Stem cell-based therapies for the treatment of stroke have received considerable attention. Two broad approaches to stem cell-based therapies have been taken: the transplantation of exogenous stem cells, and the activation of endogenous neural stem and progenitor cells (together termed neural precursors). Studies examining the transplantation of exogenous cells have demonstrated that neural stem and progenitor cells lead to the most clinically promising results. Endogenous activation of neural precursors has also been explored based on the fact that resident precursor cells have the inherent capacity to proliferate, migrate and differentiate into mature neurons in the uninjured adult brain. Studies have revealed that these neural precursor cell behaviours can be activated following stroke, whereby neural precursors will expand in number, migrate to the infarct site and differentiate into neurons. However, this innate response is insufficient to lead to functional recovery, making it necessary to enhance the activation of endogenous precursors to promote tissue repair and functional recovery. Herein we will discuss the current state of the stem cell-based approaches with a focus on endogenous repair to treat the stroke injured brain.

Adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies that reduce the risk of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) recurrence remain an area of unmet need. Advances have been made in metastatic RCC recently by leveraging PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). These agents are currently being investigated in the adjuvant and neoadjuvant settings to determine if intervention early in the disease trajectory offers a clinically meaningful benefit. While a disease-free survival benefit has been demonstrated with pembrolizumab, results from other ICI studies have not been positive to date. More mature data from these studies are needed to determine whether there is a survival benefit to ICIs in the curative-intent setting. The success of ICIs has also ushered a new wave of studies combining ICIs with other agents such as targeted therapies and vaccines, which are in early stages of investigation. We review the current state of adjuvant/neoadjuvant therapy in RCC and highlight opportunities for ongoing study.

Background: Timeliness can have a substantial effect on treatment outcomes, prognosis and quality of life for patients with lung cancer. We sought to evaluate changes in wait times for patients with non–small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) and to identify bottlenecks in cancer care. Methods: We included patients who received treatment with curative intent or palliative treatment for NSCLC, diagnosed through mediastinal staging by a thoracic surgeon. Data were collected from 3 cohorts over 3 time periods: before the regionalization of lung cancer care (2005–2007, C1), immediately postregionalization (2011–2013, C2) and 5 years after regionalization (2016–2017, C3). Total wait time and delays along treatment pathways were compared across cohorts using multivariate Cox proportionality models. Results: Our total sample size was 299 patients. Overall, there was no significant difference in total wait time among the 3 cohorts. However, wait time from symptom onset to first physician visit significantly increased in C3 compared with C2 (hazard ratio [HR] 0.41, p < 0.01) and C1 (HR 0.43, p < 0.01). Time from first physician visit to computed tomography (CT) scan significantly decreased in C3 compared with C2 (HR 1.54, p < 0.01). Time from abnormal CT scan to first surgeon visit also significantly decreased in C2 (HR 1.43, p < 0.01) and C3 (HR 4.47, p < 0.01) compared with C1, and between C3 and C2 (HR 2.67, p < 0.01). In contrast, time from first surgeon visit to completion of staging significantly increased in C2 (HR 0.36, p < 0.01) and C3 (HR 0.24, p < 0.01) compared with C1, as well as between C3 and C2 (HR 0.60, p < 0.01). Time to first treatment after completion of staging was significantly shorter for C3 than C1 (HR 1.58, p < 0.01). Conclusion: Trends toward a reduction in wait time are evident 5 years after the regionalization of lung cancer care, primarily led by shorter wait times for CT scans and thoracic surgeon consults. However, wait times can further be reduced by addressing delays in staging completion and patient and provider education to identify the early signs of NSCLC.

No abstract