Fibroblast growth factors (FGFs) and their receptors (FGFRs) are transmembrane growth factor receptors with wide tissue distribution. FGF/FGFR signaling is involved in neoplastic behavior and also development, differentiation, growth, and survival. FGFR germline mutations (activating) can cause skeletal disorders, primarily dwarfism (generally mutations in FGFR3), and craniofacial malformation syndromes (usually mutations in FGFR1 and FGFR2); intriguingly, some of these activating FGFR mutations are also seen in human cancers. FGF/FGFR aberrations reported in cancers are mainly thought to be gain-of-function changes, and several cancers have high frequencies of FGFR alterations, including breast, bladder, or squamous cell carcinomas (lung and head and neck). FGF ligand aberrations (predominantly gene amplifications) are also frequently seen in cancers, in contrast to hereditary syndromes. There are several pharmacologic agents that have been or are being developed for inhibition of FGFR/FGF signaling. These include both highly selective inhibitors as well as multi-kinase inhibitors. Of note, only four agents (ponatinib, pazopanib, regorafenib, and recently lenvatinib) are FDA-approved for use in cancer, although the approval was not based on their activity against FGFR. Perturbations in the FGFR/FGF signaling are present in both inherited and malignant diseases. The development of potent inhibitors targeting FGF/FGFR may provide new tools against disorders caused by FGF/FGFR alterations.

Effective treatment options for advanced salivary gland tumors are lacking. To better understand these tumors, we report their genomic landscape. We studied the molecular aberrations in 117 patients with salivary gland tumors that were, on physician request, tested in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) laboratory (Foundation Medicine, Cambridge, MA) using next-generation sequencing (182 or 236 genes), and analyzed by N-of-One, Inc. (Lexington, MA). There were 354 total aberrations, with 240 distinct aberrations identified in this patient population. Only 10 individuals (8.5%) had a molecular portfolio that was identical to any other patient (with four different portfolios amongst the ten patients). The most common abnormalities involved the TP53 gene (36/117 [30.8% of patients]), cyclin pathway (CCND1, CDK4/6 or CDKN2A/B) (31/117 [26.5%]) and PI3K pathway (PIK3CA, PIK3R1, PTEN or AKT1/3) (28/117 [23.9%]). In multivariate analysis, statistically significant co-existing aberrations were observed as follows: TP53 and ERBB2 (p = 0.01), cyclin pathway and MDM2 (p = 0.03), and PI3K pathway and HRAS (p = 0.0001). We were able to identify possible cognate targeted therapies in most of the patients (107/117 [91.5%]), including FDA-approved drugs in 80/117 [68.4%]. In conclusion, salivary gland tumors were characterized by multiple distinct aberrations that mostly differed from patient to patient. Significant associations between aberrations in TP53 and ERBB2, the cyclin pathway and MDM2, and HRAS and the PI3K pathway were identified. Most patients had actionable alterations. These results provide a framework for tailored combinations of matched therapies.

Purpose

Multiplex genomic tests are enabling oncologists to interrogate the DNA of their patients. However, few oncologists are proficient with respect to the implications of complex molecular diagnostics. We initiated a Molecular Tumor Board that focused on individual patients with advanced cancer whose tumors underwent genomic profiling, and here report our experience with breast cancer.

Methods

A multidisciplinary team that included physicians, scientists, geneticists, and bioinformatics/pathway specialists attended. All molecular tests were performed in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments environment (next-generation sequencing, 182 or 236 genes).

Results

Forty of 43 patients (93%; mean age, 59 years) had at least one theoretically actionable aberration (mean, 4.79 anomalies/patient). Median time from ordering to report was 27 days (median of approximately 11 days for specimen acquisition and approximately 14 days for diagnostic processing). Even if we considered distinct abnormalities in a gene as the same, there were only two patients with an identical molecular profile. Seventy-three genes (206 abnormalities; 119 distinct) were aberrant. Seventeen of the 43 patients (40%; median, seven previous therapies in the metastatic setting) were treated in a manner consistent with Molecular Tumor Board discussions; seven (16% of 43, or 41% of 17) achieved stable disease for 6 or more months (n = 2) or partial remission (n = 5). Lack of access to targeted medication was the most common reason that patients could not be treated.

Conclusion

Multidisciplinary molecular tumor boards may help to optimize the management of patients with advanced, heavily pretreated breast cancer who have undergone genomic testing. Facilitating availability of appropriately targeted drugs and clinical trials is needed.

Purpose: Oncofertility care for pediatric, adolescent, and young adult cancer patients remains under-implemented across adult and pediatric oncology settings. We pilot tested an electronic health record (EHR)-enabled multicomponent oncofertility intervention (including screening, referral, and fertility consult) in an adult academic oncology program and systematically assessed intervention fit to pediatric and community oncology programs. Methods: Using surveys (n = 33), audits (n = 143), and interviews (n = 21) guided by implementation science frameworks, we pilot tested the EHR-enabled intervention for oncofertility care in young cancer patients at an adult oncology program and evaluated implementation outcomes. We interviewed health care providers from seven regional oncology and fertility programs about intervention fit to their clinical contexts. Results: We recruited 33 health care providers from an adult oncology setting and 15 health care providers from seven additional oncology and fertility settings. At the adult oncology setting, the intervention was found to be appropriate, acceptable, and feasible and improved the screening of fertility needs (from 30% pre- to 51% post-intervention); yet, some patients did not receive appropriate referrals to fertility consults. Providers across all settings suggested content and context modifications, such as adding options to the intervention or allowing the screening component to pop up at a second visit, to improve and adapt the intervention to better fit their clinical care contexts. Conclusions: We found that the EHR-enabled intervention increased the rate of goal-concordant oncofertility care delivery at an adult oncology program. We also identified facilitators, barriers, and needed adaptations to the intervention required for implementation and scaling-up across diverse oncology settings.

