Health-care inequality could deepen with precision oncology

Leveraging continuous glucose monitoring as a catalyst for behaviour change: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Amidst the escalating prevalence of glucose-related chronic diseases, the advancements, potential uses, and growing accessibility of continuous glucose monitors (CGM) have piqued the interest of healthcare providers, consumers, and health behaviour researchers. Yet, there is a paucity of literature characterising the use of CGM in behavioural intervention research. This scoping review aims to describe targeted populations, health behaviours, health-related outcomes, and CGM protocols in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that employed CGM to support health behaviour change.

METHODS

We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Elsevier Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EBSCOhost PsycINFO, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global from inception to January 2024 for RCTs of behavioural interventions conducted in adults that incorporated CGM-based biological feedback. Citation searching was also performed. The review protocol was registered ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/SJREA ).

FINDINGS

Collectively, 5389 citations were obtained from databases and citation searching, 3995 articles were screened, and 31 were deemed eligible and included in the review. Most studies (n = 20/31, 65%) included adults with type 2 diabetes and reported HbA1c as an outcome (n = 29/31, 94%). CGM was most commonly used in interventions to target changes in diet (n = 27/31, 87%) and/or physical activity (n = 16/31, 52%). 42% (n = 13/31) of studies provided prospective CGM-based guidance on diet or activity, while 61% (n = 19/31) included retrospective CGM-based guidance. CGM data was typically unblinded (n = 24/31, 77%) and CGM-based biological feedback was most often provided through the CGM and two-way communication (n = 12/31, 39%). Communication typically occurred in-person (n = 13/31, 42%) once per CGM wear (n = 13/31; 42%).

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review reveals a predominant focus on diabetes in CGM-based interventions, pointing out a research gap in its wider application for behaviour change. Future research should expand the evidence base to support the use of CGM as a behaviour change tool and establish best practices for its implementation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/SJREA.

Overcoming Microbiome-Acquired Gemcitabine Resistance in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Gastrointestinal cancers (GICs) are one of the most recurrent diseases in the world. Among all GICs, pancreatic cancer (PC) is one of the deadliest and continues to disrupt people's lives worldwide. The most frequent pancreatic cancer type is pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), representing 90 to 95% of all pancreatic malignancies. PC is one of the cancers with the worst prognoses due to its non-specific symptoms that lead to a late diagnosis, but also due to the high resistance it develops to anticancer drugs. Gemcitabine is a standard treatment option for PDAC, however, resistance to this anticancer drug develops very fast. The microbiome was recently classified as a cancer hallmark and has emerged in several studies detailing how it promotes drug resistance. However, this area of study still has seen very little development, and more answers will help in developing personalized medicine. PC is one of the cancers with the highest mortality rates; therefore, it is crucial to explore how the microbiome may mold the response to reference drugs used in PDAC, such as gemcitabine. In this article, we provide a review of what has already been investigated regarding the impact that the microbiome has on the development of PDAC in terms of its effect on the gemcitabine pathway, which may influence the response to gemcitabine. Therapeutic advances in this type of GIC could bring innovative solutions and more effective therapeutic strategies for other types of GIC, such as colorectal cancer (CRC), due to its close relation with the microbiome.

Socioeconomic Inequalities in Novel NSCLC Treatments During the Era of Tumor Biomarker-Guided Therapy: A Population-Based Cohort Study in a Publicly Funded Health Care System

INTRODUCTION

Socioeconomic inequalities in the utilization of conventional NSCLC treatments are well documented. Nevertheless, it is not known whether these inequalities are also observed with novel anticancer therapies. This study evaluated associations between deprivation and utilization of novel anticancer therapies targeting tumor biology, the immune system, or both, within the English national publicly funded health care system.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 90,785 patients diagnosed with having a histologically confirmed stage IV NSCLC from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2017, sourced from the English national population-based cancer registry and linked Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy database, was undertaken. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated the likelihood of novel anticancer therapy utilization by deprivation category of area of residence at diagnosis (measured by quintiles of the income domain of the index of multiple deprivation).

RESULTS

Multivariable analyses revealed marked treatment inequalities by deprivation. Patients residing in the most deprived areas were more than half as likely to use any novel therapy (multivariable OR [mvOR] = 0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41-0.49) compared with patients residing in the most affluent areas. Deprivation associations with treatment utilization were slightly stronger with targeted treatments ([most versus least deprived] mvOR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.35-0.43) than immune checkpoint inhibitors (mvOR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.51-0.66).

CONCLUSIONS

There are marked socioeconomic inequalities in NSCLC novel treatment utilization, even in the English National Health Service where treatment is free at the point of delivery. These findings have important implications for equitable delivery of drugs, which have transformed outcomes in metastatic lung cancer. Further work exploring the underlying causes is now needed.

Identification of Disparities in Personalized Cancer Care-A Joint Approach of the German WERA Consortium

Simple Summary

In Molecular Tumor Boards (MTBs), clinicians and researchers discuss the biology of tumor samples from individual patients to find suitable therapies. MTBs have therefore become key elements of precision oncology programs. Patients living in urban areas with specialized medical centers can easily access MTBs. Dedicated efforts are necessary to also grant equal access for patients from rural areas. To address this challenge, the four German cancer centers in Würzburg, Erlangen, Regensburg and Augsburg collectively measured the regional efficacy of their MTBs. By jointly analyzing the residences of all MTB patients, we uncovered regional differences in our mostly rural catchment area. Mapping and further understanding these local differences—especially the underrepresented white spots—will help resolving inequalities in patient access to precision oncology. Our study represents a hands-on approach to assessing the regional efficacy of a precision oncology program. Moreover, this approach is transferable to other regions and clinical applications.

