Integrating Immune Therapies & Targeted Therapies Into Standards of Care for Solid and Hematologic Malignancies
Overview
  • Dates of Release & Expiration: December 10, 2016 - December 10, 2017
  • Available "24/7" on-demand, to be viewed either as a CME or CE or non-accredited program
  • 19 expert medical oncologists
  • 8.25 Category 1 CME credits available for physicians
  • 8.25 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

Leo I. Gordon, MD
Abby and John Friend Professor of Cancer Research
Professor in Medicine
Director Lymphoma Program
Co-Director Hematologic Malignancies Program
Division of Hematology/Oncology
Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine
Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
Medical Director of the John and Lillian Matthews Center for Cellular Therapy
Chicago, IL

 
Click here to
view this 8.25-hour webinar and earn either CME/CE credit. Requires completion of a brief evaluation form, participation in pre- and post-questions, and successfully passing a brief CME/CE test
 
Click here to
view this 8.25-hour webinar without CME or CE credit
 
 

Overview

The overall objective is to review the ongoing integration of many novel immune therapies and novel targeted therapies into the evolving standards of care, including the use of chemotherapy, for many malignancies. Standards of care are evolving due to a continuing stream of FDA drug approvals, the evolving NCCN and ASCO guidelines and the increasing number of ongoing investigational clinical trials available to patients now.

What makes this activity unique and highly relevant and practical to oncologists, hematologists, nurses, pharmacists, scientists and other cancer HealthCare Professionals (HCPs) is that it concurrently addresses integrating all of these new immune and targeted therapies into routine practice. This is the “real world” situation of how oncologists and hematologists and other HCPs must learn how to optimally incorporate all of these new therapies into their practices.

For a large number of malignancies, e.g., lung cancer, pancreatic cancer, leukemia and melanoma, there are both new and emerging targeted therapies, as well as new and emerging immune therapies. For many patients these new therapies have similar, if not identical indications. Strategies employing these new immune and targeted therapies include single-agent usage, as well as combinations of immune therapy plus targeted therapy, and dual combinations of either class of therapy, and also, the optimal sequencing of these new therapies, especially with the use of established chemotherapy and chemotherapy backbones, for a large number of solid and hematologic malignancies. Treating most malignancies today involves the evaluation of numerous options of different therapies—more than ever before.

Melanoma is a good example malignancy where oncologists are facing dilemmas regarding how to use targeted and immune therapies today: using monotherapy, or dual and sometimes even triple immune or targeted combination therapy. And of course, depending upon the lines of therapy, when to use and switch specific strategies in order to optimize sequencing of therapy is also a critical issue to be understood.

Besides melanoma, a few questions-in-practice and dilemmas for NSCLC, pancreatic cancer and several hematologic malignancies are relevant examples and include: 1) How do clinicians select among the many new, FDA-approved checkpoint inhibitor-based strategies and their many permutations/combinations for improving outcome with NSCLC patients, plus the soon to be FDA-approved additional immune therapies? Similarly, 2) How do clinicians match NSCLC patients with specific EGFR mutations and the three generations of EGFR-directed TKI therapies, plus sequencing all of these 1st 2nd and 3rd generation EGFR-based strategies as monotherapy versus combination therapy for managing EGFR acquired resistance? 3) How do clinicians decide which is the appropriate strategy for 2nd-line non-EGFR mutated NSCLC: Is it a VEGFR-directed targeted therapy strategy or is it an immune-based (checkpoint inhibition) strategy or a taxane monotherapy? or a combination of classes? 4) How do clinicians decide which is better for improving patient outcome: either enrollment in a clinical trial to receive a new immune or targeted strategy, such as an investigational checkpoint inhibitor, or an anti-CDK/4, anti-CDK/6 or other late-stage investigational targeted therapy versus an established taxane chemotherapy approach? 5) How do hematologists begin selecting from the newest immune therapies for several lymphomas versus radiation and stem cell transplants, etc.? 6) How do oncologists integrate the most recent immune and targeted therapy data using novel JAK and BTK inhibition versus CAR T-Cell, stem cells, vaccines and other immune therapies for pancreatic cancer? These dilemmas and critical questions will be addressed in order to optimize the potential benefits from the various and increasing new and emerging therapies that are being integrated into new standards of cancer care.

