Dr. Sumit Shah specializes in the management of advanced urologic malignancies such as prostate, kidney, bladder, and testicular cancers. He also serves as an investigator on numerous clinical trials, with a focus on novel immunotherapy agents. His academic interests also include digital health technologies and novel healthcare delivery services, both in the domestic and international setting. Dr. Shah graduated with distinction in biomedical engineering from Duke University, received his medical doctorate from Stanford University, and Masters in Public Health from Harvard University. He completed his internal medicine residency at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) where he stayed on faculty for one year before returning to Stanford for his fellowship training in medical oncology, where he now serves on the faculty.
- Prostate Cancer
- Kidney Cancer
- Bladder Cancer
- Testicular Cancer/Germ Cell Tumor
Honors & Awards
US Fulbright Scholar, South Korea (2005)
Fellowship: Stanford University Hematology and Oncology Fellowship (2017) CA
Medical Education: Stanford University School of Medicine (2010) CA
Board Certification: American Board of Internal Medicine, Oncology (2017)
Board Certification: American Board of Internal Medicine, Internal Medicine (2013)
Residency: UCSF Internal Medicine Residency (2013) CA
Fellowship, Stanford University Hospital, Oncology/Hematology (2017)
Residency, University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), Internal Medicine (2013)
MPH, Harvard School of Public Health (2010)
MD, Stanford School of Medicine (2010)
BSE, Duke University (2004)
Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Multiple Immunotherapy-Based Treatments and Combinations in Patients With Urothelial Carcinoma (MORPHEUS-UC)
A Phase Ib/II, open-label, multicenter, randomized, umbrella study in participants with MIBC and in participants with locally advanced or metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma (UC) who have progressed during or following a platinum-containing regimen. The study is designed with the flexibility to open new treatment arms as new treatments become available, close existing treatment arms that demonstrate minimal clinical activity or unacceptable toxicity, or modify the participant population (e.g., with regard to prior anti-cancer treatment or biomarker status). Participants in the mUC Cohort who experience loss of clinical benefit or unacceptable toxicity during Stage 1 may be eligible to continue treatment with a different treatment regimen for Stage 2.
Academic Advising Dean
David Altman, Ankit Baghel, Bryce Allen Bagley, Wills Baird, Elizabeth Beam, Preksha Bhagchandani, Christian Calderon, Tim Chai, Michelle Chang, Mira Cheng, Suyoung Choi, Samuel Cohen, Shayna Cooperman, Anthony Cort, Alexis Doyle, Areian Eghbali, Sofia Essayan-Perez, Allan Feng, Brandon Foster, Cesar Garcia, Bereket Gebregziabher, Jason Gomez, Cayo Gonzalez, Jonathan Goodman, Margaret Guo, Jessica Hampton, Marissa Huang, Zoe Hughes, Edoghogho Ighodaro, Shammah Ike, Kendra Jackson, Candice Kim, Chelsea Li, Michelle Lin, Daniel Liu, Long Sha Liu, Sofia Luna, Lucy Ma, Kajal Maran, Aviva Mattingly, Jack Michaud, Paras Minhas, Daniel Mokhtari, Haley Morin, Caroline Murtagh, Michael Nedelman, Sidney Owen, Ragini Phansalkar, Nathaniel Porter, Mollie Qian, Santiago Sanchez, Ben Schwartz, Aadit Shah, Jason Shen, Vinita Shivakumar, Benjie Smith, Jodi So, Elijah Sommer, Akshay Swaminathan, Jason Thomas, Austin Valido, Harsh Wadhwa, Allan Wang, Songnan Wang, Christine Xu, Christine Yeh, Willemijn van Deursen
- The Will to Go On. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 2022: JCO2201188
Clinical impact of COVID-19 on patients with cancer (CCC19): a cohort study.