Abstract

(1) Background: molecular tumor boards (MTBs) are crucial instruments for discussing and allocating targeted therapies to suitable cancer patients based on genetic findings. Currently, limited evidence is available regarding the regional impact and the outreach component of MTBs; (2) Methods: we analyzed MTB patient data from four neighboring Bavarian tertiary care oncology centers in Würzburg, Erlangen, Regensburg, and Augsburg, together constituting the WERA Alliance. Absolute patient numbers and regional distribution across the WERA-wide catchment area were weighted with local population densities; (3) Results: the highest MTB patient numbers were found close to the four cancer centers. However, peaks in absolute patient numbers were also detected in more distant and rural areas. Moreover, weighting absolute numbers with local population density allowed for identifying so-called white spots—regions within our catchment that were relatively underrepresented in WERA MTBs; (4) Conclusions: investigating patient data from four neighboring cancer centers, we comprehensively assessed the regional impact of our MTBs. The results confirmed the success of existing collaborative structures with our regional partners. Additionally, our results help identifying potential white spots in providing precision oncology and help establishing a joint WERA-wide outreach strategy.

Health inequity drives disease biology to create disparities in prostate cancer outcomes

Prostate cancer exerts a greater toll on African American men than on White men of European descent (hereafter referred to as European American men): the disparity in incidence and mortality is greater than that of any other common cancer. The disproportionate impact of prostate cancer on Black men has been attributed to the genetics of African ancestry, to diet and lifestyle risk factors, and to unequal access to quality health care. In this Review, all of these influences are considered in the context of the evolving understanding that chronic or recurrent inflammatory processes drive prostatic carcinogenesis. Studies of inherited susceptibility highlight the contributions of genes involved in prostate cell and tissue repair (BRCA1/2, ATM) and regeneration (HOXB13 and MYC). Social determinants of health appear to accentuate these genetic influences by fueling prostate inflammation and associated cell and genome damage. Molecular characterization of the prostate cancers that arise in Black versus White men further implicates this inflammatory microenvironment in disease behavior. Yet, when Black and White men with similar grade and stage of prostate cancer are treated equally, they exhibit equivalent outcomes. The central role of prostate inflammation in prostate cancer development and progression augments the impact of the social determinants of health on disease pathogenesis. And, when coupled with poorer access to high-quality treatment, these inequities result in a disparate burden of prostate cancer on African American men.

Next-generation sequencing, should I use anti-HER2 therapy for HER2-amplified tumors off-label? Illustrating an extrapolation framework

Background:

Next-generation sequencing is used to increase targeted treatment opportunities, particularly for patients who have exhausted standard options. Where randomized controlled trial evidence for a targeted therapy is available for molecular alterations in one tumor type, the dilemma for the clinician is whether ‘matching’ targeted agents should be recommended off-label for the same molecular alterations detected in other tumor types, for which no trial data are available to guide practice. To judge the likely benefits, it may be possible to extrapolate evidence from cancers where treatment benefits have been established.

Methods:

We present a framework for assessing the appropriateness of extrapolation using trastuzumab, an anti-HER2 antibody, for HER2-amplified tumors where trastuzumab use would be off-label as an illustrative example.

Results:

The following should be considered for the tumor type where trastuzumab would be off-label: (a) reliability of the NGS assay for detecting HER2 amplification; (b) criteria for defining HER2 positivity; (c) strength of evidence supporting the actionability of HER2 amplification and trastuzumab; (d) whether better clinical outcomes with trastuzumab are due to a more favorable natural history rather than trastuzumab effect; (e) signals of trastuzumab activity and whether it translates to clinically meaningful benefit; (f) whether the safety profile of trastuzumab differs from established indications; and (g) discussion points for shared decision making (SDM) to facilitate informed consent.

Conclusion:

We present a systematic approach for appraising evidence to support extrapolating trastuzumab benefits from established indications to off-label applications. Extrapolation criteria and areas of uncertainty to inform SDM are outlined. This framework is potentially generalizable to other tumor-agnostic biomarker-targeted therapy scenarios. It is a practical approach for clinicians to apply in routine practice and should be considered by molecular tumor boards who make off-label recommendations.

Proteomics, Personalized Medicine and Cancer

As of 2020 the human genome and proteome are both at >90% completion based on high stringency analyses. This has been largely achieved by major technological advances over the last 20 years and has enlarged our understanding of human health and disease, including cancer, and is supporting the current trend towards personalized/precision medicine. This is due to improved screening, novel therapeutic approaches and an increased understanding of underlying cancer biology. However, cancer is a complex, heterogeneous disease modulated by genetic, molecular, cellular, tissue, population, environmental and socioeconomic factors, which evolve with time. In spite of recent advances in treatment that have resulted in improved patient outcomes, prognosis is still poor for many patients with certain cancers (e.g., mesothelioma, pancreatic and brain cancer) with a high death rate associated with late diagnosis. In this review we overview key hallmarks of cancer (e.g., autophagy, the role of redox signaling), current unmet clinical needs, the requirement for sensitive and specific biomarkers for early detection, surveillance, prognosis and drug monitoring, the role of the microbiome and the goals of personalized/precision medicine, discussing how emerging omics technologies can further inform on these areas. Exemplars from recent onco-proteogenomic-related publications will be given. Finally, we will address future perspectives, not only from the standpoint of perceived advances in treatment, but also from the hurdles that have to be overcome.