High Glutaminase (GLS1) expression may have prognostic implications in colorectal and breast cancers; however, high quality data for expression in prostate cancer (PCa) are lacking. The purpose of this study is to investigate the status of GLS1 expression in PCa and correlated expression levels with clinicopathologic parameters. This study was conducted in two phases: an exploratory cohort analyzing RNA-Seq data for GLS1 from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data portal (246 PCa samples) and a GLS1 immunohistochemical protein expression cohort utilizing a tissue microarray (TMA) (154 PCa samples; 41 benign samples) for correlation with clinicopathologic parameters. In the TCGA cohort, GLS1 mRNA expression did not show a statistically significant difference in disease-free survival (DFS) but did show a small significant difference in overall survival (OS). In the TMA cohort, there was no correlation between GLS1 expression and stage, Gleason score, DFS and OS. GLS1 expression did not significantly correlate with the clinical outcomes measured; however, GLS1 expression was higher in PCa cells compared to benign epithelium. Future studies are warranted to evaluate expression levels in greater numbers of high-grade and advanced PCa samples to investigate whether there is a rational basis for GLS1 targeted therapy in a subset of patients with prostate cancer.

Background: Phase I clinical trials aim to find the highest dose of a novel drug that may be administrated safely without having serious adverse effects. Model-based designs have recently become popular in dose-finding procedures. Our objective is to provide an overview of phase I clinical trials in oncology. Methods: A retrospective analysis of phase I clinical trials in oncology was performed by using the PubMed database between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2022. We extracted all papers with the inclusion of trials in oncology and kept only those in which dose escalation or/ and dose expansion were conducted. We also compared the study parameters, design parameters, and patient parameters between industry-sponsored studies and academia-sponsored research. Result: Among the 1450 papers retrieved, 256 trials described phase I clinical trials in oncology. Overall, 71.1% of trials were done with a single study cohort, 56.64% of trials collected a group of at least 20 study volunteers, 55.1% were sponsored by industry, and 99.2% of trials had less than 10 patients who experienced DLTs. The traditional 3 + 3 (73.85%) was still the most prevailing method for the dose-escalation approach. More than 50% of the trials did not reach MTDs. Industry-sponsored study enrolled more patients in dose-escalation trials with benefits of continental cooperation. Compared to previous findings, the usage of model-based design increased to about 10%, and the percentage of traditional 3 + 3 design decreased to 74%. Conclusions: Phase I traditional 3 + 3 designs perform well, but there is still room for development in novel model-based dose-escalation designs in clinical practice.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of implementing a Nurse Navigator (NN) to improve the rate and timeliness of molecular tumor testing. Methods: This is an evaluation of the impact of education sessions, consensus building, and NN implementation for molecular tumor testing in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. The NNs’ responsibilities included attending tumor boards and ensuring Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) is ordered, reviewed, and coordinated for appropriate patients. Results: NNs significantly improved NGS testing rates from 35.29% to 77.27%, p = 0.002. Ordering a targeted panel test (TPT) was the most common reason for not ordering NGS in the pre-NN cohort (13/22, 59%). The total turnaround time for testing was reduced after the introduction of NNs from 145.2 days to 42.8 days, p < 0.0001. The post-NN group had a significantly higher rate of actionable mutations identified for the recurrent setting [67.6% versus 20.8% (p = 0.0005)] and a trend towards a higher rate of actionable mutations identified in the frontline setting [41.2% versus 33.3% (p = 0.41)]. Conclusion: NNs significantly improved somatic tumor testing rates and timeliness for patients with ovarian cancer. Discontinuing TPT in favor of NGS revealed a higher rate of actionable tumor mutations that would have been missed with TPT alone.

