Conflict Of Policies Research Articles

Economics Peer-Review: Problems, Recent Developments, and Reform Proposals

This article contributes to the debate on reforming the peer-review process in the economics profession. It examines the current state of peer-review in economics, surveys the relevant literature, and identifies several problems and solutions. Problems to be discussed are referee overreach and excessive revisions, strategic refereeing and conflicts of interest, prestige bias and other discrimination, and the noisy outcome of peer-review. It recommends several solutions for reform. First, enforce referee guidelines that referee reports must explicitly separate their suggestions into essential and optional, with 3 essential maximum. Second, let authors award the best referee report. Third, adopt conflict of interest policies for referees and punish non-disclosure. Fourth, use double-blind refereeing. Fifth, make better use of prior reports from other journals. Sixth, pay referees for prompt reports. A discussion of the role of editors highlights additional issues that deserve a debate in the profession.

Research integrity in Instructions for Authors in Japanese medical journals using ICMJE Recommendations: A descriptive literature study.

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) has published Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. These provide a global standard for writing and editing medical articles, including research integrity. However, no study has examined the research integrity-related content of Japanese medical journals' Instructions for Authors. We therefore compared research integrity content in ICMJE member journals with those in the English- and Japanese-language journals of the Japanese Association of Medical Sciences (JAMS). This was a descriptive literature study. We obtained Instructions for Authors from English- and Japanese-language journals listed on the JAMS website and the ICMJE member journals listed on the ICMJE website as of September 1, 2021. We compared the presence of 20 topics (19 in the ICMJE Recommendations plus compliance with ICMJE) in the Instructions for Authors, and analyzed the content of the conflict of interest disclosure. We evaluated 12 ICMJE member journals, and 82 English-language and 99 Japanese-language subcommittee journals. The median number of topics covered was 10.5 for ICMJE member journals, 10 for English-language journals, and three for Japanese-language journals. Compliance with ICMJE was mentioned by 10 (83%) ICMJE member journals, 75 (91%) English-language journals, and 29 (29%) Japanese-language journals. The ICMJE Conflicts of Interest Disclosure Form was requested by seven (64%) ICMJE member journals, 15 (18%) English-language journals, and one (1%) Japanese-language journal. Although the topics in the JAMS English-language journals resembled those in the ICMJE member journals, the median value of ICMJE-related topic inclusion was approximately one-third lower in JAMS Japanese-language journals than in ICMJE member journals. It is hoped that Japanese-language journals whose conflict of interest disclosure policies differ from ICMJE standards will adopt international standards to deter misconduct and ensure publication quality.

From science-policy interface to science-policy panel: The United Nations’ strengthening of the sustainable life cycle management of chemicals

In recent years, the chemical production and waste generation have been rapidly increasing, presenting substantial hazards to the ecosystem and human well-being. To address this issue, a series of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) have been developed internationally, that provide essential decision-making support for the appropriate governance of chemicals and wastes in the participating countries. MEAs have established subsidiary bodies known as science-policy interface (SPI) institutions to provide evidence-based support and scientific assessments for environmental policies. However, the existing SPIs face limitations that hinder their ability to tackle the obstacles presented by the vast quantities of chemicals and wastes currently found in the environment. Therefore, the fifth session of the United Nations Environment Assembly made the decision to establish a science-policy panel to promote the effective management of chemicals and waste and to prevent pollution (SPP-CWP). This panel is intended to be an independent intergovernmental body, similar to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. The United Nations Environment Programme convened an ad hoc open-ended working group (OEWG) to design strategies for the SPP-CWP. Since 2022, three OEWG meetings have been conducted, and draft documents outlining the panel's scope, functions, operational principles, conflict of interest policy, institutional setup, work processes, and procedures have been formulated. In this article, we analyzed the background and development of the SPP-CWP and provided updates regarding the progress of the panel's establishment. We also suggested future trends for the SPP-CWP. We concluded that SPP-CWP will be a comprehensive and authoritative international body, providing policymakers with exhaustive reports, consequently strengthening the capacity of life cycle management of chemicals. Thus, the panel will effectively reduce or prevent waste production and pollution, promote material circulation, and minimize resource consumption, making significant contributions to the establishment of a circular economy and an environmentally friendly society.

Trends in NCCN enforcement of financial conflict of interest policies for guidelines panelists.

