The purpose of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) pilot project to prioritize cancer antigens was to develop a well-vetted ranked prioritized list of cancer vaccine target antigens based on pre-defined and pre-weighted objective criteria. An additional aim was for the NCI to test a new approach for prioritizing translational research opportunities based on an Analytic Hierarchy Process for dealing with complex decisions. Antigen prioritization involved developing a list of “ideal” cancer antigen criteria/characteristics, assigning relative weights to those criteria using pair-wise comparisons, selecting 75 representative antigens for comparison and ranking, assembling information on the pre-defined criteria for the selected antigens, and ranking the antigens based on the pre-defined, pre-weighted criteria. Using the pair-wise approach, the result of criteria weighting, in descending order was: (1) Therapeutic function, (2) Immunogenicity, (3) Role of the antigen in oncogenicity, (4) Specificity, (5) Expression level and percent of antigen positive cells, (6) Stem cell expression, (7) Number of patients with antigen positive cancers, (8) Number of antigenic epitopes and (9) Cellular location of antigen expression. None of the 75 antigens had all of the characteristics of the “ideal” cancer antigen. However, 46 were immunogenic in clinical trials and 20 of them had suggestive clinical efficacy in the “Therapeutic function” category. These findings reflect the current status of the cancer vaccine field, highlight the possibility that additional organized efforts and funding would accelerate the development of therapeutically effective cancer vaccines, and accentuate the need for prioritization.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounting for over 85% of all cases. Until recently, chemotherapy – characterized by some benefit but only rare durable responses – was the only treatment option for patients with NSCLC whose tumors lacked targetable mutations. By contrast, immune checkpoint inhibitors have demonstrated distinctly durable responses and represent the advent of a new treatment approach for patients with NSCLC. Three immune checkpoint inhibitors, pembrolizumab, nivolumab and atezolizumab, are now approved for use in first- and/or second-line settings for selected patients with advanced NSCLC, with promising benefit also seen in patients with stage III NSCLC. Additionally, durvalumab following chemoradiation has been approved for use in patients with locally advanced disease. Due to the distinct features of cancer immunotherapy, and rapid progress in the field, clinical guidance is needed on the use of these agents, including appropriate patient selection, sequencing of therapies, response monitoring, adverse event management, and biomarker testing. The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened an expert Task Force charged with developing consensus recommendations on these key issues. Following a systematic process as outlined by the National Academy of Medicine, a literature search and panel voting were used to rate the strength of evidence for each recommendation. This consensus statement provides evidence-based recommendations to help clinicians integrate immune checkpoint inhibitors into the treatment plan for patients with NSCLC. This guidance will be updated following relevant advances in the field.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s40425-018-0382-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

As many biosimilars come to market in the next several years, their use in oncology will play an important role in the future care of patients with cancer. ASCO is committed to providing education and guidance to the oncology community on the use of biosimilars in the cancer setting; therefore, ASCO has developed this statement to offer guidance in the following areas: (1) naming, labeling, and other regulatory considerations, (2) safety and efficacy of biosimilars, (3) interchangeability, switching, and substitution, (4) value of biosimilars, and (5) prescriber and patient education.

The rapid development of immuno-oncology (I-O) therapies for multiple types of cancer has transformed the cancer treatment landscape and brightened the long-term outlook for many patients with advanced cancer. Responding to ongoing efforts to generate value assessments for novel therapies, multiple stakeholders have been considering the question of “What makes I-O transformative?” Evaluating the distinct features and attributes of these therapies, and better characterizing how patients experience them, will inform such assessments. This paper defines ways in which treatment with I-O is different from other therapies. It also proposes key aspects and attributes of I-O therapies that should be considered in any assessment of their value and seeks to address evidence gaps in existing value frameworks given the unique properties of patient outcomes with I-O therapy. The paper concludes with a “data needs catalogue” (DNC) predicated on the belief that multiple key, unique elements that are necessary to fully characterize the value of I-O therapies are not routinely or robustly measured in current clinical practice or reimbursement databases and are infrequently captured in existing research studies. A better characterization of the benefit of I-O treatment will allow a more thorough assessment of its benefits and provide a template for the design and prioritization of future clinical trials and a roadmap for healthcare insurers to optimize coverage for patients with cancers eligible for I-O therapy.

Objective To investigate the relationship between abdominal ultrasound (US) findings and demographic, historical and clinical features in children with CF. Study design Children age 3-12 years with CF without known cirrhosis, were enrolled in a prospective, multi-center study of US to predict hepatic fibrosis. Consensus US patterns were assigned by 3 radiologists as normal, heterogeneous, homogeneous, or cirrhosis. Data were derived from direct collection and U.S. or Toronto CF registries. Chi-square or ANOVA were used to compare variables among US groups and between normal and abnormal. Logistic regression was used to study risk factors for having abnormal US. Results Findings in 719 subjects were normal (n=590, 82.1%), heterogeneous (64, 8.9%), homogeneous (41, 5.7%), and cirrhosis (24, 3.3%). Cirrhosis (p=0.0004), homogeneous (p<0.0001) and heterogeneous (p=0.03) were older than normal. More males were heterogeneous (p=0.001). More heterogeneous (15.0%, p=0.009) and cirrhosis (25.0%, p=0.005) had CF-related diabetes or impaired glucose tolerance versus normal (5.4%). Early infection with Pseudomonas aeruginosa (<2 years old) was associated with a lower risk (OR 0.42, p=0.0007) of abnormal. Ursodeoxycholic acid use (OR 3.69, p <0.0001) and CF-related diabetes (OR 2.21, p=0.019) were associated with increased risk of abnormal. Conclusions Unsuspected cirrhosis is seen in 3.3% of young patients with CF, heterogeneous in 8.9%. abnormal US is associated with CF-related diabetes, and early P aeruginosa is associated with normal US. Prospective assessment of these risk factors may identify potential interventional targets.

This study was funded by Daiichi Sankyo Inc.

Immunotherapy has transformed lung cancer care in recent years. In addition to providing durable responses and prolonged survival outcomes for a subset of patients with heavily pretreated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs)— either as monotherapy or in combination with other ICIs or chemotherapy—have demonstrated benefits in first-line therapy for advanced disease, the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings, as well as in additional thoracic malignancies such as small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) and mesothelioma. Challenging questions remain, however, on topics including therapy selection, appropriate biomarker-based identification of patients who may derive benefit, the use of immunotherapy in special populations such as people with autoimmune disorders, and toxicity management. Patient and caregiver education and support for quality of life (QOL) is also important to attain maximal benefit with immunotherapy. To provide guidance to the oncology community on these and other important concerns, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a multidisciplinary panel of experts to develop a clinical practice guideline (CPG). This CPG represents an update to SITC’s 2018 publication on immunotherapy for the treatment of NSCLC, and is expanded to include recommendations on SCLC and mesothelioma. The Expert Panel drew on the published literature as well as their clinical experience to develop recommendations for healthcare professionals on these important aspects of immunotherapeutic treatment for lung cancer and mesothelioma, including diagnostic testing, treatment planning, immune-related adverse events, and patient QOL considerations. The evidence- and consensus-based recommendations in this CPG are intended to give guidance to cancer care providers using immunotherapy to treat patients with lung cancer or mesothelioma.

Patient advocates expressed their views that lung cancer is a neglected disease that is not highly prioritized in healthcare systems, treatment approaches and public perceptions. This project represents an integral step in developing an ongoing partnership between researchers and these advocates.