Purpose: Cannabinoids (CBD) have anti-tumor activity against prostate cancer (PCa). Preclinical studies have demonstrated a significant decrease in prostate specific antigen (PSA) protein expression and reduced tumor growth in xenografts of LNCaP and DU-145 cells in athymic mice when treated with CBD. Over-the-counter CBD products may vary in activity without clear standardization, and Epidiolex is a standardized FDA-approved oral CBD solution for treatment of certain types of seizures. We aimed to assess the safety and preliminary anti-tumor activity of Epidiolex in patients with biochemically recurrent (BCR) PCa. Experimental design: This was an open-label, single center, phase I dose escalation study followed by a dose expansion in BCR patients after primary definitive local therapy (prostatectomy +/− salvage radiotherapy or primary definitive radiotherapy). Eligible patients were screened for urine tetrahydrocannabinol prior to enrollment. The starting dose level of Epidiolex was 600 mg by mouth once daily and escalated to 800 mg daily with the use of a Bayesian optimal interval design. All patients were treated for 90 days followed by a 10-day taper. The primary endpoints were safety and tolerability. Changes in PSA, testosterone levels, and patient-reported health-related quality of life were studied as secondary endpoints. Results: Seven patients were enrolled into the dose escalation cohort. There were no dose-limiting toxicities at the first two dose levels (600 mg and 800 mg). An additional 14 patients were enrolled at the 800 mg dose level into the dose expansion cohort. The most common adverse events were 55% diarrhea (grade 1–2), 25% nausea (grade 1–2), and 20% fatigue (grade 1–2). The mean PSA at baseline was 2.9 ng/mL. At the 12-week landmark time-point, 16 out of 18 (88%) had stable biochemical disease, one (5%) had partial biochemical response with the greatest measurable decline being 41%, and one (5%) had PSA progression. No statistically significant changes were observed in patient-reported outcomes (PROs), but PROs changed in the direction of supporting the tolerability of Epidiolex (e.g., emotional functioning improved). Conclusion: Epidiolex at a dose of 800 mg daily appears to be safe and tolerable in patients with BCR prostate cancer supporting a safe dose for future studies.

PURPOSE: Tumor next-generation sequencing (NGS) testing identifies possible germline pathogenic variants (PGPVs), creating a dilemma for appropriate recognition, triage, and management. The objective of this study was to determine the clinical utility of an institutional molecular tumor board (MTB) in assessing tumor NGS reports for PGPVs. METHODS: Our institutional MTB reviews all NGS reports to provide treatment and further testing recommendations, including genetic counseling referral and consideration of genetic testing (GC/GT). We studied the patients reviewed by the MTB who were recommended for GC/GT to determine the frequency of referral to a GC, germline test completion, rate of pathogenic germline variants (PGVs), factors related to PGVs, and germline conversion rate (GCR). RESULTS: Of the 2,355 patients reviewed by the MTB during the study period, 609 (25.9%) had a recommendation for GC/GT. Of the 609 with a GC/GT recommendation, only 181 (29.7%) were referred for GC/GT by their treating physicians, and only 107 (17.6%) completed GT. Of the 107 patients completing GT, 29 (26%) had a confirmed PGV. The only factors significantly associated with PGVs were testing due to a PGPV and higher mean variant allele fraction on the tumor NGS. Only 40 patients with a GC/GT recommendation (14.3%) due to a PGPV completed GT; however, the GCR was 42.5% (n = 17/40). CONCLUSION: The MTB review of PGPV is clinically valuable, identifying PGPV in 12% of patients undergoing tumor NGS and a GCR of 42.5%. Rates of GC/GT completion were relatively low due to under-referral by treating physicians. Given the high GCR, the authors encourage institutional algorithms to help increase GC/GT rates for patients found to have PGPV following tumor NGS testing.

Purpose: Cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) was considered a well-established treatment modality for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the interferon era. However, its role after the introduction of multiple targeted therapies is less well established. Herein, We evaluated the effect of CN on overall survival (OS) on pa-tients with RCC who were identified through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (SEER). Materials and Methods: A total of 5,483 patients with metastatic RCC were identified from 2010 to 2016 using the SEER database. Factors pertaining to the following variables were collected: presence or absence of CN; age; gender; grade; status of metastasis to bone, liver, lung and brain; tumor stage; nodal status; histological subtypes; and chemotherapy status. Subjects who had CN were matched with those who did not in all previously mentioned covariates using inverse probability weighting. These weights were then used in adjusted Cox regression models to report doubly robust estimates. Results: CN was associated with 67% reduction in the hazards of death. Advanced T-stage, N1 disease, advanced tumor grade, non-clear histology and metastasis to bone, liver, lung or brain are independent risk factors for death. Patients with T4 disease benefited less of CN compared to those with T1 disease, while higher number of metastat -ic sites didn???t predict worse outcome among those who had CN. Conclusion: CN could provide a survival advantage in favorable risk patients with RCC in the era of targeted therapy.