Macrophage Repolarization as a Therapeutic Strategy for Osteosarcoma.

Macrophages are versatile immune cells and can adapt to both external stimuli and their surrounding environment. Macrophages are categorized into two major categories; M1 macrophages release pro-inflammatory cytokines and produce protective responses that lead to antimicrobial or antitumor activity. M2 or tumor-associated macrophages (TAM) release anti-inflammatory cytokines that support tumor growth, invasion capacity, and metastatic potential. Since macrophages can be re-polarized from an M2 to an M1 phenotype with a variety of strategies, this has emerged as an innovative anti-cancer approach. Osteosarcoma (OS) is a kind of bone cancer and consists of a complex niche, and immunotherapy is not very effective. Therefore, immediate attention to new strategies is required. We incorporated the recent studies that have used M2-M1 repolarization strategies in the aspect of treating OS cancer.

Clinical utility of a regional precision medicine molecular tumor board and challenges to implementation.

PURPOSE: Molecular tumor boards provide precision treatment recommendations based on cancer genomic profile. However, practical barriers limit their benefits. We studied the clinical utility of the precision medicine molecular tumor board (PMMTB) and described challenges with PMMTB implementation. METHODS: An observational cohort study included patients reviewed by the PMMTB between September 2015 to December 2017. Patients who had consented to the registry study were included. The primary endpoint of this study was time on treatment (ToT) ratio. Clinical utility was established if the primary endpoint had least 15% of patients achieving a ToT ratio of ≥1.3. RESULTS: Overall, 278 patients were presented to the PMMTB and 113 cases were included in the final analysis. The PMMTB identified at least one nonstandard of care (SOC) clinically actionable mutation for 69.0% (78/113) of cases. In patients who received non-SOC treatment, 43.8% (7/16) achieved a ToT ratio of 1.3 or more (p < 0.001). Fifty-nine patients did not receive non-SOC recommendations. Reasons for not pursuing treatment included 35.6% having response to current treatment, 20.3% died prior to starting or considering PMMTB recommendations, 13.6% pursued other treatment options based on clinician discretion, another 10.2% pursued other treatment options because clinical trials recommended were not geographically accessible, 8.5% had rapid decline of performance status, 6.8% lacked of financial support for treatment, and 5.1% were excluded from clinical trials due to abnormal laboratory values. CONCLUSION: The regional PMMTB non-SOC recommendations benefitted a majority of patients and additional processes were implemented to assist with non-SOC treatment accessibility.

Molecular Tumor Board Review and Improved Overall Survival in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

With the introduction of precision medicine, treatment options for non-small-cell lung cancer have improved dramatically; however, underutilization, especially in disadvantaged patients, like those living in rural Appalachian regions, is associated with poorer survival. Molecular tumor boards (MTBs) represent a strategy to increase precision medicine use. UK HealthCare at the University of Kentucky (UK) implemented a statewide MTB in January 2017. We wanted to test the impact of UK MTB review on overall survival in Appalachian and other regions in Kentucky. METHODS: We performed a case-control study of Kentucky patients newly diagnosed with non-small-cell lung cancer between 2017 and 2019. Cases were reviewed by the UK MTB and were compared with controls without UK MTB review. Controls were identified from the Kentucky Cancer Registry and propensity-matched to cases. The primary end point was the association between MTB review and overall patient survival. RESULTS: Overall, 956 patients were included, with 343 (39%) residing in an Appalachian region. Seventy-seven (8.1%) were reviewed by the MTB and classified as cases. Cox regression analysis showed that poorer survival outcome was associated with lack of MTB review (hazard ratio [HR] = 8.61; 95% CI, 3.83 to 19.31; P < .0001) and living in an Appalachian region (hazard ratio = 1.43; 95% CI, 1.17 to 1.75; P = .004). Among individuals with MTB review, survival outcomes were similar regardless of whether they lived in Appalachia or other parts of Kentucky. CONCLUSION: MTB review is an independent positive predictor of overall survival regardless of residence location. MTBs may help overcome some health disparities for disadvantaged populations.

Clostridium difficile infection perceptions and practices: a multicenter qualitative study in South Africa.

Background: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is understudied in limited resource settings. In addition, provider awareness of CDI as a prevalent threat is unknown. An assessment of current facilitators and barriers to CDI identification, management, and prevention is needed in limited resource settings to design and evaluate quality improvement strategies to effectively minimize the risk of CDI. Methods: Our study aimed to identify CDI perceptions and practices among healthcare providers in South African secondary hospitals to identify facilitators and barriers to providing quality CDI care. Qualitative interviews (11 physicians, 11 nurses, 4 pharmacists,) and two focus groups (7 nurses, 3 pharmacists) were conducted at three district level hospitals in the Cape Town Metropole. Semi-structured interviews elicited provider perceived facilitators, barriers, and opportunities to improve clinical workflow from patient presentation through CDI (1) Identification, (2) Diagnosis, (3) Treatment, and (4) Prevention. In addition, a summary provider CDI knowledge score was calculated for each interviewee for seven components of CDI and management. Results: Major barriers identified were knowledge gaps in characteristics of C. difficile identification, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. The median overall CDI knowledge score (scale 0-7) from individual interviews was 3 [interquartile range 0.25, 4.75]. Delays in C. difficile testing workflow were identified. Participants perceived supplies for CDI management and prevention were usually available; however, hand hygiene and use of contact precautions was inconsistent. Conclusions: Our analysis provides a detailed description of the facilitators and barriers to CDI workflow and can be utilized to design quality improvement interventions among limited resource settings.