeutics, Incyte, Astra Zeneca, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Boehringer Ingelheim, SERVIER, Genentech, Basilea Research Funding: Pieris Pharmaceuticals, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Merck, Exelixis, QED Therapeutics, Rafael Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Bayer, Immunovaccine, Seagen, Novocure, Nucana, Loxo/Lilly, Faeth Therapeutics        

SALE ON TRENDSPIDER ENDING SOON Get 55% off Trendspider here - please use this link as I do get a commission when you sign up, but it's the program I use my algorithm in and I'll give you access to the algorithm if you sign up through this link. I will also give you watch lists and my custom scans that I use in the podcast every day. Sign up for Webull and get free stocks like I did - WEBULL LINK Support the podcast - HERE Social Links and more - https://linktr.ee/dailystockpick $NKE killed earnings and market is looking positive. With it down this much, we could be looking at an up swing for the rest of the week with some good news. $Mrna way up again $Wfc $Bac $Boil $kold $Soxl $Soxs $Tqqq $sqqq $Nke up - beat earnings - up almost 12% - I said to buy it under $100 before - of course I didn't

The code may help scientists identify people with the autism-linked condition and recruit them into clinical trials. The post New diagnostic code for PTEN syndrome may spur research appeared first on Spectrum | Autism Research News.

The code may help scientists identify people with the autism-linked condition and recruit them into clinical trials.

