Gina Columbus

Paul Kelly Marcom, MD, discusses the future landscape of HR-positive breast cancer, highlighting the influence of CDK4/6 inhibitors and targeted agent/endocrine therapy combinations.

Lisa Carey, MD, discusses the current state of the science in triple-negative breast cancer, the potential for immunotherapy, and future treatment approaches she anticipates in the coming years.

Plasma- and urine-based assays designed to detect actionable mutations in patients with non–small cell lung cancer are changing the face of treatment for these patients.

Molecular testing is done for patients with non–small cell lung cancer to determine what genetic abnormalities are present. If a common-enough mutation is detected—such as EGFR or ALK—then patients are able to receive a targeted agent matched to that driver.

Osimertinib, an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), is quickly emerging as a therapeutic option for patients with EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who develop the acquired resistance mutation T790M.

Frontline therapy for patients with ALK-positive non–small cell lung cancer is poised to change in the coming years, as researchers continue to explore agents beyond crizotinib.

The neoadjuvant combination of CDK4/6 inhibitor abemaciclib plus anastrazole may represent a novel therapeutic option for patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer.

Even with 1 FDA approval of an immunotherapeutic agent in urothelial carcinoma—and more expected in the coming months—chemotherapy regimens will continue to play a pivotal part in the treatment of patients with this disease.

Though testing for mutations in EGFR, ALK, and ROS1 is a standard approach in patients with non–small cell lung cancer, the same is not true for less common genetic abnormalities, including RET, BRAF, c-MET, and NTRK.

Researchers are exploring VEGF and EGFR inhibitors in combination with other therapies for patients with non–small cell lung cancer in hopes of maximizing clinical outcomes while keeping toxicity levels low.

Three recent drug approvals have shifted the landscape in the second-line setting for renal cell carcinoma, and researchers are now setting their sights on transforming upfront care.

The NCCN recently published new guidelines for myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), with an emphasis on diagnosis, treatment, and supportive care strategies for myelofibrosis. Subsequent editions will focus more on other MPNs, including essential thrombocythemia, polycythemia vera.

Treatment for patients with aggressive lymphomas needs to be intensified with more effective strategies, potentially including an infusion, dose-adjusted regimen of etoposide phosphate, prednisone, vincristine sulfate, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin hydrochloride, and rituximab.

Immunotherapy may be having a moment in the changing landscape of bladder cancer, but expert Gopa Iyer, MD, advises that there is much research to be done before physicians replace chemotherapy with these agents upfront.

For patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, the radiopharmaceutical radium-223 dichloride has proven to be an efficacious bone-targeted agent.

The field of lung cancer has undoubtedly seen notable advances over the past year—especially with the game-changing November 2016 approval of pembrolizumab for the frontline treatment of patients with non–small cell lung cancer.

Beyond the strong efficacy outcomes observed with single-agent immunotherapies in non–small cell lung cancer—including pembrolizumab, nivolumab, and atezolizumab—the field is now awaiting the next phase: combination regimens.

An investigational anti-BCMA chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy demonstrated an objective response rate of 78% in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Identifying biomarkers to determine who should receive chemotherapy, targeted agents, and immunotherapy is just one of several obstacles the prostate cancer community is currently facing.

Investigators are exploring therapy options for patients with indolent lymphomas—including follicular lymphoma, marginal zone lymphoma, and small lymphocytic lymphoma—as rituximab regimens are proving to not be a long-term option for many patients.

How oncologists can translate their increased understanding of the biology of prostate cancer into clinical practice is a question being raised currently in the field, explains Howard I. Scher, MD, adding, that the emergence of liquid biopsies could possibly be one way to tackle the issue.

A number of clinical trials are seeking to identify beneficial therapeutic outcomes in patients with prostate cancer who are resistant to androgen receptor–targeted agents.

Standard treatment approaches for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia will continue to include fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab and allogeneic stem cell transplantation.

The PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors moving through the pipeline in bladder cancer will have a lasting impact on the armamentarium in the field, explains Jonathan E. Rosenberg, MD.

Immunotherapy and chemotherapy are options physicians should not dismiss for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer, according to Lisa Carey, MD, even with the available targeted agents trastuzumab, pertuzumab, lapatinib, and ado-trastuzumab emtansine.

While immunotherapy continues to make headway in various malignancies, the chemotherapy docetaxel maintains a key role in the treatment of patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

Findings from a highly anticipated, randomized, phase II trial could possibly pave the path for the FDA approval of the first targeted therapy for patients with triple-negative breast cancer, explains Linda T. Vahdat, MD.

Pivotal clinical trial findings from the past year will likely have a game-changing effect on the multiple myeloma landscape, according to Rafael Fonseca, MD. Moreover, he adds, oncologists may be looking at a future where the number of drugs in a single regimen continues to grow in an effort to further improve outcomes.

Immunotherapy continues to revolutionize the field of non–small cell lung cancer, with researchers now focusing on the optimal use of immune agents in the frontline setting.

Individualizing frontline therapy for patients with non–small cell lung cancer based on preferences and clinical experience, as well as efficacy and safety data from pivotal trials, is an appropriate method for selecting EGFR-targeted agents.