11070 Background: Financial conflict of interest (FCOI) among authors of clinical practice guidelines is a potential concern for the independence and integrity of guideline recommendations. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guidelines policy stipulates limits on physician-industry FCOI among its panelists (<$50,000 overall and <$20,000 from each individual company, annually). Those in violation will be asked to resign. However, COI policies reliant on physician self-report may be difficult to enforce. The increased transparency of FCOI resulting from Open Payments – and the ensuing attention in 2016 on high levels of FCOI among guideline-writing bodies including the NCCN – may have enabled and motivated increased enforcement of existing FCOI policy. We describe trends in FCOI among NCCN Guidelines panelists and in enforcement when violations occur. Methods: We manually extracted NCCN Guidelines panelist names and terms of service for the 20 most prevalent cancers, 2013-22. We manually linked each physician to their Open Payments records, a federal archive of financial transactions from industry to physicians. For each panelist, we included only the categories of industry payments deemed relevant by the NCCN COI policy: ownership payments and some General Payments categories (eg., speaking fees, consulting) but not others (eg., free meals). We measured payments during each full calendar year of service. If a panelist received payments above NCCN limits (“violation”), we assessed whether their term of service continued for at least 1 additional full calendar year (“retained"), inferring that panelists who were retained had not been asked to resign as stipulated. We assessed whether retention post-violation was less likely after 2016. Results: There were 978 eligible physician-guideline pairs. Mean industry payments increased from $6175 in 2014 to $9169 in 2019, then declined to $6492 in 2021 following the COVID-19 pandemic. There were 143 panelist-years in violation of NCCN FCOI limits. Violations occurred among 99 unique panelists; 32 panelists had multiple observed violations. Across the full study period, panelists with a violation were less likely to be retained versus those without a violation (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.15-0.31). However, likelihood of post-violation retention was lower after 2016 compared to before. 81% were retained during 2014-15 (versus 89% for those without violation, OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.26-1.31) compared to 47% during 2017-20 (versus 89% without violation, OR 0.10, 95% CI 0.06-0.17). Conclusions: Lower retention among panelists receiving excessive industry payments is consistent with NCCN enforcement of its COI policy. Lower post-violation retention after 2016 is consistent with stricter enforcement following that year. However, even in 2017-20, in 47% of violations, the panelist continued to serve, suggesting that enforcement remains incomplete.

Cross-sectional examination of commercial milk formula industry funding of international, regional and national healthcare professional associations: protocol

IntroductionCommercial milk formula manufacturers often emphasise their role in supporting infant and young child nutrition and breastfeeding, but their commercial goals to increase volume and profit margin of formula sales...

Conflicts of Interest Among Cardiology Clinical Practice Guideline Authors in Japan.

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) offer disease management recommendations based on scientific evidence. However, financial conflicts of interest between CPG developers and the pharmaceutical industry could bias these recommendations, potentially affecting patient care. Proper management of these conflicts of interest is particularly crucial for maintaining the integrity of CPGs. The study aimed to evaluate the extent of financial relationships between the pharmaceutical industry and authors of CPGs for cardiovascular diseases in Japan. The study analyzed personal payments from the pharmaceutical industry to authors of cardiovascular disease CPGs published by the Japanese Circulation Society from January 2015 to December 2022. Payment data, including speaking, consultancy, and writing fees from 2016 to 2020, were extracted from a publicly available database containing personal payments disclosed by all major pharmaceutical companies. A total of 929 unique authors from 37 eligible Japanese Circulation Society CPGs were identified. Notably, 94.4% of these authors received personal payments from pharmaceutical companies, totaling >US $70.8 million. The mean±SD payment per author was US $76 314±138 663) and the median payment per author was US $20 792 (interquartile range: US $4262-US $76 998) over the 5-year period. Chairs of CPGs received significantly higher payments than other authors. More than 80% of authors in each CPG received personal payments. The study elucidated that there were considerable financial relationships between pharmaceutical companies and cardiology CPG authors in Japan. This finding deviates from international conflict of interest management policies, suggesting the need for more stringent conflict of interest management strategies by the Japanese Circulation Society to ensure the development of trustworthy and evidence-based CPGs.

2024 Focused Update: Guidelines on Use of Corticosteroids in Sepsis, Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, and Community-Acquired Pneumonia.

