No abstract

Tumors evade the immune system though a myriad of mechanisms. Using checkpoint inhibitors to help reprime T cells to recognize tumor has had great success in malignancies including melanoma, lung, and renal cell carcinoma. Many tumors including prostate cancer are resistant to such treatment. However, Sipuleucel-T, a dendritic cell (DC) based immunotherapy, improved overall survival (OS) in prostate cancer. Despite this initial success, further DC vaccines have failed to progress and there has been limited uptake of Sipuleucel-T in the clinic. We know in prostate cancer (PCa) that both the adaptive and the innate arms of the immune system contribute to the immunosuppressive environment. This is at least in part due to dysfunction of DC that play a crucial role in the initiation of an immune response. We also know that there is a paucity of DC in PCa, and that those there are immature, creating a tolerogenic environment. These attributes make PCa a good candidate for a DC based immunotherapy. Ultimately, the knowledge gained by much research into antigen processing and presentation needs to translate from bench to bedside. In this review we will analyze why newer vaccine strategies using monocyte derived DC (MoDC) have failed to deliver clinical benefit, particularly in PCa, and highlight the emerging antigen loading and presentation technologies such as nanoparticles, antibody-antigen conjugates and virus co-delivery systems that can be used to improve efficacy. Lastly, we will assess combination strategies that can help overcome the immunosuppressive microenvironment of PCa.

This study demonstrates that p-mTOR signaling has a potential role in both the initiation and progression of PCa. These data provide support for further research into the possible use of rapamycin analogues in the treatment of PCa, and raise the possibility that mTOR might be a potential target for chemoprevention.

Study Type – Prognosis (case series)
Level of Evidence 4 OBJECTIVE To investigate the effect of prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) testing on stage migration in an Australian population, and its consequences on the prognostic accuracy of the post‐radical prostatectomy (RP) Kattan nomogram, as in North America widespread PSA testing has resulted in prostate cancer stage migration, questioning the utility of prognostic nomograms in this setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS The study comprised 1008 men who had consecutive RP for localized prostate cancer between 1991 and 2001 at one institution. Two groups were assessed, i.e. those treated in 1991–96 (group 1, the early PSA era), and 1997–2001 (group 2, the contemporary PSA era). Differences in clinicopathological features between the groups were analysed by chi‐squared testing and survival modelling. Individual patient data were entered into the post‐RP Kattan nomogram and the efficacy assessed by receiver‐ operating characteristic curve analysis. RESULTS Patients in group 2 had lower pathological stage disease (P = 0.01) and fewer cancers with Gleason score ≥8 (P < 0.001) than group 1. Multivariate analysis identified preoperative serum PSA level (P < 0.01) and Gleason score (P < 0.01) as strong predictors of biochemical relapse in both groups. In group 2 pathological stage was not significant, but margin involvement became highly significant (P = 0.004). There was no difference in the predictive accuracy of the Kattan nomogram between the groups (P = 0.253). CONCLUSIONS These findings show a downward stage migration towards organ‐confined disease after the introduction of widespread PSA testing in an Australian cohort. Despite this, the Kattan nomogram remains a robust prognostic tool in clinical practice.

Introduction The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in a widespread adoption of telehealth (phone and video consultations) in cancer care worldwide. The aim of this study was to determine patient satisfaction with telehealth consultations with their medical oncologist at a tertiary cancer centre in Sydney, Australia. Methods Patients who attended a routine telehealth appointment at the medical oncology outpatient clinic were recruited to complete a questionnaire containing 16 items, each on a 5-point Likert scale regarding satisfaction levels in various aspects of telehealth and their willingness to continue telehealth after the pandemic. Patients were also invited to provide suggestions for improvement. Results In total, 150 patients were invited to participate, and 103 valid questionnaires were returned. Median age was 63 years (range: 25–90), 49% of patients were male, 63% of patients had advanced cancer and 81% were on active treatment. In total, 95% of participants indicated that they were satisfied (score ≥4) with telehealth. 82% of participants preferred to continue telehealth consultations after the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, but ideally with a mix of telehealth and in-person consultations. Phone appointments (vs. video, p < 0.002), patients with advanced cancer (vs. early, p < 0.036) and pre-chemotherapy/immunotherapy/targeted therapy treatment reviews (vs. follow-up appointments, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with a willingness to continue telehealth. Discussion Patients were overwhelmingly satisfied with telehealth during the study period and were willing to continue telehealth for some appointments beyond the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. More research into the effectiveness, safety and implementation of telehealth to compliment traditional face-to-face services for patient-centred cancer care is required.

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) significantly reduces the rate of relapse in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) but comes at the cost of significant treatment-related mortality. Despite the reduction in relapse overall, it remains common, especially in high-risk groups. The outcomes for patients who relapse after transplant remains very poor. A large proportion of the morbidity that prevents most patients from accessing allo-HSCT is due to toxic nonspecific conditioning agents that are required to remove recipient hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs), allowing for successful donor engraftment. CD300f is expressed evenly across HSPC subtypes. CD300f has transcription and protein expression equivalent to CD33 on AML. We have developed an anti-CD300f antibody that efficiently internalizes into target cells. We have generated a highly potent anti-CD300f antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) with a pyrrolobenzodiazepine warhead that selectively depletes AML cell lines and colony forming units in vitro. The ADC synergizes with fludarabine, making it a natural combination to use in a minimal toxicity conditioning regimen. Our ADC prolongs the survival of mice engrafted with human cell lines and depletes primary human AML engrafted with a single injection. In a humanized mouse model, a single injection of the ADC depletes CD34+ HSPCs and CD34+CD38−CD90+ hematopoietic stem cells. This work establishes an anti-CD300f ADC as an attractive potential therapeutic that, if validated in transplant models using a larger cohort of primary AML samples, will reduce relapse rate and toxicity for patients with AML undergoing allo-HSCT.

No abstract

Appendiceal cancer is rare and encompasses a diverse group of tumours ranging from low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasms to high-grade adenocarcinomas. Appendiceal cancers often spread to the peritoneal cavity causing extensive mucinous dissemination and peritoneal metastases. Prognosis varies with histological subtype. Cytoreductive surgery and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy is well-established as the most effective treatment achieving long-term survival in some patients. Chemotherapy regimens used to treat appendiceal cancer are extrapolated from the colorectal cancer setting, but disease biology differs and outcomes are inferior. The role of chemotherapy in the treatment of appendiceal cancer remains poorly defined. There is an urgent need to develop novel tailored treatment strategies in the perioperative and unresectable setting. This review aims to evaluate the literature for patients who received intraperitoneal and systemic chemotherapy for appendiceal cancers.