Lancet (London, England)
Data on patients with COVID-19 who have cancer are lacking. Here we characterise the outcomes of a cohort of patients with cancer and COVID-19 and identify potential prognostic factors for mortality and severe illness.In this cohort study, we collected de-identified data on patients with active or previous malignancy, aged 18 years and older, with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection from the USA, Canada, and Spain from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) database for whom baseline data were added between March 17 and April 16, 2020. We collected data on baseline clinical conditions, medications, cancer diagnosis and treatment, and COVID-19 disease course. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality within 30 days of diagnosis of COVID-19. We assessed the association between the outcome and potential prognostic variables using logistic regression analyses, partially adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, and obesity. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04354701, and is ongoing.Of 1035 records entered into the CCC19 database during the study period, 928 patients met inclusion criteria for our analysis. Median age was 66 years (IQR 57-76), 279 (30%) were aged 75 years or older, and 468 (50%) patients were male. The most prevalent malignancies were breast (191 [21%]) and prostate (152 [16%]). 366 (39%) patients were on active anticancer treatment, and 396 (43%) had active (measurable) cancer. At analysis (May 7, 2020), 121 (13%) patients had died. In logistic regression analysis, independent factors associated with increased 30-day mortality, after partial adjustment, were: increased age (per 10 years; partially adjusted odds ratio 1·84, 95% CI 1·53-2·21), male sex (1·63, 1·07-2·48), smoking status (former smoker vs never smoked: 1·60, 1·03-2·47), number of comorbidities (two vs none: 4·50, 1·33-15·28), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or higher (status of 2 vs 0 or 1: 3·89, 2·11-7·18), active cancer (progressing vs remission: 5·20, 2·77-9·77), and receipt of azithromycin plus hydroxychloroquine (vs treatment with neither: 2·93, 1·79-4·79; confounding by indication cannot be excluded). Compared with residence in the US-Northeast, residence in Canada (0·24, 0·07-0·84) or the US-Midwest (0·50, 0·28-0·90) were associated with decreased 30-day all-cause mortality. Race and ethnicity, obesity status, cancer type, type of anticancer therapy, and recent surgery were not associated with mortality.Among patients with cancer and COVID-19, 30-day all-cause mortality was high and associated with general risk factors and risk factors unique to patients with cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to better understand the effect of COVID-19 on outcomes in patients with cancer, including the ability to continue specific cancer treatments.American Cancer Society, National Institutes of Health, and Hope Foundation for Cancer Research.
View details for DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31187-9
View details for PubMedID 32473681
First-in-Human, First-in-Class Phase I Trial of the Anti-CD47 Antibody Hu5F9-G4 in Patients With Advanced Cancers.
Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology
PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of Hu5F9-G4 (5F9), a humanized IgG4 antibody that targets CD47 to enable phagocytosis.PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients with solid tumors were treated in four cohorts: part A, to determine a priming dose; part B, to determine a weekly maintenance dose; part C, to study a loading dose in week 2; and a tumor biopsy cohort.RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were treated: 11 in part A, 14 in B, 22 in C, and 15 in the biopsy cohort. Part A used doses that ranged from 0.1 to 3 mg/kg. On the basis of tolerability and receptor occupancy studies that showed 100% CD47 saturation on RBCs, 1 mg/kg was selected as the priming dose. In subsequent groups, patients were treated with maintenance doses that ranged from 3 to 45 mg/kg, and most toxicities were mild to moderate. These included transient anemia (57% of patients), hemagglutination on peripheral blood smear (36%), fatigue (64%), headaches (50%), fever (45%), chills (45%), hyperbilirubinemia (34%), lymphopenia (34%), infusion-related reactions (34%), and arthralgias (18%). No maximum tolerated dose was reached with maintenance doses up to 45 mg/kg. At doses of 10 mg/kg or more, the CD47 antigen sink was saturated by 5F9, and a 5F9 half-life of approximately 13 days was observed. Strong antibody staining of tumor tissue was observed in a patient at 30 mg/kg. Two patients with ovarian/fallopian tube cancers had partial remissions for 5.2 and 9.2 months.CONCLUSION: 5F9 is well tolerated using a priming dose at 1 mg/kg on day 1 followed by maintenance doses of up to 45 mg/kg weekly.
View details for PubMedID 30811285
Consolidative Radiotherapy in Metastatic Urothelial Cancer.
Clinical genitourinary cancer
We report outcomes of a retrospective, single-institution experience with consolidative radiation after chemotherapy in metastatic urothelial cancer (MUC).From our single-institution database of 2597 patients with urothelial carcinoma treated since 1997, we identified 22 patients with MUC who underwent consolidative radiotherapy after a partial response to chemotherapy with the intent of rendering them disease-free. All patients had undergone primary surgical therapy with either cystectomy or nephroureterectomy. Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as time from completion of radiation therapy to relapse or last follow-up. Overall survival (OS) was defined as time from start of chemotherapy to death or last follow-up.In the selected group of patients with MUC, the median age was 67 years; 59% had received previous cisplatin-based chemotherapy. The most common sites radiated were the regional lymph nodes (64%). Other radiated sites included the lung, adrenal glands, and omental metastases. Median survival from diagnosis to cystectomy was 48 months. Median PFS was 13 months and median OS was 29 months. Eight patients (36%) were alive and disease-free 6 years after radiation therapy. Patients who were rendered disease-free were those with nodal metastases and delivery of radiation to a single site of metastasis.In this highly selective cohort of patients with MUC treated with consolidative radiation after chemotherapy, 36% were rendered disease-free. This suggests that radiation is feasible and might contribute to long-term disease control. Further prospective studies are needed to better characterize the benefit of combined modality treatment.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.clgc.2017.04.007
View details for PubMedID 28465049
Interplay of Immunosuppression and Immunotherapy Among Patients With Cancer and COVID-19.
