Integrating Immuno-Oncology Into Therapy for Lung Cancer
Challenging Patient Cases with Expert Panel Discussions
Overview
  • Dates of Release & Expiration: August 1, 2015 - August 1, 2016
  • Available "24/7" on-demand, to be viewed either as a CME or CE or non-accredited program
  • 5 expert medical oncologists
  • 2 Category 1 CME credits available for physicians
  • 2 CE credits available for nurses and pharmacists
Co-Chairs
Roy S. Herbst, MD, PhD
Ensign Professor of Medicine (Oncology)
Professor of Pharmacology
Chief of Medical Oncology
Associate Director for Translational Research
Director, Thoracic Oncology Research Program
Yale Comprehensive Cancer Center
Yale School of Medicine
New Haven, CT
USA

Frances A. Shepherd, MD, FRCPC
Professor of Medicine
Scott Taylor Chair in
Lung Cancer Research
University of Toronto
Princess Margaret Hospital
Toronto, Ontario
CANADA

 
Click here to
view this 2-hour webinar and earn either CME or CE credit. Requires completion of a brief evaluation form, participation in 4 pre- and post-questions, and successfully passing a CME or CE test of 4 questions
 
Click here to
view this 2-hour webinar without CME or CE credit
 
 

Overview

There are many important differences between immune therapy and the traditional, systemic approaches to treating NSCLC. These are the result of an entirely new mechanism of action involving the immune system's checkpoint pathways that cause patient responses to immune therapy, as well as drug toxicity and toxicity management, to be much different than what occurs with targeted therapy or chemotherapy.

The objective of this two-hour symposium is to use five of the world's leading medical oncologists from the US, Canada and the United Kingdom, who are experts on the use of Immuno-Oncology for lung cancer, to help medical oncologists and other healthcare professionals (HCPs) understand how Immuno-Oncology therapy can best be used to improve the outcome of their NSCLC patients in their practices today.

Two, highly interactive presentations have been carefully developed to help medical oncologists and other HCPs fully understand the vitally important differences in efficacy and toxicity with Immuno-Oncology therapy: the differences in efficacy/patterns of response to therapy, and the differences in toxicity/toxicity management with immune therapy. With these two interactive presentations, and with three carefully selected patient case studies, the participants in this symposium will make treatment decisions and answer other important questions that are designed to help clinicians prepare to utilize this new Immuno-Oncology therapy for their patients.

Target Audience

This activity is designed to meet the educational needs and help close the practice gaps of medical oncologists, hematologists, radiation oncologists, surgical oncologists, oncology nurses/nurse planners, oncology pharmacists and other HCPs involved in the treatment, care and management of patients with NSCLC. Today lung cancer is treated optimally by a multidisciplinary approach, thus, all of the aforementioned clinical specialties are invited to participate in this activity.

Learning Objectives

PHYSICIANS
  1. Analyze the differences in how efficacy is measured when NSCLC treatment is Immuno-Oncology therapy versus traditional chemotherapy or targeted therapy.
  2. Compare and contrast the differences in Mechanisms of Action between Immuno-Oncology therapy and traditional targeted and chemotherapy for NSCLC.
  3. Critically assess the recent data using Immuno-Oncology therapy versus chemotherapy plus targeted therapy for second-line therapy of NSCLC.
  4. Evaluate the strategies for determining which NSCLC patients are candidates to receive Immuno-Oncology therapy versus treatment with traditional targeted or chemotherapy.
NURSES
  1. List the differences in how efficacy is measured when NSCLC treatment is Immuno-Oncology therapy versus traditional chemotherapy or targeted therapy.
  2. Recall the differences in Mechanisms of Action between Immuno-Oncology therapy and traditional targeted and chemotherapy for NSCLC.
  3. Critically assess the recent data using Immuno-Oncology therapy versus chemotherapy plus targeted therapy for second-line therapy of NSCLC.
  4. Describe the strategies for determining which NSCLC patients are candidates to receive Immuno-Oncology therapy versus treatment with traditional targeted or chemotherapy.
PHARMACISTS
  1. List the differences in how efficacy is measured when NSCLC treatment is Immuno-Oncology therapy versus traditional chemotherapy or targeted therapy.
  2. Recall the differences in Mechanisms of Action between Immuno-Oncology therapy and traditional targeted and chemotherapy for NSCLC.
  3. Critically assess the recent data using Immuno-Oncology therapy versus chemotherapy plus targeted therapy for second-line therapy of NSCLC.
  4. Describe the strategies for determining which NSCLC patients are candidates to receive Immuno-Oncology therapy versus treatment with traditional targeted or chemotherapy.