The increasing use of Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) testing for NSCLC and other malignancies has made the identification of many more biologic targets and pathways as targets that can possibly improve patient outcome. The ability of NGS to identify these new biologic targets such as BRAF, MET, MEK, ROS 1, HER2, etc., for NSCLC, breast cancer and other solid malignancies has expanded the potential list of targeted therapy options for community-based practitioners as well as has increased the options for using the new immune therapies and their combinations with both targeted therapies and in some cases, novel chemotherapies, which are under active clinical investigation. This has expanded the use of NGS testing, used as large gene panels, and also as liquid and even urine based-biopsy ctDNA testing, versus tissue-based testing and FDA-approved companion diagnostic molecular tests.

The standards of cancer care for most malignancies for the forthcoming several years will continue to be evolving with a very large number of options as existing treatment algorithms integrate new immune and new targeted therapies into the traditional systemic anticancer therapies, including chemotherapy and radiation and surgery. This activity will emphasize and facilitate an in-depth understanding of how the new immune and novel targeted therapies are best integrated into standards of care for improving cancer patient outcome.

Target Audience

This activity is designed to meet the educational needs of medical oncologists, hematologists, radiation oncologists, surgical oncologists, pathologists, oncology pharmacists, oncology nurses/Advanced Nurse Practitioners, and other allied healthcare professionals involved in the treatment, care and management of patients with solid and hematologic malignancies that are responsive to immune and targeted therapies. Cancer Is treated optimally by a multi-disciplinary approach of clinicians, and thus, all of the aforementioned clinical specialties are targeted for invitation to this CME/CE activity.

Learning Objectives

PHYSICIANS
  1. Understand the differences in efficacy and toxicity between immunotherapies, New-Generation targeted therapies, and traditional targeted therapy and chemotherapy.
  2. Compare and contrast the various emerging and current therapies for pancreatic cancer.
  3. Compare and contrast the targeted and emerging immune therapies for leukemia.
  4. Analyze the different strategies for non-small cell lung cancer involving immune therapy versus targeted therapy and regimens with chemotherapy backbones.
  5. Devise various treatment strategies using immunotherapy and targeted therapy utilizing monotherapy, combinations and sequencing of therapies for melanoma.
  6. Assess the new and emerging data utilizing immune therapy for Hodgkin Lymphoma.
  7. Compare and contrast the use of the immune therapy for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma, and Follicular Lymphoma.
  8. Evaluate the different therapeutic strategies for Multiple Myeloma, including New-Generation targeted therapy, immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibition and with IMiDs, in both combination and monotherapy regimens.
  9. Integrate the new checkpoint inhibitor immune therapies and the established and emerging targeted strategies for metastatic renal cell carcinoma.
  10. Describe the various immune therapy strategies for metastatic Urothelial Bladder Cancer (mUBC).
  11. Compare and contrast the different immunotherapy and targeted therapy strategies for metastatic and relapsed squamous cell Head & Neck cancer.
NURSES
  1. Review the differences in efficacy and toxicity between immunotherapies, New-Generation targeted therapies, and traditional targeted therapy and chemotherapy.
  2. List the various emerging and current therapies for pancreatic cancer.
  3. Recognize the differences between the targeted and emerging immune therapies for leukemia.
  4. Recognize the different strategies for non-small cell lung cancer involving immune therapy versus targeted therapy and regimens with chemotherapy backbones.
  5. Identify various treatment strategies using immunotherapy and targeted therapy utilizing monotherapy, combinations and sequencing of therapies for melanoma.
  6. Recall the new and emerging data utilizing immune therapy for Hodgkin Lymphoma.
  7. Outline the use of the immune therapy for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma, and Follicular Lymphoma.
  8. Define the different therapeutic strategies for Multiple Myeloma, including New-Generation targeted therapy, immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibition and with IMiDs, in both combination and monotherapy regimens.
  9. Integrate the new checkpoint inhibitor immune therapies and the established and emerging targeted and immune strategies for renal cell carcinoma.
  10. Describe the various immune therapy strategies for metastatic Urothelial Bladder Cancer (mUBC).
  11. List the different immunotherapy and targeted therapy strategies for metastatic and relapsed squamous cell Head & Neck cancer.
PHARMACISTS
  1. Review the differences in efficacy and toxicity between immunotherapies, New-Generation targeted therapies, and traditional targeted therapy and chemotherapy.
  2. List the various emerging and current therapies for pancreatic cancer.
  3. Recognize the differences between the targeted and emerging immune therapies for leukemia.
  4. Recognize the different strategies for non-small cell lung cancer involving immune therapy versus targeted therapy and regimens with chemotherapy backbones.
  5. Identify various treatment strategies using immunotherapy and targeted therapy utilizing monotherapy, combinations and sequencing of therapies for melanoma.
  6. Recall the new and emerging data utilizing immune therapy for Hodgkin Lymphoma.
  7. Outline the use of the immune therapy for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma, and Follicular Lymphoma.
  8. Define the different therapeutic strategies for Multiple Myeloma, including New-Generation targeted therapy, immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibition and with IMiDs, in both combination and monotherapy regimens.
  9. Integrate the new checkpoint inhibitor immune therapies and the established and emerging targeted and immune strategies for renal cell carcinoma.
  10. Describe the various immune therapy strategies for metastatic Urothelial Bladder Cancer (mUBC).
  11. List the different immunotherapy and targeted therapy strategies for metastatic and relapsed squamous cell Head & Neck cancer.