Cytokine storm due to COVID-19 can cause high morbidity and mortality and may be more common in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy (IO) due to immune system activation.To determine the association of baseline immunosuppression and/or IO-based therapies with COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm in patients with cancer.This registry-based retrospective cohort study included 12 046 patients reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from March 2020 to May 2022. The CCC19 registry is a centralized international multi-institutional registry of patients with COVID-19 with a current or past diagnosis of cancer. Records analyzed included patients with active or previous cancer who had a laboratory-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction and/or serologic findings.Immunosuppression due to therapy; systemic anticancer therapy (IO or non-IO).The primary outcome was a 5-level ordinal scale of COVID-19 severity: no complications; hospitalized without requiring oxygen; hospitalized and required oxygen; intensive care unit admission and/or mechanical ventilation; death. The secondary outcome was the occurrence of cytokine storm.The median age of the entire cohort was 65 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-74) years and 6359 patients were female (52.8%) and 6598 (54.8%) were non-Hispanic White. A total of 599 (5.0%) patients received IO, whereas 4327 (35.9%) received non-IO systemic anticancer therapies, and 7120 (59.1%) did not receive any antineoplastic regimen within 3 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Although no difference in COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm was found in the IO group compared with the untreated group in the total cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56-1.13, and aOR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.41-1.93, respectively), patients with baseline immunosuppression treated with IO (vs untreated) had worse COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm (aOR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.38-8.01, and aOR, 4.41; 95% CI, 1.71-11.38, respectively). Patients with immunosuppression receiving non-IO therapies (vs untreated) also had worse COVID-19 severity (aOR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.36-2.35) and cytokine storm (aOR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.42-3.79).This cohort study found that in patients with cancer and COVID-19, administration of systemic anticancer therapies, especially IO, in the context of baseline immunosuppression was associated with severe clinical outcomes and the development of cytokine storm.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04354701.
View details for DOI 10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.5357
View details for PubMedID 36326731
Characterization of remote second-opinion oncology patients and associated changes in management.
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS. 2022: E18563
View details for Web of Science ID 000863680303717
Post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with cancer.
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS. 2022: E18746
View details for Web of Science ID 000863680303883
COVID-19 in patients with gynecologic cancer: A preliminary report from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19).
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS. 2022
View details for Web of Science ID 000863680301560
Patients recently treated for B-lymphoid malignancies show increased risk of severe COVID-19: a CCC19 registry analysis.
Blood cancer discovery
Patients with B-lymphoid malignancies have been consistently identified as a population at high risk of severe COVID-19. Whether this is exclusively due to cancer-related deficits in humoral and cellular immunity, or whether risk of severe COVID-19 is increased by anti-cancer therapy, is uncertain. Using data derived from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19), we show that patients treated for B-lymphoid malignancies have an increased risk of severe COVID-19 compared to control populations of patients with non-B-lymphoid hematologic malignancies. Among patients with B-lymphoid malignancies, those who received anti-cancer therapy within 12 months of COVID-19 diagnosis experienced increased COVID-19 severity compared to patients with B-lymphoid malignancies off therapy, after adjustment for cancer status and several other prognostic factors. Our findings suggest that patients recently treated for a B-lymphoid malignancy are at uniquely high risk for severe COVID-19.
View details for DOI 10.1158/2643-3230.BCD-22-0013
View details for PubMedID 35262738
Coinfections in Patients With Cancer and COVID-19: A COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) Study.
Open forum infectious diseases
2022; 9 (3): ofac037
Background: The frequency of coinfections and their association with outcomes have not been adequately studied among patients with cancer and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a high-risk group for coinfection.Methods: We included adult (≥18 years) patients with active or prior hematologic or invasive solid malignancies and laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) infection, using data from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19, NCT04354701). We captured coinfections within ±2 weeks from diagnosis of COVID-19, identified factors cross-sectionally associated with risk of coinfection, and quantified the association of coinfections with 30-day mortality.Results: Among 8765 patients (hospitalized or not; median age, 65 years; 47.4% male), 16.6% developed coinfections: 12.1% bacterial, 2.1% viral, 0.9% fungal. An additional 6.4% only had clinical diagnosis of a coinfection. The adjusted risk of any coinfection was positively associated with age >50 years, male sex, cardiovascular, pulmonary, and renal comorbidities, diabetes, hematologic malignancy, multiple malignancies, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, progressing cancer, recent cytotoxic chemotherapy, and baseline corticosteroids; the adjusted risk of superinfection was positively associated with tocilizumab administration. Among hospitalized patients, high neutrophil count and C-reactive protein were positively associated with bacterial coinfection risk, and high or low neutrophil count with fungal coinfection risk. Adjusted mortality rates were significantly higher among patients with bacterial (odds ratio [OR], 1.61; 95% CI, 1.33-1.95) and fungal (OR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.28-3.76) coinfections.Conclusions: Viral and fungal coinfections are infrequent among patients with cancer and COVID-19, with the latter associated with very high mortality rates. Clinical and laboratory parameters can be used to guide early empiric antimicrobial therapy, which may improve clinical outcomes.
