QUESTION ASKED: To what extent, and for what purpose, do oncology physicians and physicians-in-training use Web-based social media? SUMMARY ANSWER: Despite the ability of social media to enhance collaboration and knowledge dissemination among health care providers, this cohort survey study identified an overall low use of social media among oncologists, and significant generational gaps and differences in patterns of use. METHODS: A nine-item survey was designed using a survey-generating Web site (SurveyMonkey) and was distributed securely via weekly e-mail messages to 680 oncology physicians and physicians-in-training from July 2013 through September 2013. All responses were received anonymously. Results were analyzed and are reported using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of 680 surveys sent, 207 were completed, for a response rate of 30.4%. Social media were used by 72% of our survey respondents (95% CI, 66% to 78%; Table 1 ). Results were cross tabulated by age, which revealed a significant difference in social media use by age group, with 89% of trainees, 93% of fellows, and 72% of early-career oncologists reporting social media use, compared with only 39% of mid-career oncologists (P < .05). Respondents reported using each social media platform for either personal or professional purposes, but rarely both. When respondents were questioned regarding barriers to social media use and their hesitations around joining a medically related social media site, the majority (59%) answered, “I don't have enough time.” [Table: see text] BIAS, CONFOUNDING FACTOR(S), DRAWBACKS: This study was conducted online, via e-mail. Therefore, respondents may represent a subpopulation of individuals who already prefer using Web-based technologies and may be more inclined to use social media, compared with individuals who do not use e-mail and were, by default, excluded from the study. We assumed, in designing this study, that the proportion of practicing oncology physicians who do not use e-mail is low. Although our sample size is small, it does represent one third of all registered medical oncologists in Canada. Finally, the high percentage of medical oncologist respondents and the concomitantly low fraction of respondents from other specialties may mean these results are more telling of social media habits in the aforementioned demographic rather than other oncology specialties. REAL-LIFE IMPLICATIONS: Our study revealed that oncology physicians and physicians-in-training who participate in Web-based social networking are largely within the younger age cohorts, whereas mid-career oncologists (age 45 to 54 years) are largely absent from the social media scene. Gaps in social networking use between younger physicians and trainees and older generations of physicians may result in critical gaps in communication, collaboration, and mentorship between these demographics. It is hoped that with further research into understanding patterns of use and limitations, medical professionals and trainees may increase their use of social media for networking, education, mentorship, and improved patient care.

The tyrosine receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitors larotrectinib and entrectinib were recently approved in Canada for the treatment of solid tumours harbouring neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusions. These NTRK gene fusions are oncogenic drivers found in most tumour types at a low frequency (80%) in a small number of rare tumours (e.g., secretory carcinoma of the salivary gland and of the breast). They are generally mutually exclusive of other common oncogenic drivers. Larotrectinib and entrectinib have demonstrated impressive overall response rates and tolerability in Phase I/II trials in patients with TRK fusion cancer with no other effective treatment options. Given the low frequency of TRK fusion cancer and the heterogeneous molecular testing landscape in Canada, identifying and optimally managing such patients represents a new challenge. We provide a Canadian consensus on when and how to test for NTRK gene fusions and when to consider treatment with a TRK inhibitor. We focus on five tumour types: thyroid carcinoma, colorectal carcinoma, non-small cell lung carcinoma, soft tissue sarcoma, and salivary gland carcinoma. Based on the probability of the tumour harbouring an NTRK gene fusion, we also suggest a tumour-agnostic consensus for NTRK gene fusion testing and treatment. We recommend considering a TRK inhibitor in all patients with TRK fusion cancer with no other effective treatment options.

Background: Soft-tissue sarcoma (sts) represents a rare group of mesenchymal neoplasms comprising more than 50 heterogeneous subtypes. Great efforts have been made to increase the understanding of the treatment of advanced sts (unresectable or metastatic disease). We set out to determine whether outcomes for patients with advanced sts have improved over time and to assess the current evidence for systemic therapy. Methods: In a scoping review, we evaluated the contemporary evidence for systemic treatment of advanced sts in adults (>18 years of age). Phase i, ii, and iii studies of systemic therapy for advanced sts published in the English language were included. After abstract and full-text review of seventy-seven studies, sixty-two trials met the inclusion criteria. Results: The number of clinical trials conducted and published in advanced sts has increased over the last 30 years. Although median overall survival has increased, attempts at improving first-line therapy through dose intensification, doublet chemotherapy, or alternative backbones have not been successful. The optimal therapy beyond anthracyclines remains a challenge, especially given the heterogeneity that grouping multiple sts subtypes within clinical trials creates. However, increasing numbers of agents are being studied, and several studies had shown isolated benefit in progression-free or overall survival. Summary: First-line systemic therapy with an anthracycline remains the standard of care for advanced sts. However, choice of subsequent therapy beyond anthracyclines remains challenging. Novel systemic therapies, use of molecular diagnostics to direct therapy, subtype-specific trials, and learnings from real-world retrospective data are all important for improving outcomes in patients with advanced sts.

