Customize
Quick Links
Specialties

Accreditation/Credit Designation

Physicians' Education Resource®, LLC is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) to provide continuing medical education for physicians.

Physicians' Education Resource®, LLC designates this enduring material for a maximum of 1.5 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.

Acknowledgement of Commercial Support

This activity is supported by educational grants from Exelixis, Inc., Incyte Corporation, and Prometheus Laboratories, Inc.

Community Practice Connections™: Personalized Assessment in Advanced RCC Decision Making: Leveraging the Evidence and Patient Characteristics to Inform Decisions Along the Disease Continuum


Release Date: April 30, 2018
Expiration Date: April 30, 2019
Media: Internet - based

 

Activity Overview

Clinical decision making in the setting of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has dramatically changed over recent years. New drug approvals have raised questions about how rational treatment planning and effective sequencing of new and older standards of care can optimize patient outcomes. Additionally, real-world experience with newer agents and new trial data continue to refine treatment strategies in RCC. Most recently, the promise of improved outcomes in the first-line metastatic setting has arisen.

This educational activity features video interviews with renowned experts in RCC who share their perspectives on evidence-based, state-of-the-art management strategies designed to meet the specific needs of oncologists who treat patients with genitourinary (GU) cancers. Throughout the activity, the faculty lead participants through an in-depth exploration of the latest data and their clinical implications.

Acknowledgement of Commercial Support

This activity is supported by educational grants from Exelixis, Inc., Incyte Corporation, and Prometheus Laboratories, Inc.

Instructions for This Activity and Receiving Credit

  • You will need to login to participate in the activity.
  • Each presentation may contain an interactive question(s). You may move forward through the presentation; however, you may not go back to change answers or review videos/content until you finish the presentation.
  • At the end of the activity, “educational content/video files” will be available for your reference.
  • In order to receive a CME certificate, participants must complete the activity.
  • Complete the posttest and pass with a score of 70% or higher, complete the evaluation and then click on request for credit. Participants may immediately download a CME certificate upon completion of these steps.


Target Audience

This educational program is directed medical oncologists, surgical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and urologists interested in the treatment of RCC. Nurse practitioners, physician assistants, nurses, and other healthcare professionals involved in the treatment and management of patients with RCC are also invited to participate.

Learning Objectives

At the conclusion of this activity, you should be better prepared to:

  1. Appraise the potential influence of recent data sets on frontline standards of care for patients with metastatic RCC
  2. Use evidence-based dosing schedules for patients with RCC that may help to optimize treatment adherence and patient outcomes
  3. Integrate key individual patient characteristics into the development of effective treatment sequencing strategies for patients with RCC
  4. Describe emerging combination treatment strategies that are being evaluated for patients with RCC

Faculty, Staff, and Planners' Disclosures

Faculty

Robert A. Figlin, MD, FACP
Steven Spielberg Family Chair in Hematology Oncology
Professor of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences
Director, Division of Hematology/Oncology
Deputy Director, Integrated Oncology Service Line
Deputy Director, Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
Los Angeles, California

Disclosure: Grant/Research Support: Peloton Therapeutics, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Argos Therapeutics, Exelixis, Inc, Merck; Consultant: Pfizer, CM Therapeutics.

Daniel J. George, MD
Professor of Medicine
Professor in Surgery
Member of the Duke Cancer Institute
Department of Medicine
Duke University School of Medicine
Durham, North Carolina

Disclosure: Grant/Research Support: Exelixis, Inc, Genentech, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Astellas Pharma, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Millennium, Acerta Pharma, Bayer, Dendreon, Innocrin; Consultant: Dendreon, Novartis, Sanofi, Bayer, Medivation, BioPharm, Axess Oncology, Exelixis, Inc, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Astellas Pharma, Innocrin, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech, Janssen, Acceleron, Celgene, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Myovant; Speakers Bureau: Dendreon, Novartis, Sanofi, Bayer, Exelixis, Inc.

Thomas E. Hutson, DO, PharmD, FACP
Director, GU Oncology Program
Co-Director, GU Center of Excellence
Texas Oncology
Charles A Sammons Cancer Center
Baylor University Medical Center
Dallas, Texas

Disclosure: No relevant financial relationships with commercial interests to disclose.

Eric Jonasch, MD
Professor of Medicine
Department of Genitourinary Medical Oncology
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Houston, Texas
 

Disclosure: Grant/Research Support: Exelixis, Inc, Pfizer, Novartis, Peloton Therapeutics; Consultant: Exelixis, Inc, Pfizer, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Peloton Therapeutics.