View details for DOI 10.1093/ofid/ofac037
View details for PubMedID 35198648
- Association of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) metastatic to pancreas with a distinct molecular profile and immune cell population. LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS. 2022
Assessment of Regional Variability in COVID-19 Outcomes Among Patients With Cancer in the United States.
JAMA network open
1800; 5 (1): e2142046
Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a distinct spatiotemporal pattern in the United States. Patients with cancer are at higher risk of severe complications from COVID-19, but it is not well known whether COVID-19 outcomes in this patient population were associated with geography.Objective: To quantify spatiotemporal variation in COVID-19 outcomes among patients with cancer.Design, Setting, and Participants: This registry-based retrospective cohort study included patients with a historical diagnosis of invasive malignant neoplasm and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between March and November 2020. Data were collected from cancer care delivery centers in the United States.Exposures: Patient residence was categorized into 9 US census divisions. Cancer center characteristics included academic or community classification, rural-urban continuum code (RUCC), and social vulnerability index.Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. The secondary composite outcome consisted of receipt of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit admission, and all-cause death. Multilevel mixed-effects models estimated associations of center-level and census division-level exposures with outcomes after adjustment for patient-level risk factors and quantified variation in adjusted outcomes across centers, census divisions, and calendar time.Results: Data for 4749 patients (median [IQR] age, 66 [56-76] years; 2439 [51.4%] female individuals, 1079 [22.7%] non-Hispanic Black individuals, and 690 [14.5%] Hispanic individuals) were reported from 83 centers in the Northeast (1564 patients [32.9%]), Midwest (1638 [34.5%]), South (894 [18.8%]), and West (653 [13.8%]). After adjustment for patient characteristics, including month of COVID-19 diagnosis, estimated 30-day mortality rates ranged from 5.2% to 26.6% across centers. Patients from centers located in metropolitan areas with population less than 250 000 (RUCC 3) had lower odds of 30-day mortality compared with patients from centers in metropolitan areas with population at least 1 million (RUCC 1) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.31; 95% CI, 0.11-0.84). The type of center was not significantly associated with primary or secondary outcomes. There were no statistically significant differences in outcome rates across the 9 census divisions, but adjusted mortality rates significantly improved over time (eg, September to November vs March to May: aOR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.17-0.58).Conclusions and Relevance: In this registry-based cohort study, significant differences in COVID-19 outcomes across US census divisions were not observed. However, substantial heterogeneity in COVID-19 outcomes across cancer care delivery centers was found. Attention to implementing standardized guidelines for the care of patients with cancer and COVID-19 could improve outcomes for these vulnerable patients.
View details for DOI 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.42046
View details for PubMedID 34982158
Efficacy of enfortumab vedotin in advanced urothelial cancer: Analysis from the Urothelial Cancer Network to Investigate Therapeutic Experiences (UNITE) study.
BACKGROUND: Enfortumab vedotin (EV) is a novel antibody-drug conjugate approved for advanced urothelial cancer (aUC) refractory to prior therapy. In the Urothelial Cancer Network to Investigate Therapeutic Experiences (UNITE) study, the authors looked at the experience with EV in patient subsets of interest for which activity had not been well defined in clinical trials.METHODS: UNITE was a retrospective study of patients with aUC treated with recently approved agents. This initial analysis focused on patients treated with EV. Patient data were abstracted from chart reviews by investigators at each site. The observed response rate (ORR) was investigator-assessed for patients with at least 1 post-baseline scan or clear evidence of clinical progression. ORRs were compared across subsets of interest for patients treated with EV monotherapy.RESULTS: The initial UNITE analysis included 304 patients from 16 institutions; 260 of these patients were treated with EV monotherapy and included in the analyses. In the monotherapy cohort, the ORR was 52%, and it was >40% in all reported subsets of interest, including patients with comorbidities previously excluded from clinical trials (baseline renal impairment, diabetes, and neuropathy) and patients with fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3) alterations. Progression-free survival and overall survival were 6.8 and 14.4 months, respectively. Patients with a pure urothelial histology had a higher ORR than patients with a variant histology component (58% vs 42%; P = .06).CONCLUSIONS: In a large retrospective cohort, responses to EV monotherapy were consistent with data previously reported in clinical trials and were also observed in various patient subsets, including patients with variant histology, patients with FGFR3 alterations, and patients previously excluded from clinical trials with an estimated glomerular filtration rate < 30 mL/min and significant comorbidities.LAY SUMMARY: Enfortumab vedotin, approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2019, is an important new drug for the treatment of patients with advanced bladder cancer. This study looks at the effectiveness of enfortumab vedotin as it has been used at multiple centers since approval, and focuses on important patient populations previously excluded from clinical trials. These populations include patients with decreased kidney function, diabetes, and important mutations. Enfortumab vedotin is effective for treating these patients. Previously reported clinical trial data have been replicated in this real-world setting, and support the use of this drug in broader patient populations.