Faculty & Disclosures

Medical Oncology Faculty

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

Consulting Fees: AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Genentech/Roche, Merck, Pfizer
Contracted Research: Genentech, Merck
Scientific Advisory Board: Biothera, Diatech, Kolltan

Leo I. Gordon, MD (Co-Chair)
Abby and John Friend Professor of Cancer Research
Professor in Medicine
Director Lymphoma Program
Co-Director Hematologic Malignancies Program
Division of Hematology/Oncology
Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine
Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
Medical Director of the John and Lillian Matthews Center for Cellular Therapy
Chicago, IL

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

Ranjana H. Advani, MD
Saul Rosenberg Professor of Lymphoma
Physician Leader of the Lymphoma Clinical Care Program
National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) non Hodgkin and Hodgkin Lymphoma (vice chair) guidelines panel
Lymphoma Core Committee of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG)
Co-Chair of the National Cancer Institute Lymphoma Steering Committee
Stanford School of Medicine
Stanford, CA

Consulting Fees: BMS, Forty Seven Inc, Juno, Kyowa, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Sutro
Contracted Research: Genentech/Roche, Seattle Genetics, Regeneron, Infinity, Millennium, Janssen Pharmaceutica, BMS, Pharmacyclics, Kura, Merck, Agensys, Celgene
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

Philippe Armand, MD, PhD
Assistant Professor
Department of Medicine
Harvard Medical School
Staff, Medical Oncology
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
Boston, MA

Consulting Fees: BMS, Merck
Contracted Research: BMS, Merck, Pfizer, Affimed, Roche, Tensha
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

Edward Garon, MD
Professor of Medicine and
Director, Department of Thoracic Oncology
UCLA Jonsson Cancer center
Los Angeles, CA

Contracted Research: AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, Genentech, Eli Lilly, BMS, Merck

Corey J. Langer, MD
Professor of Medicine
University of Pennsylvania Hospital
Director, Thoracic Oncology
Abramson Cancer Center
Perelman Center for Advanced Medicine
Philadelphia, PA

Consulting Fees: Lilly, Astra Zeneca, Merck, BMS, Genentech/Roche, AbbVie, Clovis, Ariad, Clarient, Pfizer
Contracted Research: Nektar, Merck, Clovis, Ariad, GSK, Inovio Pharmaceuticals
Other: DSMC, SWOG, AbbVie, Peregrine, Lilly, Synta
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