David F. McDermott, MD
Leader, Kidney Cancer Program
Director, Biologic Therapy and Cutaneous Oncology Programs
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Boston, Massachusetts
 

Disclosure: Grant/Research Support: Prometheus Laboratories; Consultant: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Merck, Novartis, Eisai, Exelixis, Inc, Array BioPharma, Genentech BioOncology.

The staff of PER® have no relevant financial relationships with commercial interests to disclose.

Disclosure Policy and Resolution of Conflicts of Interest (COI)

As a sponsor accredited by the ACCME, it is the policy of PER® to ensure fair balance, independence, objectivity, and scientific rigor in all of its CME activities. In compliance with ACCME guidelines, PER® requires everyone who is in a position to control the content of a CME activity to disclose all relevant financial relationships with commercial interests. The ACCME defines “relevant financial relationships” as financial relationships in any amount occurring within the past 12 months that creates a COI.

Additionally, PER® is required by ACCME to resolve all COI. PER® has identified and resolved all COI prior to the start of this activity by using a multistep process.

Off-Label Disclosure and Disclaimer

This CME activity may or may not discuss investigational, unapproved, or off-label use of drugs. Participants are advised to consult prescribing information for any products discussed. The information provided in this CME activity is for continuing medical and nursing education purposes only, and is not meant to substitute for the independent clinical judgment of a physician relative to diagnostic, treatment, or management options for a specific patient’s medical condition. The opinions expressed in the content are solely those of the individual faculty members and do not reflect those of PER®.

PER Pulse Recap™

PER Pulse Recap (1 of 3)

Community Practice Connections™: Personalized Assessment in Advanced RCC Decision Making: Leveraging the Evidence and Patient Characteristics to Inform Decisions Along the Disease Continuum is a series of short content summaries and video interviews with the faculty of a live continuing medical education–certified symposium held in February 2018 in San Francisco, California. In this online activity, expert faculty discuss the evolving treatment paradigm for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). It features commentary on:
  • Frontline Standards of Care in Light of Recent Evidence by Daniel George, MD
  • Informed Dosing Schedules to Optimize Patient Adherence and Outcomes by Eric Jonasch, MD
  • Rationale for Sequencing Based on Patient Characteristics by Thomas E. Hutson, DO, PharmD, FACP
  • The Future of RCC Therapy in Combinations: Considerations of Recent Data Sets by David McDermott, MD
  • Key Takeaways by Robert A. Figlin, MD, FACP, and Eric Jonasch, MD
This first of 3 PER Pulse™ Recaps summarizing the online program focuses on Dr George’s answers to questions about changes to frontline treatment standards and subsequent therapies for advanced/metastatic RCC based on recent clinical trial data and FDA approvals, during which he discussed:
  • His treatment approach for a 65-year-old man with clear cell RCC (pT3, N1, Mx) who experienced progression of lung and mediastinal node disease and developed bone metastasis 4 weeks after debulking nephrectomy
  • Clinical trial data that led to newly approved first-line treatment options for advanced RCC, including cabozantinib and nivolumab plus ipilimumab, and how he uses these therapies in practice
  • Best practices for integrating new therapy options for advanced RCC into the armamentarium and his evidence-based approaches toward third- and fourth-line therapy

PER Pulse Recap (2 of 3)

This second of 3 PER Pulse™ Recaps summarizing the online program focuses on Dr Jonasch’s answers to questions about using individualized treatment dosing and scheduling for advanced RCC, during which he discussed:
  • His approach to treating a 67-year-old woman who achieved a partial response to 1 cycle of sunitinib (4 weeks on, 2 weeks off) for metastatic RCC but experienced several treatment-related adverse effects (AEs) in the last 2 weeks of her treatment cycle
  • Prospective studies currently studying alternative sunitinib dosing schedules
  • Perspectives on optimizing individualized dosing and scheduling to minimize treatment-related AEs and improve outcomes (eg, sunitinib schedule of 2 weeks on, 1 week off; individualized tyrosine kinase inhibitor dosing based on toxicity)

PER Pulse Recap (3 of 3)

This third of 3 PER Pulse™ Recaps summarizing the online program focuses on Dr Hutson’s answers to questions about factoring patient characteristics into frontline treatment decision making for advanced RCC, during which he discussed:
  • His approach to first-line treatment for a 51-year-old man who developed metastatic clear cell RCC (retroperitoneal lymph node, intermediate risk by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center criteria) 1 year after resection of G2, pT2, pN1 disease
  • Strategies for choosing the most appropriate first-line therapy for advanced RCC in the context of several newly approved first-line regimens
  • Approaches for incorporating patient characteristics into treatment planning








Become a Member

Forgot Password?
Filter By