Personalized Therapies and Best Clinical Practices for Lung Cancer 2017
Overview
  • Dates of Release & Expiration: January 6, 2016 - January 6, 2017
  • Available "24/7" on-demand, to be viewed either as a CME or CE or non-accredited program
  • Expert medical oncologists
  • 8.25 Category 1 CME credits available for physicians
  • 8.25 CE credits available for nurses and pharmacists
Co-Chairs
Paul A. Bunn, Jr., MD
Distinguished Professor
James Dudley Chair in Lung Cancer Research
Professor, Medical Oncology
University of Colorado Denver
Denver, CO

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

 
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

This is an activity on the treatment and management of patients with lung cancer. The focus is on community-based medical oncology practices, but all clinicians caring for lung cancer patients are invited, including academic and research-based oncologists and allied healthcare practitioners.

The primary objective is to provide the target audience with the practical knowledge and best clinical practices to help them improve outcome in their lung cancer patients through a focus on personalized medicine with molecular and genomic testing and biomarkers, and an essential integration of the many new and emerging therapies into best practices for their lung cancer patients including immune therapy, new and novel targeted therapies, and novel uses of chemotherapy such as maintenance chemotherapy for squamous NSCLC. The target audience includes both academic and community-based lung cancer oncologists, pathologists, radiologists, surgeons, hematologists, fellows, oncology pharmacists, oncology nurses, Nurse Practitioners, physician assistants and other allied healthcare professionals. The focus is on community-based practices, but all clinicians are targeted, including academic and research-based oncologists and allied healthcare professionals.

This year there is significant focus on the integration of Immune therapy and novel targeted therapy into traditional chemotherapy, as well as an update on the status of NGS testing to address NSCLC patients without actionable mutations, including patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. And as always, heavy emphasis is placed in the use of interactive case studies and other learning formats to achieve the highest level of learner/audience interactivity with the faculty and the program.

EDUCATIONAL STATEMENT OF NEED

In 2016, lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths in the US, remains a significant unmet medical need, and, is expected to be a major clinical and scientific challenge for the foreseeable future, but with modest incremental advances. According to the American Cancer Society Facts and Figures there were an estimated 225,000 new cases, and 160,000 deaths from lung cancer this in 2015. Survival rates for patients with lung cancer vary widely depending upon the stage of the lung malignancy when it is initially diagnosed. The five-year survival rate for Stage I NSCLC is approximately 50 percent. Perhaps more importantly, because most lung cancer are diagnosed at late stages of disease, especially Stages II and mostly IV, the five-year survival rate for Stage IV NSCLC is approximately two percent. Thus, it is clear that there is incredible opportunity for improving outcomes for patients with lung cancer.

Despite the overall poor outcome, lung cancer patient outcomes are improving. Patients are living longer and with a better quality of life because physicians and other healthcare professionals have access to the information to gain the knowledge and competence to treat, care for and manage their patients. Physicians have a better understanding of lung cancer cell biology, an increasing ability to personalize existing and emerging systemic lung cancer drug therapy because of molecular and genomic diagnostic tests, the availability to use next-generation systemic lung cancer therapy and expanded uses of many existing systemic lung cancer drug therapies.

Target Audience

This activity is designed to meet the educational needs of and help close Practice Gaps of medical oncologists, hematologists, radiation oncologists, surgical oncologists, pathologists, oncology pharmacists, oncology nurses/Nurse Practitioners and other allied health-care professionals involved in the treatment, care and management of patients with lung cancer, including physician assistants and fellows. Lung cancer is treated optimally by a multi-disciplinary approach of clinicians and, thus, all of the aforementioned clinician specialties are targeted for invitation.