View details for DOI 10.1002/cncr.34057
View details for PubMedID 34882781
- Use of a computer model and care coaches to increase advance care planning conversations for patients with metastatic cancer LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS. 2021
Implementation of a cloud-based electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) platform in patients with advanced cancer.
Journal of patient-reported outcomes
2021; 5 (1): 91
BACKGROUND: Patient reported outcomes (PROs) have been associated with improved symptom management and quality of life in patients with cancer. However, the implementation of PROs in an academic clinical practice has not been thoroughly described. Here we report on the execution, feasibility and healthcare utilization outcomes of an electronic PRO (ePRO) application for cancer patients at an academic medical center.METHODS: We conducted a randomized trial comparing an experimental ePRO arm to standard of care in patients with advanced cancer in the thoracic, gastrointestinal, and genitourinary oncology groups at Stanford Cancer Center from March 2018 to November 2019. We describe the pre-implementation, implementation, and post-implementation phases of the ePRO arm, technological barriers, electronic health record (EHR) integration, clinician burden, and patient data privacy and security. Feasibility was pre-specified to be at least 70% completion of all questionnaires. Acceptability was based on patient and clinician feedback. Ambulatory healthcare utilization was assessed by reviewing numbers of phone messages, electronic portal messages, and referrals for supportive care.RESULTS: Of 617 ePRO questionnaires sent to 72 patients, 445 (72%) were completed. Most clinicians (87.5%) and patients (93%) felt neutral or positive about the ePRO tool's ease of use. Exposure to ePRO did not cause a measurable change in ambulatory healthcare utilization, with a median of less than two phone messages and supportive care referrals, and 5-6 portal messages.CONCLUSIONS: Web-based ePRO tools for patients with advanced cancer are feasible and acceptable without increasing clinical burden. Key lessons include the importance of pilot testing, engagement of stakeholders at all levels, and the need for customization by disease group. Future directions for this work include completion of EHR integration, expansion to other centers, and development of integrated workflows for routine clinical practice.
View details for DOI 10.1186/s41687-021-00358-2
View details for PubMedID 34524558
- Patterns in cancer management changes for patients with COVID-19 in northern California. LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS. 2021
- Reply to R. Kebudi et al. JCO oncology practice 2021: OP2100105
PSMA- and GRPR-targeted PET: Results from 50 Patients with Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer.
Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine
Rationale: Novel radiopharmaceuticals for positron emission tomography (PET) are evaluated for the diagnosis of biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (BCR PC). Here, we compare the gastrin releasing peptide receptors (GRPR) - targeting 68Ga-RM2 with the prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) - targeting 68Ga-PSMA11 and 18F-DCFPyL. Methods: Fifty patients had both 68Ga-RM2 PET/MRI and 68Ga-PSMA11 PET/CT (n = 23) or 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT (n = 27) at an interval ranging from 1 to 60 days (mean±SD: 15.8±17.7). Maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) were collected for all lesions. Results: RM2 PET was positive in 35 and negative in 15 of the 50 patients. PSMA PET was positive in 37 and negative in 13 of the 50 patients. Both scans detected 70 lesions in 32 patients. Forty-three lesions in 18 patients were identified only on one scan: 68Ga-RM2 detected 7 more lesions in 4 patients, while PSMA detected 36 more lesions in 13 patients. Conclusion: 68Ga-RM2 remains a valuable radiopharmaceutical even when compared with the more widely used 68Ga-PSMA11/18F-DCFPyL in the evaluation of BCR PC. Larger studies are needed to verify that identifying patients for whom these two classes of radiopharmaceuticals are complementary may ultimately allow for personalized medicine.
View details for DOI 10.2967/jnumed.120.259630
View details for PubMedID 33674398
- Myocarditis Surveillance with High-Sensitivity Troponin I During Cancer Treatment with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors. JACC. CardioOncology 2021; 3 (1): 137–39
Racial and socioeconomic disparities in retroperitoneal lymph node dissection and survival in nonseminomatous germ cell tumor: A population-based study.
