MErCuRIC1: A Phase I study of MEK1/2 inhibitor PD-0325901 with cMET inhibitor crizotinib in RASMT and RASWT (with aberrant c-MET) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients.

Background: RAS is mutated (RASMT) in ~55% of mCRC, and phase III studies have shown that patients harbouring RAS mutations do not benefit from anti-EGFR MoAbs. In addition, ~50% of RAS Wild Type (RASWT) will not benefit from the addition of an EGFR MoAb to standard chemotherapy. Hence, novel treatment strategies are urgently needed for RASMT and > 50% of RASWT mCRC patients. c-MET is overexpressed in ~50-60%, amplified in ~2-3% and mutated in ~3-5% of mCRC. Recent preclinical studies have shown that c-MET is an important mediator of resistance to MEK inhibitors (i) in RASMT mCRC, and that combined MEKi/METi resulted in synergistic reduction in tumour growth in RASMT xenograft models (1). A number of recent studies have highlighted the role of c-MET in mediating primary/secondary resistance to anti-EGFR MoAbs in mCRC, suggesting that patient with RASWT tumours with aberrant c-MET (RASWT/c-MET+) may benefit from anti-c-MET targeted therapies (2). These preclinical data supported the further clinical evaluation of combined MEKi/METi treatment in RASMT and RASWT CRC patients with aberrant c-MET signalling (overexpression, amplification or mutation; RASWT/c-MET+). Methods: MErCuRIC1 is a phase I combination study of METi crizotinib with MEKi PD-0325901. The dose escalation phase, utilizing a rolling six design, recruits 12-24 patients with advanced solid tumours and aims to assess safety/toxicity of combination, recommended phase II (RPII) dose, pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) (pERK1/2 in PBMC and tumour; soluble c-MET). In the dose expansion phase an additional 30-42 RASMT and RASWT/c-MET mCRC patients with biopsiable disease will be treated at the RPII dose to further evaluate safety, PK, PD and treatment response. In the dose expansion phase additional biopsy and blood samples will be obtained to define mechanisms of response/resistance to crizotinib/PD-0325901 therapy. Enrolment into the dose escalation phase began in December 2014 with cohort 1 still ongoing. EudraCT registry number: 2014-000463-40. (1) Van Schaeybroeck S et al. Cell Reports 2014;7(6):1940-55; (2) Bardelli A et al. Cancer Discov 2013;3(6):658-73. Clinical trial information: 2014-000463-40.

Heritability of peripheral refraction in Chinese children and adolescents: the Guangzhou Twin Eye study.

PURPOSE:

To estimate the heritability of peripheral refraction in Chinese children and adolescents.

METHODS:

The authors examined 72 monozygotic (MZ) twins and 48 dizygotic (DZ) twins aged 8 to 20 years from a population-based twin registry. Temporal and nasal peripheral refraction, each 40° from the visual axis, and axial refraction were measured using an autorefractor. Relative peripheral refractive error (RPRE) was defined as the peripheral refraction minus the axial refraction. Heritability was assessed by structural equation modeling after adjustment for age and sex.

RESULTS:

The mean and SD of temporal refraction (T(40)), nasal refraction (N(40)), RPRE-T(40), RPRE-N(40), and T(40)-N(40) asymmetry were -0.27 ± 2.0 D, 0.36 ± 2.19 D, 1.18 ± 1.39 D, 1.80 ± 1.69 D, and -0.62 ± 1.58 D, respectively. The intraclass correlations for T(40) refraction, N(40) refraction, RPRE-T(40), RPRE-N(40), and T(40)-N(40) asymmetry were 0.87, 0.83, 0.65, 0.74, and 0.58 for MZ pairs and 0.49, 0.42, 0.30, 0.41, and 0.32 for DZ pairs, respectively. A model with additive genetic and unique environmental effects was the most parsimonious, with heritability values estimated as 0.84, 0.76, 0.63, 0.70, and 0.55, respectively, for the peripheral refractive parameters.

CONCLUSIONS:

Additive genetic effects appear to explain most of the variance in peripheral refraction and relative peripheral refraction when adjusting for the effects of axial refraction.

Epidemiology, Patterns of Care, and Mortality for Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Intensive Care Units in 50 Countries

Importance Limited information exists about the epidemiology, recognition, management, and outcomes of patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).

Objectives To evaluate intensive care unit (ICU) incidence and outcome of ARDS and to assess clinician recognition, ventilation management, and use of adjuncts—for example prone positioning—in routine clinical practice for patients fulfilling the ARDS Berlin Definition.

Design, Setting, and Participants The Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure (LUNG SAFE) was an international, multicenter, prospective cohort study of patients undergoing invasive or noninvasive ventilation, conducted during 4 consecutive weeks in the winter of 2014 in a convenience sample of 459 ICUs from 50 countries across 5 continents.

Exposures Acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was ICU incidence of ARDS. Secondary outcomes included assessment of clinician recognition of ARDS, the application of ventilatory management, the use of adjunctive interventions in routine clinical practice, and clinical outcomes from ARDS.

Results Of 29 144 patients admitted to participating ICUs, 3022 (10.4%) fulfilled ARDS criteria. Of these, 2377 patients developed ARDS in the first 48 hours and whose respiratory failure was managed with invasive mechanical ventilation. The period prevalence of mild ARDS was 30.0% (95% CI, 28.2%-31.9%); of moderate ARDS, 46.6% (95% CI, 44.5%-48.6%); and of severe ARDS, 23.4% (95% CI, 21.7%-25.2%). ARDS represented 0.42 cases per ICU bed over 4 weeks and represented 10.4% (95% CI, 10.0%-10.7%) of ICU admissions and 23.4% of patients requiring mechanical ventilation. Clinical recognition of ARDS ranged from 51.3% (95% CI, 47.5%-55.0%) in mild to 78.5% (95% CI, 74.8%-81.8%) in severe ARDS. Less than two-thirds of patients with ARDS received a tidal volume 8 of mL/kg or less of predicted body weight. Plateau pressure was measured in 40.1% (95% CI, 38.2-42.1), whereas 82.6% (95% CI, 81.0%-84.1%) received a positive end-expository pressure (PEEP) of less than 12 cm H2O. Prone positioning was used in 16.3% (95% CI, 13.7%-19.2%) of patients with severe ARDS. Clinician recognition of ARDS was associated with higher PEEP, greater use of neuromuscular blockade, and prone positioning. Hospital mortality was 34.9% (95% CI, 31.4%-38.5%) for those with mild, 40.3% (95% CI, 37.4%-43.3%) for those with moderate, and 46.1% (95% CI, 41.9%-50.4%) for those with severe ARDS.

Conclusions and Relevance Among ICUs in 50 countries, the period prevalence of ARDS was 10.4% of ICU admissions. This syndrome appeared to be underrecognized and undertreated and associated with a high mortality rate. These findings indicate the potential for improvement in the management of patients with ARDS.