Learning Objectives

PHYSICIANS
  1. Compare and contrast the differences between the various approved and emerging immune therapeutic strategies for NSCLC patients in the relapsed and treatment naïve settings.
  2. Analyze the new and existing strategies including immune therapy, novel chemotherapy and targeted therapy for patients with squamous NSCLC across all lines of therapy including the treatment-naïve, relapsed and maintenance settings.
  3. Devise experimental therapeutic strategies using combination regimens containing an immune oncology therapy plus either another immune therapy, a targeted therapy, or chemotherapy.
  4. Understand how to devise personalized, systemic, NSCLC treatment strategies against otherwise non-actionable targets such as KRAS, MET, MEK, CDK4 and CDK6 based upon the results of Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) testing.
  5. Compare and contrast the various treatment strategies for managing acquired resistance to anti-EGFR and anti-ALK therapy, including which, when and how to use liquid biopsies to help guide therapy selections.
  6. Compare and contrast the various strategies targeting EGFR mutations in NSCLC, including monotherapy versus combination therapy and the impact on therapy related to differences in mutations.
  7. Understand the strategies for treating patients in the evolving ALK landscape in NSCLC, including when and how to use second-line therapy for treatment-naïve patients and for managing relapsed patients with CNS involvement.
  8. Compare and contrast the new and emerging value-based care system for reimbursement and payment of anti-cancer therapy versus the fee for service system including the process of transitioning to the new value-based system.
  9. Understand how the new COME HOME project from the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation reduces costs, enhances patient care and improves outcomes for patients with lung cancer.
  10. Describe how initiating the use of appropriate supportive care for lung cancer improves patient outcomes, including overall survival.
  11. Analyze the evidence-based data from major Phase III trials supporting the role of an oral gherlin receptor agonist for the treatment of loss of weight and loss of appetite in patients with advanced NSCLC.
NURSES
  1. Describe the differences between the various approved and emerging immune therapeutic strategies for NSCLC patients in the relapsed and treatment naïve settings.
  2. List the new and existing strategies including immune therapy, novel chemotherapy and targeted therapy for patients with squamous NSCLC across all lines of therapy including the treatment-naïve, relapsed and maintenance settings.
  3. Recall experimental therapeutic strategies using combination regimens containing an immune oncology therapy plus either another immune therapy, a targeted therapy, or chemotherapy.
  4. Identify the personalized, systemic, NSCLC treatment strategies against otherwise non-actionable targets such as KRAS, MET, MEK, CDK4 and CDK6 based upon the results of Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) testing.
  5. Define the various treatment strategies for managing acquired resistance to anti-EGFR and anti-ALK therapy, including which, when and how to use liquid biopsies to help guide therapy selections.
  6. List the various strategies targeting EGFR mutations in NSCLC, including monotherapy versus combination therapy and the impact on therapy related to differences in mutations.
  7. Recall the strategies for treating patients in the evolving ALK landscape in NSCLC, including when and how to use second-line therapy for treatment-naïve patients and for managing relapsed patients with CNS involvement.
  8. Describe the pros and cons of using Stereotactic Ablation Body Radiation (SABR) as an equivalent alternative standard of care to surgery for stage I NSCLC patients.
  9. Recall the current progress in the management of oligometastatic NSCLC.
  10. List the pros and cons of prophylactic cranial irradiation in NSCLC considering the advances with TKIs and other systemic therapy.
  11. Identify the evidence-based data from major Phase III trials supporting the role of an oral gherlin receptor agonist for the treatment of loss of weight and loss of appetite in patients with advanced NSCLC.
PHARMACISTS
  1. Describe the differences between the various approved and emerging immune therapeutic strategies for NSCLC patients in the relapsed and treatment naïve settings.
  2. List the new and existing strategies including immune therapy, novel chemotherapy and targeted therapy for patients with squamous NSCLC across all lines of therapy including the treatment-naïve, relapsed and maintenance settings.
  3. Recall experimental therapeutic strategies using combination regimens containing an immune oncology therapy plus either another immune therapy, a targeted therapy, or chemotherapy.
  4. Identify the personalized, systemic, NSCLC treatment strategies against otherwise non-actionable targets such as KRAS, MET, MEK, CDK4 and CDK6 based upon the results of Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) testing.
  5. Define the various treatment strategies for managing acquired resistance to anti-EGFR and anti-ALK therapy, including which, when and how to use liquid biopsies to help guide therapy selections.
  6. List the various strategies targeting EGFR mutations in NSCLC, including monotherapy versus combination therapy and the impact on therapy related to differences in mutations.
  7. Recall the strategies for treating patients in the evolving ALK landscape in NSCLC, including when and how to use second-line therapy for treatment-naïve patients and for managing relapsed patients with CNS involvement.
  8. Describe the pros and cons of using Stereotactic Ablation Body Radiation (SABR) as an equivalent alternative standard of care to surgery for stage I NSCLC patients.
  9. Recall the current progress in the management of oligometastatic NSCLC.
  10. List the pros and cons of prophylactic cranial irradiation in NSCLC considering the advances with TKIs and other systemic therapy.
  11. Identify the evidence-based data from major Phase III trials supporting the role of an oral gherlin receptor agonist for the treatment of loss of weight and loss of appetite in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Faculty & Disclosures