New evidence is available examining the use of corticosteroids in sepsis, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), warranting a focused update of the 2017 guideline on critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency. To develop evidence-based recommendations for use of corticosteroids in hospitalized adults and children with sepsis, ARDS, and CAP. The 22-member panel included diverse representation from medicine, including adult and pediatric intensivists, pulmonologists, endocrinologists, nurses, pharmacists, and clinician-methodologists with expertise in developing evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines. We followed Society of Critical Care Medicine conflict of interest policies in all phases of the guideline development, including task force selection and voting. After development of five focused Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes (PICO) questions, we conducted systematic reviews to identify the best available evidence addressing each question. We evaluated the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach and formulated recommendations using the evidence-to-decision framework. In response to the five PICOs, the panel issued four recommendations addressing the use of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis, ARDS, and CAP. These included a conditional recommendation to administer corticosteroids for patients with septic shock and critically ill patients with ARDS and a strong recommendation for use in hospitalized patients with severe CAP. The panel also recommended against high dose/short duration administration of corticosteroids for septic shock. In response to the final PICO regarding type of corticosteroid molecule in ARDS, the panel was unable to provide specific recommendations addressing corticosteroid molecule, dose, and duration of therapy, based on currently available evidence. The panel provided updated recommendations based on current evidence to inform clinicians, patients, and other stakeholders on the use of corticosteroids for sepsis, ARDS, and CAP.

Get familiar with who is impacted by excess benefit/self‐dealing rules

Among other things, a nonprofit board's conflict of interest policies are meant to shield the organization from fraud and malfeasance that can come as a result of self‐dealing—that is, a board member benefiting financially off the board's decisions and organizations' operations.

An uncertain structure for minimizing the conflict of exploitation policies in common pool groundwater resources

Abstract Creating a structure for allocating water from common pool resources is a serious problem in agricultural water management. In this research, an attempt has been made based on bi-objective optimization and the non-dominated theory to create the water allocation models for the cultivation pattern. The water allocated in each irrigation event was defined as the decision variable in this structure. Two objective functions include the following: (1) maximizing and minimizing the water allocation and (2) minimizing conflicts between beneficiaries in the Hebei Plain. Conflicts between beneficiaries were formulated based on the ratio between the crop area and water allocation and were defined by an inertia weight to increase its effect on the final iterations of the process. The Whale Optimization Algorithm was included as a bi-objective algorithm in the decision-making process. The number of decision variables and feasible domains in each decision model is different and creates a crowding distance for competition between operators. The results showed that the water allocation planning structure based on the evaluation index had the best solution front.

Society of Critical Care Medicine Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rapid Sequence Intubation in the Critically Ill Adult Patient.

Controversies and practice variations exist related to the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic management of the airway during rapid sequence intubation (RSI). To develop evidence-based recommendations on pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic topics related to RSI. A guideline panel of 20 Society of Critical Care Medicine members with experience with RSI and emergency airway management met virtually at least monthly from the panel's inception in 2018 through 2020 and face-to-face at the 2020 Critical Care Congress. The guideline panel included pharmacists, physicians, a nurse practitioner, and a respiratory therapist with experience in emergency medicine, critical care medicine, anesthesiology, and prehospital medicine; consultation with a methodologist and librarian was available. A formal conflict of interest policy was followed and enforced throughout the guidelines-development process. Panelists created Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) questions and voted to select the most clinically relevant questions for inclusion in the guideline. Each question was assigned to a pair of panelists, who refined the PICO wording and reviewed the best available evidence using predetermined search terms. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework was used throughout and recommendations of "strong" or "conditional" were made for each PICO question based on quality of evidence and panel consensus. Recommendations were provided when evidence was actionable; suggestions, when evidence was equivocal; and best practice statements, when the benefits of the intervention outweighed the risks, but direct evidence to support the intervention did not exist. From the original 35 proposed PICO questions, 10 were selected. The RSI guideline panel issued one recommendation (strong, low-quality evidence), seven suggestions (all conditional recommendations with moderate-, low-, or very low-quality evidence), and two best practice statements. The panel made two suggestions for a single PICO question and did not make any suggestions for one PICO question due to lack of evidence. Using GRADE principles, the interdisciplinary panel found substantial agreement with respect to the evidence supporting recommendations for RSI. The panel also identified literature gaps that might be addressed by future research.