Episode 105: Renal Cell Carcinoma. Manpreet and Jon-Ade explain how to diagnose renal cell carcinoma. Introduction about age and kidney transplant by Dr. Arreaza and Dr. Yomi. Introduction: Too old for a new kidney?By Hector Arreaza, MD. Discussed with  Timiiye Yomi, MD.Today we will be talking about the kidneys, those precious bean-shaped organs that detoxify your blood 24/7. Amazingly, we can live normal lives with one kidney, but when the kidney function is not good enough to meet the body's demands, patients need to start kidney replacement therapy. Modern medicine has made a lot of advances with dialysis, but the perfection of a kidney has not been outperformed by any machine yet. That's why kidney transplant is the hope for many of our patients with end-stage kidney disease.The need for a kidney transplant is growing, likely due to increasing chronic diseases such as diabetes and hypertension, and also because of an increase in elderly population. About 22% of patients on the kidney transplant waiting list are over age 65. A cut-off age to receive kidney transplant has not been established across the globe. Different countries use different criteria for the maximum age for transplant. The American Society of Transplantation's guidelines states “There should be no absolute upper age limit for excluding patients whose overall health and life situation suggest that transplantation will be beneficial.” So, if your patient is older than 65 and needs a kidney, they may qualify for a transplant, and age should not be an absolute contraindication to receive it. Actually, older patients may have lower risk of rejection due to a theoretically weaker immune system. A live donor is likely to be a better option for elderly patients. A condition that would make your elderly patient a poor candidate for kidney transplant would be frailty. Common contraindications to kidney transplant include active infections or malignancy, uncontrolled mental illness, ongoing addiction to substances, reversible kidney failure, and documented active and ongoing treatment nonadherence.So, remember to take these factors into consideration when deciding if you need to refer your elderly patients for a kidney transplant, there is no such thing as being too old for a new kidney if your patient meets all the criteria for a transplant.This is Rio Bravo qWeek Podcast, your weekly dose of knowledge brought to you by the Rio Bravo Family Medicine Residency Program from Bakersfield, California. Our program is affiliated with UCLA, and it's sponsored by Clinica Sierra Vista, Let Us Be Your Healthcare Home. This podcast was created for educational purposes only. Visit your primary care physician for additional medical advice. Renal Cell Carcinoma. By Manpreet Singh, MS3, Ross University School of Medicine, and Jon-Ade Holter, MS3 Ross University School of Medicine. Moderated by Hector Arreaza, MD. Definition:Renal cell carcinoma is a primary neoplasm arising form the renal cortex. 80-85 percent of renal tumors are renal cell carcinomas followed closely by transitional cell renal cancer and Wilms tumor.  Epidemiology: In 2022, 79,000 new cases of kidney cancer were diagnosed with almost 14,000 mortalities. There is a 2:1 male to female ratio and the average age is 64 and normally 65-74. African Americans and American Indians have a higher prevalence rate compared to other racial groups. The lifetime risk for developing kidney cancer in men is about 1 in 46 (2.02%) and 1 in 80 (1.03%) in women.  Risk Factors associated with RCC: Anything that causes assault to the kidneys and affects its function would cause increased demand, injury, and inflammation. This assault can lead to cell derangement and lead to cancer. The risk factors that have been associated with RCC are smoking, obesity, HTN, family history of kidney cancer, Trichloroethylene (a metal degreaser used in large manufacturing factories), acetaminophen, and patients with advanced kidney disease needing dialysis. Patients with syndromes that cause multiple types of tumors: VHL (von Hippel-Lindau) deficiency, a tumor suppressor, gives rise to clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Familial inheritance of VHL deficiency is mostly found in patients that have RCC at a very young age, before 40 y/o. Other tumors can be found in the eye, brain, spinal cord, pancreas, and pheochromocytomas.Hereditary leiomyoma-renal cell carcinoma due to FH gene mutations causing women who have leiomyomas to have a higher risk of developing papillary RCC.Birt-Hogg-Dube (BHD) syndrome mutation in FLCN gene who develop various skin and renal tumors.Cowden syndrome is a mutation in the PTEN gene giving rise to cancers associated with breast, thyroid , and kidney cancers.Tuberous sclerosis causes benign tumors of the skin, brain, lungs, eyes, kidneys, and heart. Although kidney tumors are most often benign, occasionally they can be clear cell RCC. Screening For RCC:Screening is unnecessary because of the low prevalence of this cancer in the general population, though certain groups require annual repeat imaging via US, CT, or MRI. Inherited conditions that are associated with RCC such as VHL syndrome or Tuberous SclerosisESRD patients who have been on dialysis for 3-5 yearsFamily history of RCCPrior kidney irradiation Clinical Picture: Most patients with RCC are asymptomatic until cancer grows large enough to cause disruption of local organs, such as the kidney, bladder, or renal vein, and dysregulates other organs via metastasis. Therefore, it's important to look at other signs and symptoms caused by RCC.  The patient most likely will be an older male who presents with the classic triad of: Flank pain: caused by rapid expansion and stretching of the renal capsule.Hematuria: occurs from the invasion of the neoplasm into the collecting duct.Palpable abdominal mass: mass tends to be homogenous and mobile with respirations. Though this presents only in 9% of patients during the presentation, having physical symptoms is a sign of advanced disease and 25% of patients with these signs tend to have distant metastasis.  