Faculty & Disclosures

Roy S. Herbst, MD, PhD (Co-Chair)
Ensign Professor of Medicine (Oncology)
Professor of Pharmacology
Chief of Medical Oncology
Associate Director for Translational Research
Director, Thoracic Oncology Research Program
Yale Comprehensive Cancer Center
Yale School of Medicine
New Haven, CT
USA

Consulting Fees: Genentech/Roche, Merck, Pfizer
Scientific Advisory Boards: Biothera, Diatech, Kolltan, N of 1
Clinical Trials Support / Grant: Genentech
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

Frances A. Shepherd, MD, FRCPC (Co-Chair)
Professor of Medicine
Scott Taylor Chair in
Lung Cancer Research
University of Toronto
Princess Margaret Hospital
Toronto, Ontario
CANADA

Ownership Interest (stocks, stock options, or other ownership interest excluding diversified mutual funds): Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca
Honoraria: Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Serono, Roche/Genentech, Merck/Schering Plough, Boehringer Ingelheim
Consulting Fees: Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Boehringer Ingelheim, Recombio, Synta Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb
Research Funding: Boehringer Ingelheim

Faculty
Mary E.R. O'Brien, MD, FRCP
Consultant Medical Oncologist
The Royal Marsden Hospital
Chair, European Organization for
Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC)
Lung Cancer Group
Sutton
UNITED KINGDOM

Consulting Fees: MSD

David R. Spigel, MD
Director, Lung Cancer Research Program
Sarah Cannon Research Institute
Tennessee Oncology
Nashville, TN
USA

Other (Uncompensated Advisor): Genentech, Bristol-Myers Squibb

Suresh S. Ramalingam, MD
Professor of Hematology and Medical Oncology
Director, Division of Medical Oncology
Emory University
Winship Cancer Institute
Atlanta, GA
USA

Consulting Fees: Genentech, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

LEAD NURSE PLANNER
Diane D. DePew, DSN, RN-BC

I have no real or apparent conflicts of interest to report.

PLANNER & CME/CE REVIEWER
Steve Madison, RPh, MBA (BMLI Manager)

I have no real or apparent conflicts of interest to report.

CME/CE PEER REVIEWER
Danielle Shafer, MD

I have no real or apparent conflicts of interest to report.

Peer Review Process of Conflicts of Interest

This educational activity has been independently peer-reviewed.

Disclosure of Unlabeled Uses

This educational activity may contain discussion of published and/or investigational uses of agents that are not indicated by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). For additional information about approved uses, including approved indications, contraindications, and warnings, please refer to the prescribing information for each product or consult the Physicians' Desk Reference.

The Biomedical Learning Institute (BMLI) does not recommend the use of any agent outside of the FDA labeled indications. The opinions expressed in the educational activity are those of the faculty and do not necessarily represent the views of the BMLI. Please refer to the official FDA prescribing information for each product for discussion of approved indicated, contraindications, and warnings.

CME/CE Accreditation & Credit Designation

To receive CME/CE credit participation in the entire activity by viewing the activity and the completion of a brief evaluation form, participation in 4 pre- and post-questions, and successfully passing a CME/CE test of 4 questions.

The Biomedical Learning Institute is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians.

The Biomedical Learning Institute designates this enduring activity for a maximum of 2 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits™.

Physicians should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.

The Biomedical Learning Institute is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education as a provider of continuing pharmacy education.

UAN: 0838-0000-15-001-H01-P
Credits: 2 hours (0.2 ceus)
Type of Activity: Knowledge

The Biomedical Learning Institute is accredited as a provider of continuing nursing education by the American Nurses Credentialing Center's COA.

The Biomedical Learning Institute designates this educational activity for 2 contact hours.

Accreditation by the American Nurses Credentialing Center's COA refers to recognition of educational activities and does not imply approval or endorsement of any product.

Participation at the entire activity, a 70% or better score on the post-test and completion of the evaluation form is required to receive CE contact hour credit.

Physician Assistants: AAPA accepts certificates of attendance for educational activities certified for Category 1 credit from AOACCME, Prescribed credit from AAFP, and AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™ from organizations accredited by ACCME or a recognized state medical society. Physician Assistants may receive a maximum of 2 hours of Category 1 credit for attending this symposium.

Fellows will receive a certificate of attendance that they can submit to their accrediting organizations for continuing education credit.

Educational Support

Sincere appreciation is extended to Bristol-Myers Squibb for their generous support of this educational activity

Educational Needs

Lung cancer is a significant unmet medical need. It is the leading cause of cancer deaths in the US and in many other countries. In 2014, according to the American Cancer Society Facts and Figures there were an estimated 224,210 new cases, and 159,260 deaths from lung cancer. Survival rates vary depending upon the stage of the lung malignancy when it is diagnosed. Globally, the five-year survival rate for Stage I NSCLC is approximately 50 percent. For Stage IV NSCLC, the five-year survival rate is approximately two percent. Thus, it is clear that a significant unmet medical need exists for patients with lung cancer.

Despite the very high mortality occurring with lung malignancy there is cause to be optimistic because of a the recently FDA approved Immuno-Oncology monoclonal antibody targeting PD-1, the first immune therapy approved for lung cancer.

Because Immuno-Oncology is so different from traditional systemic therapy for lung cancer, targeted therapy and chemotherapy, a significant educational need exists to help medical oncologists and other healthcare professionals (HCPs) quickly understand how to utilize immunotherapy in their practices to help improve their lung cancer patients' outcomes today.

Click here for the Computer System Requirements to view this webinar