A principled conflict of laws characterisation of fraud in letters of credit

This article examines how the issue of fraud in letters of credit (which constitutes a critical exception to the autonomy principle) should be characterised in a conflict of laws analysis; and consequently, which law should apply to determine if fraud has been established. It argues that the fraud issue has thus far been incorrectly subsumed within the letter of credit contract, rather than being correctly characterised as a separate and independent issue. On the basis of fundamental conflict of laws principles and policies, this article advocates that the fraud issue should be characterised separately as a tortious/delictual issue. It then discusses how some of the difficulties of such a conflicts characterisation may be adequately addressed.

Conflict of interest policies at Australian medical schools.

Pharmaceutical industry exposure is widespread during medical training and may affect education and clinical decision-making. Medical faculties' conflict of interest (COI) policies help to limit this exposure and protect students against commercial influence. Our aim was to investigate the prevalence, content and strength of COI policies at Australian medical schools and changes since a previous assessment conducted in 2009. We identified policies by searching medical school and host university websites in January 2021, and contacted deans to identify any missed policies. We applied a modified version of a scorecard developed in previous studies to examine the content of COI policies. All data were coded in duplicate. COI policies were rated on a scale from 0 (no policy) to 2 (strong policy) across 11 items per medical school. Oversight mechanisms and sanctions were also assessed, and current policies were compared with the 2009 study. Of 155 potentially relevant policies, 153 were university-wide and two were specific to medical schools. No policies covered sales representatives, on-site sponsored education or free samples. Oversight of consultancies had improved substantially, with 76% of schools requiring preapproval. Disclosure policies, while usually present, were weak, with no public disclosure required. We found little indication that Australian medical students are protected from commercial influence on medical education, and there has been limited COI policy development within the past decade. More attention is needed to ensure the independence of medical education in Australia.

Wadon Wadas: Women’s Resistance in Agrarian Conflict of Andesite Mining Construction Policy in Purworejo Regency

Wadon Wadas: Women’s Resistance in Agrarian Conflict of Andesite Mining Construction Policy in Purworejo Regency

Professional boundaries between faculty/staff and students in UK higher education: students’ levels of comfort with personal and sexualised interactions

ABSTRACT The concept of ‘professional boundaries’ – widely used in sectors where professional relationships between adults are regulated – has not commonly been drawn on in higher education (HE) to understand and denote appropriate relationships between faculty or staff and students. Nevertheless, in recent years the question of how to regulate sexual and romantic relationships between faculty/staff and students has been a developing policy concern within HE institutions internationally. In order to contribute to empirically-informed policy development in this area, this article explores students’ levels of comfort with different sexualised and non-sexualised behaviours from staff/faculty, drawing on data from 1492 students from a national survey carried out in the United Kingdom, initially published in the National Union of Students’ report Power in the Academy (2018). New analysis on this data is introduced, outlining scales of ‘personal’ and ‘sexualised’ interactions, which reveal the patterns of comfort and discomfort across different demographic groups of students, most notably women, LGBTQ+ students, and Black and Asian students. The analysis identifies areas of interaction with staff/faculty that are of concern to different groups of students, calling into question existing policy frameworks such as conflict of interest policies and varying levels of regulation for undergraduate and postgraduate students. In the light of these findings, the article makes two recommendations: first, that training on professional boundaries should be included in higher education teaching qualifications, and second, for the development of shared norms around professional boundaries within academic departments and professional societies.