BACKGROUND: Though testicular cancer is the most common cancer in young men, there is a paucity of epidemiologic studies examining sociodemographic disparities in adjuvant therapy and outcomes. We examined the associations of sociodemographic factors with retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) and survival among patients with nonseminomatous germ cell tumors (NSGCTs).METHODS: Within the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database (2005-2015), we identified 8,573 patients with nonseminomatous germ cell tumors. Multivariable logistic regression and Fine-Gray competing-risks regression models were constructed to examine the association of sociodemographic factors (neighborhood SES (nSES), race, and insurance) with, respectively, adjuvant RPLND within 1 year of diagnosis and cancer-specific mortality.RESULTS: Patients in the lowest nSES quintile (OR 0.59, 95% CI = 0.40-0.88, P = 0.01) and Black patients (OR 0.41, 95% CI = 0.15-1.00, P= 0.058) with stage II disease were less likely to receive RPLND compared to those in the highest quintile and White patients, respectively. Stage III patients with Medicaid (OR 0.64, 95% CI = 0.46-0.89, P= 0.009) or without insurance (OR 0.46, 95% CI = 0.27-0.76, P= 0.003) were less likely to receive RPLND compared to patients with private insurance. Lowest quintile nSES patients of all disease stages and Black patients with stage I disease (HR = 2.64, 95% CI = 1.12-6.20, P = 0.026) or stage II disease (HR=4.93, 95% CI = 1.48-16.44, P = 0.009) had higher risks of cancer-specific mortality compared to highest quintile nSES and White patients, respectively.CONCLUSIONS: This national study found multilevel, stage-specific sociodemographic disparities in receipt of RPLND and survival.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.12.016
View details for PubMedID 33423934
Remote Oncology Care: Review of Current Technology and Future Directions.
2020; 12 (8): e10156
Cancer patients frequently develop tumor and treatment-related complications, leading to diminished quality of life, shortened survival, and overutilization of emergency department and hospital services. Outpatient oncology treatment has potential to leave cancer patients unmonitored for long periods while at risk of clinical deterioration which has been exaggerated during the COVID19 pandemic. Visits to cancer clinics and hospitals risk exposing immunocompromised patients to infectious complications. Remote patient reported outcomes monitoring systems have been developed for use in cancer treatment, showing benefits in economic and survival outcomes. While advanced devices such as pulmonary artery pressure monitors and implantable loop recorders have proven benefits in cardiovascular care, similar options do not exist for oncology. Here we review the current literature around remote patient monitoring in cancer care and propose the use of reliable devices for capturing and reporting patient symptoms and physiology.
View details for DOI 10.7759/cureus.10156
View details for PubMedID 33014652
View details for PubMedCentralID PMC7526951
- Remote Oncology Care: Review of Current Technology and Future Directions CUREUS 2020; 12 (8)
Utilization of COVID-19 treatments and clinical outcomes among patients with cancer: A COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) cohort study.
Among 2,186 US adults with invasive cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, we examined the association of COVID-19 treatments with 30-day all-cause mortality, and factors associated with treatment. Logistic regression with multiple adjustments (e.g., comorbidities, cancer status, baseline COVID-19 severity) was performed. Hydroxychloroquine with any other drug was associated with increased mortality versus treatment with any COVID-19 treatment other than hydroxychloroquine or untreated controls; this association was not present with hydroxychloroquine alone. Remdesivir had numerically reduced mortality versus untreated controls that did not reach statistical significance. Baseline COVID-19 severity was strongly associated with receipt of any treatment. Black patients were approximately half as likely to receive remdesivir as white patients. While observational studies can be limited by potential unmeasured confounding, our findings add to the emerging understanding of patterns of care for patients with cancer and COVID-19 and support evaluation of emerging treatments through prospective controlled trials inclusive of this population.
View details for DOI 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-20-0941
View details for PubMedID 32699031
Development of robust artificial neural networks for prediction of 5-year survival in bladder cancer.
PURPOSE: When exploring survival outcomes for patients with bladder cancer, most studies rely on conventional statistical methods such as proportional hazards models. Given the successful application of machine learning to handle big data in many disciplines outside of medicine, we sought to determine if machine learning could be used to improve our ability to predict survival in bladder cancer patients. We compare the performance of artificial neural networks (ANN), a type of machine learning algorithm, with that of multivariable Cox proportional hazards (CPH) models in the prediction of 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with bladder cancer.SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) 18 program database was queried to identify adult patients with bladder cancer diagnosed between 1995 and 2010, yielding 161,227 patients who met our inclusion criteria. ANNs were trained and tested on an 80/20 split of the dataset. Multivariable CPH models were developed in parallel. Variables used for prediction included age, sex, race, grade, SEER stage, tumor size, lymph node involvement, degree of extension, and surgery received. The primary outcomes were 5-year DSS and 5-year OS. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was conducted, and ANN models were tested for calibration.RESULTS: The area under the curve for the ANN models was 0.81 for the OS model and 0.80 for the DSS model. Area under the curve for the CPH models was 0.70 for OS and 0.81 for DSS. The ANN OS model achieved a calibration slope of 1.03 and a calibration intercept of -0.04, while the ANN DSS model achieved a calibration slope of 0.99 and a calibration intercept of -0.04.CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning algorithms can improve our ability to predict bladder cancer prognosis. Compared to CPH models, ANNs predicted OS more accurately and DSS with similar accuracy. Given the inherent limitations of administrative datasets, machine learning may allow for optimal interpretation of the complex data they contain.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.05.009
View details for PubMedID 32593506
- Clinical impact of COVID-19 on patients with cancer: Data from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS. 2020
- Association of renal cell carcinoma subtypes with race/ethnicity and comorbid medical conditions AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH. 2020
- Testicular cancer in Hispanics: Incidence of subtypes over time according to neighborhood sociodemographic factors in California AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH. 2020
Testicular cancer in Hispanics: incidence of subtypes over time according to neighborhood sociodemographic factors in California.