OBJECTIVE: Physicians of all specialties experienced unprecedented stressors during the COVID-19 pandemic, exacerbating preexisting burnout. We examine burnouts association with perceived and actionable electronic health record (EHR) workload factors and personal, professional, and organizational characteristics with the goal of identifying levers that can be targeted to address burnout. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Survey of physicians of all specialties in an academic health center, using a standard measure of burnout, self-reported EHR work stress, and EHR-based work assessed by the number of messages regarding prescription reauthorization and use of a staff pool to triage messages. Descriptive and multivariable regression analyses examined the relationship among burnout, perceived EHR work stress, and actionable EHR work factors. RESULTS: Of 1038 eligible physicians, 627 responded (60% response rate), 49.8% reported burnout symptoms. Logistic regression analysis suggests that higher odds of burnout are associated with physicians feeling higher level of EHR stress (odds ratio [OR], 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-1.25), having more prescription reauthorization messages (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.04-1.47), not feeling valued (OR, 3.38; 95% CI, 1.69-7.22) or aligned in values with clinic leaders (OR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.87-4.27), in medical practice for ≤15 years (OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.63-4.12), and sleeping for <6 h/night (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.12-2.67). DISCUSSION: Perceived EHR stress and prescription reauthorization messages are significantly associated with burnout, as are non-EHR factors such as not feeling valued or aligned in values with clinic leaders. Younger physicians need more support. CONCLUSION: A multipronged approach targeting actionable levers and supporting young physicians is needed to implement sustainable improvements in physician well-being.

Purpose: Oncofertility care at cancer diagnosis remains underimplemented across oncology and fertility care settings, with limited tools to scale up effective implementation strategies. Using implementation science theory, we systematically assessed factors that influence oncofertility care implementation and mapped scalable strategies, particularly electronic health record (EHR)-enabled ones, that fit adult and pediatric oncology care contexts. Methods: Using purposeful sampling, we recruited health care providers and female, reproductive-aged survivors of adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancers (AYA survivors) from a comprehensive cancer center and a freestanding children's hospital to semistructured interviews and focus groups. Using thematic analysis combining inductive codes with deductive codes using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we characterized barriers and facilitators to care and designed responsive strategies. Two coders independently coded each transcript. Results: We recruited 19 oncology and fertility providers and 9 cancer survivors. We identified barriers and facilitators to oncofertility care in the CFIR domains of individual, inner setting, outer setting, and process, allowing us to conceptualize oncofertility care to encompass three core components (screening, referral, and fertility preservation counseling) and map five strategies to these components that fit an adult and a children's context and bridge oncology and fertility practices. The strategies were screening using a best practice advisory, referral order, telehealth fertility counseling, provider audit and feedback, and provider education. All but provider education were EHR tools with embedded efficiencies. Conclusion: An implementation science approach systematically assessed oncofertility care and mapped strategies to provide a theory-based approach and scalable EHR tools to support wider dissemination.

Tumor sequencing has revolutionized oncology, allowing for detailed interrogation of the molecular underpinnings of cancer at an individual level. With this additional insight, it is increasingly apparent that not only do tumors vary within a sample (tumor heterogeneity), but also that each patient's individual tumor is a constellation of unique molecular aberrations that will require an equally unique personalized therapeutic regimen. We report here the results of 439 patients who underwent Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendment (CLIA)-certified next generation sequencing (NGS) across histologies. Among these patients, 98.4% had a unique molecular profile, and aside from three primary brain tumor patients with a single genetic lesion (IDH1 R132H), no two patients within a given histology were molecularly identical. Additionally, two sets of patients had identical profiles consisting of two mutations in common and no other anomalies. However, these profiles did not segregate by histology (lung adenocarcinoma-appendiceal cancer (KRAS G12D and GNAS R201C), and lung adenocarcinoma-liposarcoma (CDK4 and MDM2 amplification pairs)). These findings suggest that most advanced tumors are molecular singletons within and between histologies, and that tumors that differ in histology may still nonetheless exhibit identical molecular portraits, albeit rarely.

Background

Zilovertamab is a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting ROR1, an onco-embryonic antigen expressed by malignant cells of a variety of solid tumors, including breast cancer. A prior phase 1 study showed that zilovertamab was well tolerated and effective in inhibiting ROR1-signaling, which leads to activation of ERK1/2, NF-κB, and NRF2 target genes. This phase 1b study evaluated the safety and tolerability of zilovertamab with paclitaxel in patients with advanced breast cancer.

Patients and methods

Eligible patients had locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic HER2^- breast cancer with Eastern Cooperative Group performance status of 0-2 and without prior taxane therapy in the advanced setting. Study treatment included 600 mg of zilovertamab administered intravenously (IV) on Days 1 and 15 of Cycle 1 and then Day 1 of each 28-day cycle along with paclitaxel weekly at 80 mg/m² IV.

Results

Study patients had received a median of 4 prior therapies (endocrine therapy + chemotherapy) for locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic disease. No patient discontinued therapy due to toxicity ascribed to zilovertamab. Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of paclitaxel. Of 16 patients, 6 (38%) had a partial response, and 6/16 (38%) patients had stable disease as best tumor response.

Conclusion

The combination of zilovertamab and paclitaxel was safe and well tolerated in heavily pre-treated advanced breast cancer patients. Further evaluation of ROR1 targeting in breast cancer patients with zilovertamab is warranted.

Trial registration

NCT02776917. Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov on 05/17/2016.