Eileen M. O'Reilly, MD
Associate Director,
David M. Rubenstein Center for
Pancreatic Cancer Research
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
New York, NY

Consulting Fees: Aduro Biotech, Agios, Array, Aslan, Astellas Pharma US, Bayer, Blueprint, Boston Scientific, BMS, Celgene, CASI, Celsion, Delcath, Eisai, EMD Serono, Gilead, Halozyme, Integragen, Ipsen, Janssen, Merck, Merrimack, Momenta, New B Innovation, NewLink Genetics, Onxeo, Opsona, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier, Silenseed, Sillajen, Sirtex, VAXIMM, Vicus Therapeutics, Westhaven
Contracted Research: Amgen, Astra Zeneca, BMS, Bayer, CASI, Celgene, Chugai, Exelixis, Genentech, Incyte, Lilly, Mabvax, Medimmune, Momenta, Myriad Genetics, OncoMed Pharmaceuticals Polaris Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Vicus Therapeutics
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

John M. Pagel, MD, PhD Dsc
Clinical Hematologist
Staff Physician
Swedish Cancer Institute
Seattle, WA

I have no real or apparent conflicts of interest to report

Daniel P. Petrylak, MD
Professor of Medicine, Medical Oncology and Urology
Professor & Co-Director
Signal Transduction Research Program
Yale Comprehensive Cancer Center
Yale School of Medicine
New Haven, CT

Consulting Fees: Bayer, Bellicum, Dendreon, Sanofi Aventis, Johnson and Johnson, Exelixis, Ferring, Millennium, Medivation, Pfizer, Roche Laboratories, Tyme Pharmaceuticals
Contracted Research: Oncogenix, Progenics, Johnson and Johnson, Millennium, Celgene, Dendreon, Sanofi, Agenysis, Eli Lilly, Roche Laboratories
Ownership Interest: Bellisum, Tyme

Gregory J. Riely, MD, PhD
Medical Oncologist
Thoracic Oncology Service
Vice Chair,
Clinical Trials Office
Department of Medicine
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
New York, NY

Consulting Fees: Genentech

Stanley R. Riddell, MD
Professor, School of Medicine
University of Washington
Seattle Cancer Care Alliance
Seattle, WA

Scientific Advisory Board: Cell Medica, Adaptive Biotechnologies
Ownership Interest (stocks, stock options, or other ownership interest excluding diversified mutual funds): Juno Therapeutics (co-founder, equity holder)

Mario Sznol, MD
Professor of Medicine
Yale University School of Medicine
Co-Director, Yale SPORE in Skin Cancer
Yale Comprehensive Cancer Center
New Haven, CT

Consulting Fees: Genentech-Roche, Bristol-Myers, Astra-Zeneca/Medimmune, Pfizer, Novartis, Kyowa-Kirin, Immune Design, Prometheus, Nektar, Pierre-Fabre, Lilly, Merck, Alexion, Theravance, Biodesix, Vaccinex, Janssen/Johnson and Johnson, Lycera, Modulate Therapeutics, Baxalta
Scientific Advisory Board: Symphogen, Lion Biotechnologies, Amphivena – (Stock options only), Adaptive Biotechnologies– (stock options only), Intensity – (stock options only), Adaptimmune (no payments to date), Pieris (no payments to date), Omniox (no payments to date)

Margaret A. Tempero, MD
Director, UCFS Pancreas Center
Leader, Pancreas Cancer Program
Professor of Medicine
Division of Hematology and Oncology
University of California San Francisco
San Francisco, CA

Consulting Fees: Cornerstone Pharma, Eli Lilly, Novacure/MCS Biotech Resources, Opsona Therapeutics
Contracted Research: Celgene, Halozyme
Advisory Board: Gilead, Threshold Pharma/EMD Serono
Data Monitoring Committee: Fuji Film/Strategia Therapeutics
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

Heather A. Wakelee, MD
Assistant Professor
Department of Medicine
Division of Oncology
Member, Stanford Cancer Institute
Stanford Clinical Cancer Center
Stanford, CA