Flashback Foreword: KRAS Is a Selection Marker for Panitumumab Benefit in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Article Tools FLASHBACK FOREWORD Article Tools OPTIONS & TOOLS Export Citation Track Citation Add To Favorites Rights & Permissions COMPANION ARTICLES JCO Flashback: Predictive Value of KRAS Mutations on the Outcomes of Panitumumab Monotherapy in Colorectal Cancer. June 14, 2023 Wild-Type KRAS Is Required for Panitumumab Efficacy in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. June 14, 2023 ARTICLE CITATION DOI: 10.1200/JCO.23.00221 Journal of Clinical Oncology - published online before print June 14, 2023 PMID: 37315388 Flashback Foreword: KRAS Is a Selection Marker for Panitumumab Benefit in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Andrew H. Ko, MD1,2xAndrew H. KoSearch for articles by this author Show More 1Associate Editor, Journal of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA2University of California San Francisco Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.23.00221 First Page Full Text PDF Figures and Tables © 2023 by American Society of Clinical OncologyTHE TAKEAWAYIn 2008, Amado et al1 published a biomarker analysis demonstrating the negative predictive value of KRAS mutations for outcome of antiepidermal growth factor receptor therapy in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. These findings guide treatment decision making for colorectal cancer that continues up to the present time and also informed further discoveries relating to treatment resistance and approaches to monitoring for this disease.AUTHOR'S DISCLOSURES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTERESTFlashback Foreword: KRAS Is a Selection Marker for Panitumumab Benefit in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal CancerThe following represents disclosure information provided by the author of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated unless otherwise noted. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/jco/authors/author-center.Open Payments is a public database containing information reported by companies about payments made to US-licensed physicians (Open Payments).Andrew H. KoThis author is an Associate Editor for Journal of Clinical Oncology. Journal policy recused the author from having any role in the peer review of this manuscript.Honoraria: Research to Practice, Clinical Care Options, Medscape, BioAscent, MJH Life Sciences, Gerson Lehrman GroupConsulting or Advisory Role: ERYTECH Pharma, Imugene, SynCoreBio, Roche/Genentech, Ipsen, Five Prime Therapeutics, Tyme, Turning Point Therapeutics, Signatera, Syros PharmaceuticalsSpeakers' Bureau: Clinical Care OptionsResearch Funding: Celgene (Inst), Merck (Inst), Genentech/Roche (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), AbGenomics International (Inst), Apexigen (Inst), Astellas Pharma (Inst), Leap Therapeutics (Inst), BioMed Valley Discoveries (Inst), CrystalGenomics (Inst)No other potential conflicts of interest were reported. Companion JCO Flashback: Predictive Value of KRAS Mutations on the Outcomes of Panitumumab Monotherapy in Colorectal Cancer Wild-Type KRAS Is Required for Panitumumab Efficacy in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Rationale for Cotargeting Hepatocyte Growth Factor and Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor in Recurrent/Metastatic Head and Neck Cancer.

Article Tools UNDERSTANDING THE PATHWAY Article Tools OPTIONS & TOOLS Export Citation Track Citation Add To Favorites Rights & Permissions COMPANION ARTICLES Randomized Phase II Trial of Ficlatuzumab With or Without Cetuximab in Pan-Refractory, Recurrent/Metastatic Head and Neck Cancer. March 28, 2023 ARTICLE CITATION DOI: 10.1200/JCO.23.00460 Journal of Clinical Oncology - published online before print June 15, 2023 PMID: 37319388 Rationale for Cotargeting Hepatocyte Growth Factor and Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor in Recurrent/Metastatic Head and Neck Cancer Stéphanie Kermorgant, PhD1xStéphanie KermorgantSearch for articles by this author Show More 1Spatial Signalling Group, Barts Cancer Institute–a CR-UK Centre of Excellence, Queen Mary University of London, John Vane Science Centre, London, United Kingdom https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.23.00460 First Page Full Text PDF Figures and Tables © 2023 by American Society of Clinical OncologySUPPORTSupported by Rosetrees Trust (M314 and M346), Barts Charity (MGU0511, G-001868, G-002205), and the MRC (MR/R009732/1).AUTHOR'S DISCLOSURES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTERESTRationale for Cotargeting Hepatocyte Growth Factor and Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor in Recurrent/Metastatic Head and Neck CancerThe following represents disclosure information provided by the author of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated unless otherwise noted. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/jco/authors/author-center.Open Payments is a public database containing information reported by companies about payments made to US-licensed physicians (Open Payments).No potential conflicts of interest were reported. Companion Randomized Phase II Trial of Ficlatuzumab With or Without Cetuximab in Pan-Refractory, Recurrent/Metastatic Head and Neck Cancer

Microsatellite Instability Detection: The Current Standards, Limitations, and Misinterpretations.

