Pulmonary carcinoids (PCs) display the common features of all well-differentiated neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) and are classified as low- and intermediate-grade malignant tumours (i.e., typical and ...atypical carcinoid, respectively). There is a paucity of randomised studies dedicated to advanced PCs and management principles are drawn from the larger gastroenteropancreatic NEN experience. There is growing evidence that NEN anatomic subgroups have different biology and different responses to treatment and, therefore, should be investigated as separate entities in clinical trials. In this review, we discuss the existing evidence and limitations of tumour classification, diagnostics and staging, prognostication, and treatment in the setting of PC, with focus on unmet medical needs and directions for the future.
The subject of colorectal neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs), subdivided into well-differentiated NENs, termed neuroendocrine tumours (NETs; grade (G) 1 and 2), and poorly differentiated NENs, termed ...neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs; G3) according to the 2010 World Health Organisation (WHO) classification, has arguably not had as much attention or study as NENs occurring in other sites. Colorectal NETs and NECs are however easier to study than many others since they are usually not difficult to remove and are increasingly detected because of intensified colorectal cancer screening and surveillance programmes. Colorectal NETs and NECs show site-specific heterogeneity with variable behaviour and different therapeutic options; these various aspects provide unique challenges. Because of bowel cancer screening programmes, colorectal NENs, like conventional adenocarcinomas, may be diagnosed at a stage that is associated with improved survival. In this article we intend to describe and define areas of unmet needs relating to the epidemiology, classification, pathology, diagnosis and therapy of colorectal NETs (including NETs G3), colorectal NECs, and finally, mixed adeno-neuroendocrine carcinomas (MANECs) by reviewing and discussing the relevant literature.
In the article (BMJ 2017;359, doi: 10.1136/bmj.j5058 ), instances of "rivaroxaban 20 mg twice daily" should read as "rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily" and "edoxaban 60 mg twice daily" as "edoxaban 60 mg ...once."
Unmet medical needs are not infrequent in oncology, and these needs are usually of higher magnitude in rare cancers. The field of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) has evolved rapidly during the last ...decade, and, currently, a new WHO classification is being implemented and several treatment options are available in the metastatic setting after the results of prospective phase III clinical trials. However, several questions are still unanswered, and decisions in our daily clinical practice should be made with limited evidence. In the 2016 meeting of the advisory board of the European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS), the main unmet medical needs in the metastatic NENs setting were deeply discussed, and several proposals to try to solve them are presented in this article, including biomarkers, imaging, and therapy.
The aim of this study was to evaluate a parenting programme designed for foster carers from an independent fostering agency. The programme (Park's Parenting Approach) adapted existing parenting ...programmes to be more specific to the needs of looked-after children. Sixty-one carers consented to take part in the evaluation of the training, and 55 (90%) completed the programme. The training was delivered over 9 weeks, once a week for 2 h, and pre- and post-course evaluations were carried out at the first and last sessions of the course. The evaluation included carers' ratings of their fosterchild's most challenging problems, parenting style, carer efficacy and a survey of carer satisfaction with training. Results showed a decrease in foster children's problem behaviours and an increase in carer confidence. Carers expressed a high level of satisfaction with the programme, and 100% felt that they would be able to retain the information and skills they had acquired on the course. The implications of providing training within an independent foster care context are discussed.
Abstract
Background
Brain metastases derived from non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) represent a significant clinical problem. We aim to characterize the genomic landscape of brain metastases derived ...from NSCLC and assess clinical actionability.
Methods
We searched Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and BIOSIS from inception to 18/19 May 2022. We extracted information on patient demographics, smoking status, genomic data, matched primary NSCLC, and programmed cell death ligand 1 expression.
Results
We found 72 included papers and data on 2346 patients. The most frequently mutated genes from our data were EGFR (n = 559), TP53 (n = 331), KRAS (n = 328), CDKN2A (n = 97), and STK11 (n = 72). Common missense mutations included EGFR L858R (n = 80) and KRAS G12C (n = 17). Brain metastases of ever versus never smokers had differing missense mutations in TP53 and EGFR, except for L858R and T790M in EGFR, which were seen in both subgroups. Of the top 10 frequently mutated genes that had primary NSCLC data, we found 37% of the specific mutations assessed to be discordant between the primary NSCLC and brain metastases.
Conclusions
To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review to describe the genomic landscape of brain metastases derived from NSCLC. These results provide a comprehensive outline of frequently mutated genes and missense mutations that could be clinically actionable. These data also provide evidence of differing genomic landscapes between ever versus never smokers and primary NSCLC compared to the BM. This information could have important consequences for the selection and development of targeted drugs for these patients.
Interventional trials that evaluate treatment effects using surrogate endpoints have become increasingly common. This paper describes four linked empirical studies and the development of a framework ...for defining, interpreting and reporting surrogate endpoints in trials.
As part of developing the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) and SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) extensions for randomised trials reporting surrogate endpoints, we undertook a scoping review, e-Delphi study, consensus meeting, and a web survey to examine current definitions and stakeholder (including clinicians, trial investigators, patients and public partners, journal editors, and health technology experts) interpretations of surrogate endpoints as primary outcome measures in trials.
