Cancer Commons leadership, including founder Marty Tenenbaum, executive director Erika Vial Monteverdi, and editor in chief George Lundberg, are speaking at the 2019 Precision Medicine World Conference (PMWC) in Silicon Valley. Every year, the conference attracts doctors, innovators, and patients “to learn first-hand about the latest developments and advancements in precision medicine and cutting-edge new strategies and solutions that are changing how patients are treated.”
On January 22 at 8:45 am, Marty will lead a panel discussing the potential of real-world evidence to inform research and clinical decision making: “Traditionally, the majority of evidence regarding the benefits and risks of cancer treatments is derived from clinical trial populations. However, the vast majority of cancer patients receive treatment outside the context of clinical trials. There is tremendous motivation to evaluate the benefits and risks of cancer treatments delivered in the context of ‘real world’ care. Real-world evidence (RWE) is typically defined as treatment that is not delivered in accordance with an investigational protocol and therefore lacks clearly specified endpoints and assessment intervals for determining benefit. This session will cover opportunities and challenges in using real-world evidence to inform clinical decision making in cancer. The session will review opportunities and challenges in defining real world endpoints and the development of methods and analytical tools capable of generating insights from RWE.” Continue reading…
A Q&A with Eddy Yang, MD, PhD, Professor and Vice Chair of Translational Sciences Department of Radiation Oncology; Deputy Director, Associate Director of Precision Oncology at the Hugh Kaul Precision Medicine Institute; Birmingham, AL; email@example.com
Originally published December 5, 2017
Q: You are a radiation oncologist with a particular interest in cancer of the prostate. How does the molecular study of prostate, as well as other cancers, including Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), help inform Precision Radiation Oncology?
A: Radiation oncology is a specialty where the accuracy and precision of treatment delivery is vital to the safety and outcomes of our patients. Many specialized techniques are utilized to enhance this precision, including intensity modulated radiation therapy, image-guided radiation therapy, and volumetric arc therapy. Emerging modalities such as proton and carbon therapy take advantage of the physics of heavy ions to potentially minimize normal tissue toxicity. With these methods, we are in essence, performing precision oncology, tailoring radiotherapy to each individual patient. However, precision oncology is much more than that, as novel technologies have expanded our understanding of the drivers of cancer that may be targetable or dictate response to treatment. Currently, emerging evidence has shown the benefits of biomarker-directed systemic treatments, but what about genomic markers to guide radiation therapy? Although the preclinical and retrospective data supports the notion of this possibility, results from prospective studies are not yet available. Continue reading…
A Q&A with Mary Woolley, President and CEO of Research!America
Q: You attended the December 2016 signing by President Obama of the 21st Century Cures Act and are recognized to be a strong supporter. Yet harsh criticism of it has quickly appeared in JAMA, BMJ, a variety of other venues, as well as on these pages. Please tell our readers why this is good legislation and how the public health will be protected from exploitation in this very different regulatory world.
A: The bi-partisan 21st Century Cures Act is grounded in a commitment to assuring that our nation’s research ecosystem has the capacity to accelerate the pace at which safe and effective medical advances reach patients. The Act will expand the efficiency, reach and impact of medical discovery in a manner that sustains crucial safeguards against unsafe or ineffective products. The law finances more research, helps to reduce the administrative cost surrounding basic research, and takes additional steps to overcome challenges the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) faces. Patient groups, health care professionals, academic leaders, industry leaders and the FDA and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) were frequently consulted regarding provisions of this bipartisan bill, and their insights were incorporated. We at Research!America were closely involved throughout development of the bill, and are pleased that it crossed the finish line last December. Continue reading…
“People diagnosed with cancer understandably reach for the very best that medical science has to offer. That motivation is increasingly driving people to ask to have the DNA of their tumors sequenced. And while that’s useful for some malignancies, the hype of precision medicine for cancer is getting far ahead of the facts.
“It’s easy to understand why that’s the case. When you hear stories about the use of DNA sequencing to create individualized cancer treatment, chances are they are uplifting stories. Like that of Ben Stern.”
“Several patients with recurring glioblastoma, a deadly brain cancer, survived for more than a year in a clinical trial believed to be the first to use comprehensive DNA and RNA sequencing of a patient’s tumor to inform treatment for these patients in real-time. The study was led by the Translational Genomics Research Institute (TGen), UC San Francisco (UCSF) and the Ivy Foundation Early Phase Clinical Trials Consortium.”
“Genomic Health, Inc. (GHDX) announced today the presentation of results from four studies evaluating the clinical value and utility of its Oncotype DX® Genomic Prostate Score™ (GPS) in the management of early-stage prostate cancer. Collectively, these new data highlight the test’s ability to predict disease aggressiveness and refine risk stratification across National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) clinical risk groups.
” ‘We now have 22 clinical studies, involving more than 4,200 prostate cancer patients, that distinguish Oncotype DX as the only test developed specifically for men who are deciding between active surveillance or definitive treatment. The test is validated to provide individualized information about both the current state and future risk of patients’ prostate cancer,’ said Phil Febbo, M.D., chief medical officer, Genomic Health. ‘Together with the recently published economic analysis demonstrating substantial cost savings of more than $2,200 per patient tested, the data presented will support increased adoption and reimbursement of Oncotype DX as physicians aim to bring precision medicine to their prostate cancer patients.’ “
Update 3-1-17: A video of this event has now been released. Watch it below.
This year’s Precision Medicine World Conference in Mountain View, California, was well-attended by many members of Cancer Commons, who shared in the scientific discoveries that will lead the way to more personalized, accurate, and effective cancer care. Precision medicine is a rapidly evolving field with many breakthroughs in science, technology, and diagnosis that is transforming the way cancer care is practiced at the bedside.
A special session was co-chaired by Cancer Commons board member Larry Marton and Lincoln Nadauld, director of the personalized oncology program at Intermountain Healthcare in Utah. The session also featured Cancer Commons medical director Kevin Knopf, Mountain View oncologist Edmund Tai, and Tim Collins, who is corporate vice president of operations and research at Scripps Health in San Diego. Continue reading…
“A new study led by researchers at UC San Francisco and Kaiser Permanente has identified genetic predictors of normal prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels in healthy men, which could be used to improve the accuracy of PSA-based prostate cancer screening tests.
“Until recently, PSA tests for prostate cancer were considered an exemplar of successful early cancer detection leading to improved treatment outcomes. But over the past five years, a series of studies has suggested that the tests are not sensitive enough: frequent false positives lead to too many unnecessary medical procedures, and false negatives give men a false sense of security. In 2012, the test was given a ‘D’ rating by the U.S. Preventive Task Force, and the test is no longer covered by some insurers.”
“A team of Dana-Farber scientists has released new research with an important message about precision medicine: Sequencing the genes of brain tumors in kids could point to treatments that target their genetic abnormalities and therefore have the best chance of being effective. At least one of those drugs is already on the market, Novartis’ Tafinlar (dabrafenib), approved by the FDA to treat other types of cancer but still readily available to pediatric oncologists who may want to try it in their patients.”