Article Tools REVIEW ARTICLES Diagnostics Article Tools OPTIONS & TOOLS Export Citation Track Citation Add To Favorites Rights & Permissions COMPANION ARTICLES No companion articles ARTICLE CITATION DOI: 10.1200/PO.23.00010 JCO Precision Oncology no. 7 (2023) e2300010. Published online June 14, 2023. PMID: 37315263 Microsatellite Instability Detection: The Current Standards, Limitations, and Misinterpretations Valentina Yakushina , PhD1,2xValentina YakushinaSearch for articles by this author; Alexandra Kavun , MSc1xAlexandra KavunSearch for articles by this author; Egor Veselovsky, MSc1,3xEgor VeselovskySearch for articles by this author; Tatiana Grigoreva , MSc1,4xTatiana GrigorevaSearch for articles by this author; Ekaterina Belova , PhD1,5xEkaterina BelovaSearch for articles by this author; Alexandra Lebedeva , MSc1xAlexandra LebedevaSearch for articles by this author; Vladislav Mileyko , MSc1xVladislav MileykoSearch for articles by this author; and Maxim Ivanov , PhD1,6xMaxim IvanovSearch for articles by this author Show More 1OncoAtlas LLC, Moscow, Russian Federation2Laboratory of Epigenetics, Research Centre for Medical Genetics, Moscow, Russian Federation3Department of Evolutionary Genetics of Development, Koltzov Institute of Developmental Biology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russian Federation4Shemyakin-Ovchinnikov Institute of Bioorganic Chemistry, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russian Federation5Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russian Federation6Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Moscow, Russian Federation https://doi.org/10.1200/PO.23.00010 First Page Full Text PDF Figures and Tables © 2023 by American Society of Clinical OncologyCONTEXTKey ObjectiveAccurate microsatellite instability (MSI) assessment is critical for Lynch syndrome diagnostics, prognosis of disease progression, and success of chemotherapy and immunotherapy. In immunotherapy, false-positive MSI testing prevents putative responding patients from receiving effective treatment, and false-negative MSI testing leads to the prescription of ineffective therapy with its adverse effects.Knowledge GeneratedThis article provides the main advantages and limitations of the standard MSI testing methods and novel approaches in clinical practice, assesses possible sources of errors, discusses best practices and guidelines, and highlights the unsolved questions that remain sources of incorrect interpretation.RelevanceAmong novel approaches, next-generation sequencing (NGS) is considered one of the most promising; its advantages include high accuracy, an expanded spectrum of microsatellites analyzed, and simultaneous assessment of a comprehensive spectrum of clinically significant markers. In liquid biopsy, NGS-based approaches demonstrate outstanding results.SUPPORTSupported by the Russian Science Foundation (project No. 22-75-10154; https://rscf.ru/project/22-75-10154/).AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONSConception and design: Valentina Yakushina, Vladislav Mileyko, Maxim IvanovData analysis and interpretation: Alexandra Kavun, Egor Veselovsky, Tatiana Grigoreva, Ekaterina Belova, Alexandra LebedevaManuscript writing: All authorsFinal approval of manuscript: All authorsAccountable for all aspects of the work: All authorsAUTHORS' DISCLOSURES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTERESTThe following represents disclosure information provided by authors of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated unless otherwise noted. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/po/author-center.Open Payments is a public database containing information reported by companies about payments made to US-licensed physicians (Open Payments).Valentina YakushinaEmployment: Atlas OncodiagnosticsAlexandra KavunEmployment: OncoAtlas LLCEgor VeselovskyEmployment: OncoAtlas LLCTatiana GrigorevaEmployment: OncoAtlas LLCEkaterina BelovaEmployment: OncoAtlas LLCAlexandra LebedevaEmployment: OncoAtlas LLCVladislav MileykoEmployment: OncoAtlas LLCLeadership: OncoAtlas LLCStock and Other Ownership Interests: OncoAtlasResearch Funding: I-pharmMaxim IvanovEmployment: OncoAtlas LLCNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Flashback Foreword: Cisplatin/Pemetrexed in Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Article Tools FLASHBACK FOREWORD Article Tools OPTIONS & TOOLS Export Citation Track Citation Add To Favorites Rights & Permissions COMPANION ARTICLES Phase III Study Comparing Cisplatin Plus Gemcitabine With Cisplatin Plus Pemetrexed in Chemotherapy-Naive Patients With Advanced-Stage Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer. May 05, 2023 ARTICLE CITATION DOI: 10.1200/JCO.22.02804 Journal of Clinical Oncology - published online before print May 5, 2023 PMID: 37146425 Flashback Foreword: Cisplatin/Pemetrexed in Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Thomas E. Stinchcombe , MD1,2xThomas E. StinchcombeSearch for articles by this author Show More 1Duke Cancer Institute, Division of Medical Oncology, Durham, NC2Associate Editor, Journal of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.22.02804 First Page Full Text PDF Figures and Tables © 2023 by American Society of Clinical OncologyTHE TAKEAWAYThis phase III, noninferiority study1 investigated the novel chemotherapy combination of cisplatin and pemetrexed compared with the standard combination of cisplatin and gemcitabine demonstrating that survival was noninferior between the two platinum-based combinations, and a lower rate of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia was observed with cisplatin and pemetrexed. However, cisplatin and pemetrexed demonstrated a superior survival in patients with adenocarcinoma and large cell histologies and inferior survival in patients with squamous histology, and after this trial, the use of pemetrexed was restricted to patients with nonsquamous histology.AUTHOR'S DISCLOSURES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTERESTFlashback Foreword: Cisplatin/Pemetrexed in Non–Small-Cell Lung CancerThe following represents disclosure information provided by the author of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated unless otherwise noted. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/jco/authors/author-center.Open Payments is a public database containing information reported by companies about payments made to US-licensed physicians (Open Payments).Thomas E. StinchcombeThis author is an Associate Editor for Journal of Clinical Oncology. Journal policy recused the author from having any role in the peer review of this manuscript.Consulting or Advisory Role: EMD Serono, Janssen Oncology, Turning Point Therapeutics, Sanofi/Aventis, GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech/Roche, Daiichi Sankyo/Astra Zeneca, Takeda, Eisai/H3 Biomedicine, G1 Therapeutics, Spectrum PharmaceuticalsResearch Funding: AstraZeneca (Inst), Takeda (Inst), Regeneron (Inst), Seattle Genetics (Inst), Mirati Therapeutics (Inst), Genentech/Roche (Inst)No other potential conflicts of interest were reported. Companion Phase III Study Comparing Cisplatin Plus Gemcitabine With Cisplatin Plus Pemetrexed in Chemotherapy-Naive Patients With Advanced-Stage Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