Cancer causes & control : CCC
PURPOSE: Hispanic men in the USA experience the second-highest incidence rate of testicular germ cell tumors (TGCTs), behind non-Hispanic (NH) White men, and have experienced steep increases in TGCT in recent decades. It is unknown whether increases in incidence differ according to neighborhood sociodemographic factors.METHODS: We conducted a population-based study of n=3759 Hispanic and n=8469 NH White men (n=12,228 total) diagnosed with TGCT in California during the three most recent pericensal periods. We calculated incidence rates according to neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES) and among Hispanics, according to ethnic enclave. We calculated incidence rate ratios to compare rates across nSES and ethnic enclave and to examine changes in rates over pericensal time periods according to these neighborhood factors for major histologic types (i.e., seminoma and nonseminoma).RESULTS: Hispanic men residing in high SES, compared to low SES, neighborhoods had greater incidence of seminoma and nonseminoma testicular cancer across pericensal periods, as did Hispanic men in low enclave (less ethnic), compared to high enclave, neighborhoods. Between the periods 1998-2002 and 2008-2012, Hispanic men residing in low SES neighborhoods experienced a 39% increased incidence of seminoma, while those residing in low and middle SES neighborhoods experienced 87% and 48% increased incidence of nonseminoma, respectively.CONCLUSION: While TGCT incidence has increased among all Hispanic men, incidence increases appear to be driven disproportionately by those residing in lower SES and lower enclave neighborhoods, particularly for nonseminoma.
View details for DOI 10.1007/s10552-020-01311-2
View details for PubMedID 32440828
DEVELOPING THE ADVANCED PRACTICE ROLE IN INFUSION TREATMENT AREA
ONCOLOGY NURSING SOC. 2020
View details for Web of Science ID 000569150400015
Safety and efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced urological cancers with pre-existing autoimmune disorders: a retrospective international multicenter study.
Journal for immunotherapy of cancer
2020; 8 (1)
BACKGROUND: There is limited experience regarding the safety and efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) in patients with autoimmune disorders (AD) and advanced urological cancers as they are generally excluded from clinical trials due to risk of exacerbations.METHODS: This multicenter retrospective cohort analysis of patients with advanced renal cell cancer (RCC) and urothelial cancer (UC) with pre-existing AD treated with CPI catalogued the incidence of AD exacerbations, new immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and clinical outcomes. Competing risk models estimated cumulative incidences of exacerbations and new irAEs at 3 and 6 months.RESULTS: Of 106 patients with AD (58 RCC, 48 UC) from 10 centers, 35 (33%) had grade 1/2 clinically active AD of whom 10 (9%) required corticosteroids or immunomodulators at baseline. Exacerbations of pre-existing AD occurred in 38 (36%) patients with 17 (45%) requiring corticosteroids and 6 (16%) discontinuing CPI. New onset irAEs occurred in 40 (38%) patients with 22 (55%) requiring corticosteroids and 8 (20%) discontinuing CPI. Grade 3/4 events occurred in 6 (16%) of exacerbations and 13 (33%) of new irAEs. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Median follow-up was 15 months. For RCC, objective response rate (ORR) was 31% (95% CI 20% to 45%), median time to treatment failure (TTF) was 7 months (95% CI 4 to 10) and 12-month overall survival (OS) was 78% (95% CI 63% to 87%). For UC, ORR was 40% (95% CI 26% to 55%), median TTF was 5.0 months (95% CI 2.3 to 9.0) and 12-month OS was 63% (95% CI 47% to 76%).CONCLUSIONS: Patients with RCC and UC with well-controlled AD can benefit from CPI with manageable toxicities that are consistent with what is expected of a non-AD population. Prospective study is warranted to comprehensively evaluate the benefits and safety of CPI in patients with AD.
View details for DOI 10.1136/jitc-2020-000538
View details for PubMedID 32217762
Changes in Cancer Management due to COVID-19 Illness in Patients with Cancer in Northern California.