Consulting Fees: Peregrine, ACEA, Pfizer, Helsinn, Genentech (uncompensated)
Contracted Research: Clovis, Exelixis, AstraZeneca, MedImmune, Genentech/Roche, BMS, Gilead, Novartis, Xcovery, Pfizer, Celgene, Pharmacyclics, Lilly
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

Jeffrey S. Weber, MD, PhD
Director, Donald A. Adam
Comprehensive Melanoma Research Center
Senior Member, Moffitt Cancer Center
Professor and Associate Chair,
Department of Oncologic Sciences
University of South Florida
Tampa, FL

Consulting Fees: BMS, Merck, Novartis, GSK, Astra Zeneca, EMD Serono, Celldex, Nektar, Genentech, Roche
Ownership Interest (stocks, stock options, or other ownership interest excluding diversified mutual funds): Celldex, Altor, CytomX
Receipt of Intellectual Property Rights / Patent Holder: Named on a patent with Moffitt Cancer Center on predictive marker for IPI; no royalties of any kind
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

H. Jack West, MD
Medical Director, Thoracic Oncology Program
Swedish Cancer Institute
President and CEO
Global Resource for Advancing Cancer Education
Seattle, WA

Consulting Fees: Ariad, Astra Zeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, BMS, Celgene, Genentech/Roche, Guardant Health, Merck, Novartis, Trovagene
Fees for non-CME/CE Services Received Directly from Commercial Interest or Their Agents (e.g. speakers’ bureaus): Ariad, Astra Zeneca, Genentech/Roche, Lilly
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

Jeffrey Wolf, MD
Clinical Professor, Department of Medicine,
Director, Myeloma Program
Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center
University of California San Francisco
San Francisco, CA

Consulting Fees: Takeda, Celgene, Pharmacyclics, Telomere DX
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

Oncology Nursing Faculty

Marianne Davies, DNP, ACNP, AOCNP
Oncology Nurse Practitioner-Thoracic
Smilow Cancer Center at Yale New Haven
Yale Comprehensive Cancer Center
Assistant Professor
Yale School of Nursing
West Haven, CT

Fees for non-CME/CE Services Received Directly from Commercial Interest or Their Agents (e.g. speakers’ bureaus): Genentech, BMS, Novartis, Merck

 
 

 

Oncology Pharmacist Faculty

Jim M. Koeller, MS
Professor
University of Texas at Austin
College of Pharmacy
Pharmacotherapy Division
Adjoint Professor
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
School of Medicine
Pharmacotherapy Education & Research Center
University of Texas
Health Science Center at San Antonio
San Antonio, TX

Consulting Fees: Pfizer, Merck, Clinigen
Contracted Research: Corvida
Fees for non-CME/CE Services Received Directly from Commercial Interest or Their Agents (e.g. speakers’ bureaus): Merck, Lilly, Eisai, Pfizer

 
BioMedical Learning Institute

LEAD NURSE PLANNER
Diane D. DePew, DSN, RN-BC
I have no real or apparent conflicts of interest to report.

PLANNER & CME/CE REVIEWER
Stephen G. Madison, BSPharm, MBA, CHCP (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 8.25 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: 0838-0000-16-003-H01-P
Credits: 8.25 hours (0.825 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 8.25 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 8.25 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 Genentech, Merck, Novartis, Lilly, Celgene, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ariad, Foundation Medicine, Aduro Biotech for their generous support of this educational activity

Educational Needs

The educational need for this activity is the result of recent and continuing FDA approvals of new immune therapies and new targeted therapies for a large number of solid and hematologic malignancies. And because for many malignancies these new therapies have similar if not the same indications and usage, it is essential that their new applications within the current standards of care be evaluated concurrently in one symposium. With an understanding of the most current clinical trials’ data and FDA indications involving immune and targeted therapies, it will be possible for HCPs to deliver optimal patient care for many malignancies, resulting in improved outcome.

Click here for the Computer System Requirements to view this webinar