A Case of Pathologic Complete Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Pembrolizumab in Metaplastic Breast Cancer

Article Tools CASE REPORTS Article Tools OPTIONS & TOOLS Export Citation Track Citation Add To Favorites Rights & Permissions COMPANION ARTICLES No companion articles ARTICLE CITATION DOI: 10.1200/PO.22.00506 JCO Precision Oncology no. 7 (2023) e2200506. Published online May 17, 2023. PMID: 37196220 A Case of Pathologic Complete Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Pembrolizumab in Metaplastic Breast Cancer Anita Gul , MD1xAnita GulSearch for articles by this author; J. Jaime Alberty-Oller , MD, FACS2xJ. Jaime Alberty-OllerSearch for articles by this author; Jagbir Sandhu, MD1xJagbir SandhuSearch for articles by this author; Everick Ayala-Bustamante, MD2xEverick Ayala-BustamanteSearch for articles by this author; and Sylvia Adams , MD3xSylvia AdamsSearch for articles by this author Show More 1New York Medical College, Metropolitan Hospital, New York, NY2SUNY Downstate Health Sciences Center, Kings County Hospital, Brooklyn, NY3Perlmutter Cancer Center, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY https://doi.org/10.1200/PO.22.00506 First Page Full Text PDF Figures and Tables © 2023 by American Society of Clinical OncologyDATA SHARING STATEMENTAll the data supporting the findings in this case report are contained within the text.AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONSConception and design: Anita Gul, Jagbir Sandhu, Sylvia AdamsCollection and assembly of data: Anita Gul, J. Jaime Alberty-Oller, Jagbir Sandhu, Everick Ayala-BustamanteData analysis and interpretation: Anita Gul, Jagbir Sandhu, Everick Ayala-Bustamante, Sylvia AdamsManuscript writing: All authorsFinal approval of manuscript: All authorsAccountable for all aspects of the work: All authorsAUTHORS' DISCLOSURES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTERESTThe following represents disclosure information provided by authors of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated unless otherwise noted. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/po/author-center.Open Payments is a public database containing information reported by companies about payments made to US-licensed physicians (Open Payments).J. Jaime Alberty-OllerHonoraria: HologicConsulting or Advisory Role: HologicTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: HologicSylvia AdamsConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck, Genentech, Bristol Myers SquibbResearch Funding: Merck (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Celgene (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Amgen (Inst), Novartis (Inst)No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Exceptional Response to Dual Colony-Stimulating Factor 1 Receptor/PD-L1 Targeting After Primary Resistance to PD-1 Inhibition in a Patient With a Metastatic Uveal Melanoma.

Exceptional Response to Dual Colony-Stimulating Factor 1 Receptor/PD-L1 Targeting After Primary Resistance to PD-1 Inhibition in a Patient With a Metastatic Uveal Melanoma.