JCO oncology practice
The response to the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the management of patients with cancer. In this pooled retrospective analysis, we describe changes in management patterns for patients with cancer diagnosed with COVID-19 in two academic institutions in the San Francisco Bay Area.Adult and pediatric patients diagnosed with COVID-19 with a current or historical diagnosis of malignancy were identified from the electronic medical record at the University of California, San Francisco, and Stanford University. The proportion of patients undergoing active cancer management whose care was affected was quantified and analyzed for significant differences with regard to management type, treatment intent, and the time of COVID-19 diagnosis. The duration and characteristics of such changes were compared across subgroups.A total of 131 patients were included, of whom 55 were undergoing active cancer management. Of these, 35 of 55 (64%) had significant changes in management that consisted primarily of delays. An additional three patients not undergoing active cancer management experienced a delay in management after being diagnosed with COVID-19. The decision to change management was correlated with the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, with more delays identified in patients treated with palliative intent earlier in the course of the pandemic (March/April 2020) compared with later (May/June 2020) (OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.03 to 17.3; P = .0497). This difference was not seen among patients treated with curative intent during the same timeframe.We found significant changes in the management of cancer patients with COVID-19 treated with curative and palliative intent that evolved over time. Future studies are needed to determine the impact of changes in management and treatment on cancer outcomes for patients with cancer and COVID-19.
View details for DOI 10.1200/OP.20.00790
View details for PubMedID 33332170
- Feasibility and design of a cloud-based digital platform in patients with advanced cancer. AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY. 2019
Retrospective analysis of the safety and efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) among patients (pts) with pre-existing autoimmune disorders (AD) and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) or urothelial carcinoma (UC).
AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY. 2019
View details for Web of Science ID 000487345805393
- Cabozantinib in advanced non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma: a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study LANCET ONCOLOGY 2019; 20 (4): 581–90
Undertreatment of High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer in the California Latino Population.
Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN
2018; 16 (11): 1353–60
Background: The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology recommend definitive therapy for all men with high-risk localized prostate cancer (PCa) who have a life expectancy >5 years or who are symptomatic. However, the application of these guidelines may vary among ethnic groups. We compared receipt of guideline-concordant treatment between Latino and non-Latino white men in California. Methods: California Cancer Registry data were used to identify 2,421 Latino and 8,636 non-Latino white men diagnosed with high-risk localized PCa from 2010 through 2014. The association of clinical and sociodemographic factors with definitive treatment was examined using logistic regression, overall and by ethnicity. Results: Latinos were less likely than non-Latino whites to receive definitive treatment before (odds ratio [OR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.71-0.88) and after adjusting for age and tumor characteristics (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.75-0.95). Additional adjustment for sociodemographic factors eliminated the disparity. However, the association with treatment differed by ethnicity for several factors. Latino men with no health insurance were considerably less likely to receive definitive treatment relative to insured Latino men (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.23-0.49), an association that was more pronounced than among non-Latino whites (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47-0.83). Intermediate-versus high-grade disease was associated with lower odds of definitive treatment in Latinos (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59-0.97) but not non-Latino whites. Younger age and care at NCI-designated Cancer Centers were significantly associated with receipt of definitive treatment in non-Latino whites but not in Latinos. Conclusions: California Latino men diagnosed with localized high-risk PCa are at increased risk for undertreatment. The observed treatment disparity is largely explained by sociodemographic factors, suggesting it may be ameliorated through targeted outreach, such as that aimed at younger and underinsured Latino men.
View details for PubMedID 30442735
The CD47 Macrophage Checkpoint as a New Immunotherapy Target
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. 2017: S108–S109
View details for Web of Science ID 000413055800089
- Prognostic factors for pancreatic metastases in renal cell cancer. AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY. 2016
In situ vaccination against mycosis fungoides by intratumoral injection of a TLR9 agonist combined with radiation: a phase 1/2 study
2012; 119 (2): 355-363
We have developed and previously reported on a therapeutic vaccination strategy for indolent B-cell lymphoma that combines local radiation to enhance tumor immunogenicity with the injection into the tumor of a TLR9 agonist. As a result, antitumor CD8(+) T cells are induced, and systemic tumor regression was documented. Because the vaccination occurs in situ, there is no need to manufacture a vaccine product. We have now explored this strategy in a second disease: mycosis fungoides (MF). We treated 15 patients. Clinical responses were assessed at the distant, untreated sites as a measure of systemic antitumor activity. Five clinically meaningful responses were observed. The procedure was well tolerated and adverse effects consisted mostly of mild and transient injection site or flu-like symptoms. The immunized sites showed a significant reduction of CD25(+), Foxp3(+) T cells that could be either MF cells or tissue regulatory T cells and a similar reduction in S100(+), CD1a(+) dendritic cells. There was a trend toward greater reduction of CD25(+) T cells and skin dendritic cells in clinical responders versus nonresponders. Our in situ vaccination strategy is feasible also in MF and the clinical responses that occurred in a subset of patients warrant further study with modifications to augment these therapeutic effects. This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00226993.
View details for DOI 10.1182/blood-2011-05-355222
View details for PubMedID 22045986