Anemia: normally associated with anemia of chronic disease. It precedes the disease by at least 8 months to 1 year. Males can develop varicoceles because of decreased emptying due to neoplasm obstruction. Patients normally develop varicoceles on the left due to the spermatic vein emptying in the higher resistance left renal vein, which causes backup of the blood in the pemphigus plexus. Though a right-sided varicocele should raise a higher suspicion of obstruction due to the spermatic vein draining directly into the IVC which is lower in resistance. A right-sided varicocele is seen in approximately 11 percent of patients. The paraneoplastic syndrome can also arise from RCCEpo: Erythrocytosis with symptoms of weakness, fatigue, headache, and joint pain.PTHrP: PTH-related peptide acts like PTH which gives rise to hypercalcemia with the prevalent symptoms of arthritis, osteolytic lesions, confusions, tetany, ventricular tachycardia, shortened QTc, and nausea and vomiting.Renin: overproduction from the juxtaglomerular cells can cause disarrangement of the RAAS system causing hypertension.Others also like ACTH and beta-HCG. Other disorders present include hepatic dysfunction, cachexia, secondary amyloidosis, and thrombocytosis. Workup If a patient comes in with painless hematuria, then the first test should be abdominal CT or abdominal ultrasound. A CT is more sensitive than the US but it can quickly indicate if the abdominal mass felt can be a cyst or a solid tumor.  US of kidneys should show if it's a simple cyst:-The cyst is round and sharply demarcated with smooth walls- It's anechoic – appears solid black-There is a strong posterior wall echo-Use the Bosniak classification to classify mass  Bosniak I: benign simple cyst with thin wall less than equal to 2mm, no septa or calcifications. No future workup is needed. Bosniak II: benign cyst, 3 cm diameter, requires f/u with US/CT/MRI at 6 months, 12 months, and annually for the next 5 years. Chance of malignancy: 5%.  Bosniak III: indeterminate cystic mass with thick, irregular or smooth walls. This requires nephrectomy or radiofrequency ablation. Chance of malignancy: 55%  Bosniak IV: Clearly a malignancy its grade III with enhancing soft tissue components that its independent from the wall or septum. Requires total or partial nephrectomy. Chance of malignancy 100%.  CT of the kidneys for a neoplasm should show:-Thickened irregular walls or septa -Enhancement after contrast injection are suggestive of malignancy-CT can also help detect invasion in local tissue areas such as renal vein and perinephric organs  MRI is used if the patient cannot use contrast or kidney function is poor. MRI can also evaluate the growth of the cancer. Other imaging studies:Other imaging studies that may be useful for assessing for distant metastases include bone scan, CT of the chest, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and positron emission tomography (PET)/CT. Treatment and staging Nephrectomy, partial or total, will be used as the initial tissue collection for pathology. If the patient is not a surgical candidate, you can also obtain a percutaneous biopsy. The nephrectomy is preferred because first, it serves as a definitive treatment option, but also it allows for definitive staging of the cancer with tumor and nodal staging. Regardless of the size, any solid mass may indicate malignancy and point towards RCC, requiring resection.   TNM staging Stage I: Tumor is 7cm across or smaller and only in the kidney with no lymph nodes or distant mets. T1N0M0 Stage IIa: Tumor size is larger than 7cm but still in the kidney but no invasion of lymph node or mets. T2N0M0 Stage IIb: Tumor is growing into the renal vein or IVC, but not into neighboring organs such as adrenals or Gerota's fascia and still lacks lymph node invasion and mets. T3N0M0.  Stage III: Tumor can be any size but has not invaded outside structures such as adrenals, though nearby lymph node invasion is present but not distant. There is no distant mets. T3N1M0. Stage IV:  The main tumor is beyond the Gerota's fascia and may grow into the adrenal gland . It may or may not spread to the lymph nodes or may not have distant mets. Stage IV also consists of any cancer that has any number of distant mets. T4 Adjuvant therapy can be done with immune therapy. Conclusion: Now we conclude our episode number 105 “Renal cell carcinoma.” This type of cancer may be asymptomatic until it is large enough to cause symptoms. Keep it on your list of differentials on patients with hematuria, flank pain, weight loss, and abnormal imaging. Keep in mind the features of simple kidney cysts vs complex cysts when assessing kidney ultrasounds. Your patient will be grateful for an early diagnosis of RCC and a prompt treatment. Even without trying, every night you go to bed being a little wiser.This week we thank Hector Arreaza, Timiiye Yomi, Manpreet Singh, Jon-Ade Holter. Thanks for listening to Rio Bravo qWeek Podcast. If you have any feedback, contact us by email at RioBravoqWeek@clinicasierravista.org, or visit our website riobravofmrp.org/qweek. Audio edition: Suraj Amrutia. See you next week!  Bibliography: Is There a Cut Off Age for Kidney Transplant?, Mayo Clinic Connect, Jul 18, 2017, https://connect.mayoclinic.org/blog/transplant/newsfeed-post/is-there-a-cut-off-age-for-kidney-transplant/ Atkins, Michael. “Clinical Manifestations, Evaluation, and Staging of Renal Cell Carcinoma.” UpToDate, January 21. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/clinical-manifestations-evaluation-and-staging-of-renal-cell-carcinoma American Cancer Society. “Key Statistics About Kidney Cancer”. Cancer.Org, 2022, https://www.cancer.org/cancer/kidney-cancer/about/key-statistics.html. Escudier B, Porta C, Schmidinger M, Rioux-Leclercq N, Bex A, Khoo V, Grünwald V, Gillessen S, Horwich A; ESMO Guidelines Committee. Electronic address: clinicalguidelines@esmo.org. Renal cell carcinoma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up†. Ann Oncol. 2019 May 1;30(5):706-720. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdz056. PMID: 30788497. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30788497/. Gaillard, F., Bell, D. Bosniak classification system of renal cystic masses. Reference article, Radiopaedia.org. (accessed on 20 May 2022) https://doi.org/10.53347/rID-1006. Kopel J, Sharma P, Warriach I, Swarup S. Polycythemia with Renal Cell Carcinoma and Normal Erythropoietin Level. Case Rep Urol. 2019 Dec 11;2019:3792514. doi: 10.1155/2019/3792514. PMID: 31934488; PMCID: PMC6942735. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31934488/. Leslie SW, Sajjad H, Siref LE. Varicocele. [Updated 2022 Feb 14]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2022 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK448113/. Maguire, Claire. “Understanding Endoscopic Ultrasound and Fine Needle Aspiration.” Educational Dimension, Educational Dimensions, 1 Jan. 2007, educationaldimensions.com/eLearn/aspirationandbiopsy/eusterm.php. Maller, V., Hagir, M. Renal cell carcinoma (TNM staging). Reference article, Radiopaedia.org. (accessed on 20 May 2022) https://doi.org/10.53347/rID-4699. Palapattu GS, Kristo B, Rajfer J. Paraneoplastic syndromes in urologic malignancy: the many faces of renal cell carcinoma. Rev Urol. 2002 Fall;4(4):163-70. PMID: 16985675; PMCID: PMC1475999. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1475999/.