Background: Evidence to date supports continued human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) suppression beyond progression on HER2-directed therapy for advanced HER2-positive breast cancer. Data from several phase II and III trials evaluating HER2-directed therapy following second-line T-DM1 have recently become available. Methods: We performed a systematic search of the published and presented literature to identify phase II and phase III trials assessing novel HER2-targeted agents as third-line therapy or beyond for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer using search terms ‘breast cancer’ AND ‘HER2’ AND ‘advanced’ AND (‘phase II’ OR ‘phase III’). Results: Eight clinical trials reporting efficacy outcomes on third-line or greater HER2-directed therapy for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer were identified. In phase III trials, margetuximab and neratinib combinations demonstrated significant 1.3-month (hazard ratio, HR = 0.71, p < 0.001) and 0.1-month (HR = 0.76, p = 0.006) net improvements in median progression-free survival (PFS), respectively, with no significant improvements in overall survival (OS). Tucatinib added to trastuzumab and capecitabine demonstrated a significant 2.7-month improvement in median PFS (HR = 0.57, p < 0.00001) and a 5.5-month improvement in median OS (HR = 0.73, p = 0.004) in a randomized phase II trial, including significant clinical benefit for patients with brain metastases. Finally, trastuzumab-deruxtecan, zenocutuzumab, and poziotinib demonstrated benefit in phase II trials with the most robust overall response rate (62.0%) and median duration of response (18.2 months) observed for trastuzumab-deruxtecan among heavily pretreated patients. Conclusion: Tucatinib plus trastuzumab and capecitabine significantly prolongs OS, and promising preliminary response outcomes for trastuzumab-deruxtecan suggest that sequencing of these regimens following second-line therapy is reasonable.

The results of the Phase III DESTINY-Breast04 trial of trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) are leading to a shift in both the classification and treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer. In this trial, T-DXd was associated with a substantial survival benefit among patients with hormone receptor-positive and hormone receptor-negative disease and low expression of HER2, a biomarker previously considered unactionable in this treatment setting. Herein, we discuss the evolving therapeutic pathway for HER2-low disease, ongoing clinical trials, and the potential challenges and evidence gaps arising with treatment of this patient population.

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) represents an aggressive breast cancer subtype with historically poor overall outcomes, due primarily to a lack of effective targeted agents. Chemotherapy has been the primary treatment approach, although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are currently being investigated to improve patient outcomes. This review examines the clinical implications of current evidence on the use of ICIs for the treatment of metastatic TNBC. Our systematic search identified two phase III and five phase I/II trials reporting on the efficacy of ICIs used as monotherapy or combined with chemotherapy for the treatment of metastatic TNBC. The phase III IMpassion 130 trial showed a significant improvement in median progression-free survival in the intent-to-treat (net 1.7 months, p = 0.002) and PD-L1-positive populations (net 2.5 months, p < 0.001) for the addition of first-line atezolizumab versus placebo to nab-paclitaxel in metastatic TNBC. Although median overall survival was not significantly improved in patients receiving atezolizumab overall [net 2.3 months, hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72–1.02, p = 0.078], numerical improvements in the PD-L1-positive population were compelling (net 7.0 months, HR 0.71; 95% CI 0.54–0.93). Toxicity profiles were as expected, and no new safety signals were observed. Pembrolizumab monotherapy did not significantly improve overall survival in similar patients that had received prior treatment in KEYNOTE-119. Atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel represents a potential new first-line standard of care for patients with metastatic PD-L1-positive TNBC. Other ICIs used as monotherapy, or combined with chemotherapy for advanced TNBC, as well as their use for earlier stage disease, are areas of ongoing investigation.