Paul Bunn, Jr., MD (Co-Chair)
Distinguished Professor
James Dudley Chair in Lung Cancer Research
Professor, Medical Oncology
University of Colorado Denver
Denver, CO

Consulting Fees: Amgen, Astellas, AZ, BMS, Celgene, Clovis, Daiichi, Genentech/Roche, Merck, Novartis, Lilly

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

Tracey Evans, MD
Associate Professor of Clinical Medicine
Abramson Cancer Center
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA

Consulting Fees: Genentech, Celgene, Lilly
Fees for Non-CME/CE Services Received Directly from Commercial Interest or their Agents (e.g. speakers’ bureaus): Genentech (Spouse)

Edward Garon, MD
Associate Clinical Professor
Department of Medicine
Director, Thoracic Oncology Program
UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center
Los Angeles, CA

Contracted Research: AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, Genentech, Eli Lilly, BMS, Merck
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

Jonathan Goldman, MD
Associate Professor of Medicine
Lung Cancer Research
Department of Hematology/Oncology
UCLA Ronald Reagan Medical Center
Santa Monica, CA

Consulting Fees: Clovis, BMS, AstraZeneca, Genentech
Contracted Research: Lilly, Clovis, BMS, AstraZeneca, Genentech

Richard Gralla, MD, FACP
Professor of Medicine
Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Jacobi Medical Center
Bronx, NY

Consulting Fees: BMS, Lilly, BMI
Fees for non-CME/CE Services Received Directly from Commercial Interest or Their Agents (e.g. speakers’ bureaus): Merck
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

Fred Hirsch, MD, PhD
Professor of Medicine and Pathology
Pia and Fred R. Hirsch Endowed Chair
Associate Director, University of Colorado Cancer Center
CEO, International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC)
Denver, CO

Consulting Fees: Genentech BMS, Lilly, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Pfizer
Contracted Research: Lilly, Celgene, Amgen

Jim 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
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
San Antonio, TX

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

Ronald Natale, MD
Director of the Lung Cancer Clinical Research Program
Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
Los Angeles, CA

Contracted Research: AstraZeneca, Genentech/Roche, Merck, Peregrine
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

Joel Neal, MD, PhD
Assistant Professor
Department of Medicine
Division of Oncology
Member, Stanford Cancer Institute
Stanford Clinical Cancer Center
Stanford, CA

Consulting Fees: Clovis, CARET/Physicians Resource Mgmt, Nektar, BI, ARMO Biosciences, ARIAD
Contracted Research: Genentech/Roche, Merck, Arqule, Novartis, Exelixis, BI, Nektar
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

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

I have no real or apparent conflicts of interest to report.
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

Heather Wakelee, MD
Assistant Professor
Department of Medicine
Division of Oncology
Stanford Cancer Institute
Stanford Comprehensive 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.

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, Pfizer, Trovagene
Fees for non-CME/CE Services Received Directly from Commercial Interest or Their Agents (e.g. speakers’ bureaus): Ariad, Genentech/Roche, Lilly
I intend to reference unlabeled/unapproved uses of drugs or products in my presentation.

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: 0838-0000-16-004-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 activity.

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 Lilly, Helsinn, Celgene, Merck, Astellas, Myriad Genetic Laboratories, and Novartis for their generous support of this educational activity

Click here for the Computer System Requirements to view this webinar