Matt Caruso, President of Caruso Insights, rejoins the show to talk about using expected returns. Even in looking at market action, it's a good reminder that you can get outsized returns from your individual stocks. But your expected returns need to be high enough in relation to your risk in order to have success. We also take a look at the bull market in oil and gas stocks including Patterson-UTI Energy (PTEN), biotech Halozyme and Box (BOX) in tech. For the video version, visit investors.com/podcast.

I'm doing a little something different this week.  Monday is the last day in February, and whether it is a 28-day February or a 29-day February, the last day is recognized world wide as Rare Disease Day, the globally-coordinated movement on rare diseases, focused on working towards equity in social opportunity, healthcare, and access to diagnosis and therapies for people living with a rare disease.  A disease is considered rare if it affects fewer than one in 2000 people.  Collectively though, there are 7,000 rare diseases that impact over 300 million people globally.  https://www.rarediseaseday.org/And share Neuroversity-we need you to help this little podcast that could!https://www.neuroversitypod.com/episodesSo welcome to an encore presentation of "Introduction to PHTS."You just never know where a slice of pizza will take you.For me, and today's guest, it was the beginning of a beautiful friendship.Join me as I introduce you to one of the best humans around, Carla McDonald.  This is a conversation between two moms about parenting, advocating, learning, laughing, and more.Carla's younger son is autistic and also has PTEN Hamartoma Tumor syndrome (PHTS), which is a rare genetic condition that causes an increased risk for certain cancers, benign growths, and neurodevelopmental disorders.  As many as 20% of patients with PHTS are also autistic.  By talking about this rare genetic condition, Carla hopes to spread awareness and knowledge so that children (and adults) can get the screenings needed to help  improve their well being.For more information about PHTS visit:https://ptenfoundation.org/

You just never know where a slice of pizza will take you.For me, and today's guest, it was the beginning of a beautiful friendship.Join me as I introduce you to one of the best humans around, Carla McDonald.  This is a conversation between two moms about parenting, advocating, learning, laughing, and more.Carla's younger son is autistic and also has PTEN Hamartoma Tumor syndrome (PHTS), which is a rare genetic condition that causes an increased risk for certain cancers, benign growths, and neurodevelopmental disorders.  As many as 20% of patients with PHTS are also autistic.  By talking about this rare genetic condition, Carla hopes to spread awareness and knowledge so that children (and adults) can get the screenings needed to help  improve their well being.For more information about PHTS visit:https://ptenfoundation.org/For more information, or to support the show:https://www.neuroversitypod.com/