Current surrogate endpoint definitional frameworks are inconsistent and unclear. Surrogate endpoints are used in trials as a substitute of the treatment effects of an intervention on the target outcome(s) of ultimate interest, events measuring how patients feel, function, or survive. Traditionally the consideration of surrogate endpoints in trials has focused on biomarkers (e.g., HDL cholesterol, blood pressure, tumour response), especially in the medical product regulatory setting. Nevertheless, the concept of surrogacy in trials is potentially broader. Intermediate outcomes that include a measure of function or symptoms (e.g., angina frequency, exercise tolerance) can also be used as substitute for target outcomes (e.g., all-cause mortality)—thereby acting as surrogate endpoints. However, we found a lack of consensus among stakeholders on accepting and interpreting intermediate outcomes in trials as surrogate endpoints or target outcomes. In our assessment, patients and health technology assessment experts appeared more likely to consider intermediate outcomes to be surrogate endpoints than clinicians and regulators.
There is an urgent need for better understanding and reporting on the use of surrogate endpoints, especially in the setting of interventional trials. We provide a framework for the definition of surrogate endpoints (biomarkers and intermediate outcomes) and target outcomes in trials to improve future reporting and aid stakeholders' interpretation and use of trial surrogate endpoint evidence.
SPIRIT-SURROGATE/CONSORT-SURROGATE project is Medical Research Council Better Research Better Health (MR/V038400/1) funded.
Background: Interventional trials that evaluate treatment effects using surrogate endpoints have become increasingly common. This paper describes four linked empirical studies and the development of ...a framework for defining, interpreting and reporting surrogate endpoints in trials. Methods: As part of developing the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) and SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) extensions for randomised trials reporting surrogate endpoints, we undertook a scoping review, e-Delphi study, consensus meeting, and a web survey to examine current definitions and stakeholder (including clinicians, trial investigators, patients and public partners, journal editors, and health technology experts) interpretations of surrogate endpoints as primary outcome measures in trials. Findings: Current surrogate endpoint definitional frameworks are inconsistent and unclear. Surrogate endpoints are used in trials as a substitute of the treatment effects of an intervention on the target outcome(s) of ultimate interest, events measuring how patients feel, function, or survive. Traditionally the consideration of surrogate endpoints in trials has focused on biomarkers (e.g., HDL cholesterol, blood pressure, tumour response), especially in the medical product regulatory setting. Nevertheless, the concept of surrogacy in trials is potentially broader. Intermediate outcomes that include a measure of function or symptoms (e.g., angina frequency, exercise tolerance) can also be used as substitute for target outcomes (e.g., all-cause mortality)—thereby acting as surrogate endpoints. However, we found a lack of consensus among stakeholders on accepting and interpreting intermediate outcomes in trials as surrogate endpoints or target outcomes. In our assessment, patients and health technology assessment experts appeared more likely to consider intermediate outcomes to be surrogate endpoints than clinicians and regulators. Interpretation: There is an urgent need for better understanding and reporting on the use of surrogate endpoints, especially in the setting of interventional trials. We provide a framework for the definition of surrogate endpoints (biomarkers and intermediate outcomes) and target outcomes in trials to improve future reporting and aid stakeholders' interpretation and use of trial surrogate endpoint evidence. Funding: SPIRIT-SURROGATE/CONSORT-SURROGATE project is Medical Research Council Better Research Better Health (MR/V038400/1) funded.
IntroductionThe post-2005 rise in clinical trials and clinical research conducted in India was accompanied by frequent reports of unethical practices, leading to a series of regulatory changes. We ...conducted a systematic scoping review to obtain an overview of empirical research pertaining to the ethics of clinical trials/research in India.MethodsOur search strategy combined terms related to ethics/bioethics, informed consent, clinical trials/research and India, across nine databases, up to November 2019. Peer-reviewed research exploring ethical aspects of clinical trials/research in India with any stakeholder groups was included. We developed an evidence map, undertook a narrative synthesis and identified research gaps. A consultation exercise with stakeholders in India helped contextualise the review and identify additional research priorities.ResultsTitles/Abstracts of 9699 articles were screened, full text of 282 obtained and 80 were included. Research on the ethics of clinical trials/research covered a wide range of topics, often conducted with little to no funding. Studies predominantly examined what lay (patients/public) and professional participants (eg, healthcare staff/students/faculty) know about topics such as research ethics or understand from the information given to obtain their consent for research participation. Easily accessible groups, namely ethics committee members and healthcare students were frequently researched. Research gaps included developing a better understanding of the recruitment-informed consent process, including the doctor-patient interaction, in multiple contexts and exploring issues of equity and justice in clinical trials/research.ConclusionThe review demonstrates that while a wide range of topics have been studied in India, the focus is largely on assessing knowledge levels across different population groups. This is a useful starting point, but fundamental questions remain unanswered about informed consent processes and broader issues of inequity that pervade the clinical trials/research landscape. A priority-setting exercise and appropriate funding mechanisms to support researchers in India would help improve the clinical trials/research ecosystem.
PDF
