Data Sciences International (United States)

Incorporating Artificial Intelligence (AI) into sustainable development strategies has transformed how societies tackle environmental, economic, and social issues. In this paper, we examine the impact of AI on meeting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the United Nations, and also ways to have multi-dimensional approaches incorporating technology and policy and human-centric approaches. The paper closely reviews how the principles of AI-enabled approaches can help tackle some global issues such as climate change mitigation, resource management, and equitable societal growth by contributing efficiency, scale, and inclusion. The session focuses on responsible policies that ensure the potential capabilities of AI are harnessed for long-term sustainability goals. A review of the state of the art and possibilities for future directions, this paper highlights the need for cross-disciplinary engagement to make the most of AI for sustainable development.

Conceptions of the literature of the Global South, and of India in particular, have been powerfully shaped by the work of a small number of well-known authors writing in English. The possible distortions resulting from this limited canon have garnered significant scholarly attention in the past two decades, which has typically focused on how works produced by these writers are shaped by their own positionality as well as the exigencies of catering to an Anglo-European metropolitan audience. The concern expressed in such reflections often boils down to that of offering incomplete, skewed, or overly accommodationist representations of the cultures and countries being represented. A corollary of this position is that these same metropolitan readers would be confronted with a different, and potentially quite valuable perspective on the countries and cultures for which these authors have been presumed to speak, were they to encounter a broader swath of the writing produced by local authors writing in indigenous languages. This essay attempts to evaluate and concretize this presumption by way of a computationally assisted analysis. We compare a collection of contemporary English-language novels written by authors of South Asian descent with a corpus of contemporary fiction translated from South Asian languages into English. Using a series of quantitative proxies for two qualities seen as typical of English-language originals — literariness and cosmopolitanism — we aim to establish 1) whether and how the works of the authors writing in English can be seen to constitute a distinctive corpus vis-à-vis the translated works and 2) whether and how the former converge with literary fiction translated from two languages considered to possess high literary capital: French and German. By situating the postcolonial bestsellers within this broader context, we intend to provide a starting point from which to understand the differential pressures exerted by the “otherness industry” on literary production, as well as how reader perceptions of South Asia might be different if they were exposed to a broader range of translated texts.

ABSTRACT There has been an increasing use of master protocols in oncology clinical trials because of its efficiency to accelerate cancer drug development and flexibility to accommodate multiple substudies. Depending on the study objective and design, a master protocol trial can be a basket trial, an umbrella trial, a platform trial, or any other form of trials in which multiple investigational products and/or subpopulations are studied under a single protocol. Master protocols can use external data and evidence (e.g. external controls) for treatment effect estimation, which can further improve efficiency of master protocol trials. This paper provides an overview of different types of external controls and their unique features when used in master protocols. Some key considerations in master protocols with external controls are discussed including construction of estimands, assessment of fit-for-use real-world data, and considerations for different types of master protocols. Similarities and differences between regular randomized controlled trials and master protocols when using external controls are discussed. A targeted learning-based causal roadmap is presented which constitutes three key steps: (1) define a target statistical estimand that aligns with the causal estimand for the study objective, (2) use an efficient estimator to estimate the target statistical estimand and its uncertainty, and (3) evaluate the impact of causal assumptions on the study conclusion by performing sensitivity analyses. Two illustrative examples for master protocols using external controls are discussed for their merits and possible improvement in causal effect estimation.

Since the first approval of a tumor-agnostic indication in 2017, a total of seven tumor-agnostic indications involving six drugs have received approval from the FDA. In this paper, the master protocol subteam of the Statistical Methods in Oncology Scientific Working Group, Biopharmaceutical Session, American Statistical Association, provides a comprehensive summary of these seven tumor-agnostic approvals, describing their mechanisms of action; biomarker prevalence; study design; companion diagnostics; regulatory aspects, including comparisons of global regulatory requirements; and health technology assessment approval. Also discussed are practical considerations relating to the regulatory approval of tumor-agnostic indications, specifically (i) recommendations for the design stage to mitigate the risk that exceptions may occur if a treatment is initially hypothesized to be effective for all tumor types and (ii) because drug development continues after approval of a tumor-agnostic indication, recommendations for further development of tumor-specific indications in first-line patients in the setting of a randomized confirmatory basket trial, acknowledging the challenges in this area. These recommendations and practical considerations may provide insights for the future development of drugs for tumor-agnostic indications.

<div>Abstract<p>A number of cancer drugs activate innate immune pathways in tumor cells but unfortunately also compromise antitumor immune function. We discovered that inhibition of CARM1, an epigenetic enzyme and cotranscriptional activator, elicited beneficial antitumor activity in both cytotoxic T cells and tumor cells. In T cells, <i>Carm1</i> inactivation substantially enhanced their antitumor function and preserved memory-like populations required for sustained antitumor immunity. In tumor cells, <i>Carm1</i> inactivation induced a potent type 1 interferon response that sensitized resistant tumors to cytotoxic T cells. Substantially increased numbers of dendritic cells, CD8 T cells, and natural killer cells were present in <i>Carm1</i>-deficient tumors, and infiltrating CD8 T cells expressed low levels of exhaustion markers. Targeting of CARM1 with a small molecule elicited potent antitumor immunity and sensitized resistant tumors to checkpoint blockade. Targeting of this cotranscriptional regulator thus offers an opportunity to enhance immune function while simultaneously sensitizing resistant tumor cells to immune attack.</p>Significance:<p>Resistance to cancer immunotherapy remains a major challenge. Targeting of CARM1 enables immunotherapy of resistant tumors by enhancing T-cell functionality and preserving memory-like T-cell populations within tumors. CARM1 inhibition also sensitizes resistant tumor cells to immune attack by inducing a tumor cell–intrinsic type 1 interferon response.</p><p><i>This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1861</i></p></div>

ABSTRACT Oncology has been one of the most active therapeutic areas in medicinal products development. Despite this fact, few drugs have been approved for use in pediatric cancer patients when compared to the number approved for adults with cancer. This disparity could be attributed to the fact that many oncology drugs have had orphan drug designation and were exempt from Pediatric Research Equity Act (PREA) requirements. On August 18, 2017, the RACE for Children Act, i.e. Research to Accelerate Cures and Equity Act, was signed into law as Title V of the 2017 FDA Reauthorization Act (FDARA) to amend the PREA. Pediatric investigation is now required if the drug or biological product is intended for the treatment of an adult cancer and directed at a molecular target that FDA determines to be “substantially relevant to the growth or progression of a pediatric cancer.” This paper discusses the specific considerations in clinical trial designs and statistical methodologies to be implemented in oncology pediatric clinical programs.

BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies have dramatically improved outcomes in patients with advanced melanoma, but approximately half these patients will not have a durable benefit. Phase 1–2 trials of adoptive cell therapy with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have shown promising responses, but data from phase 3 trials are lacking to determine the role of TILs in treating advanced melanoma.MethodsIn this phase 3, multicenter, open-label trial, we randomly assigned patients with unresectable stage IIIC or IV melanoma in a 1:1 ratio to receive TIL or anti–cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 therapy (ipilimumab at 3 mg per kilogram of body weight). Infusion of at least 5×109 TILs was preceded by nonmyeloablative, lymphodepleting chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide plus fludarabine) and followed by high-dose interleukin-2. The primary end point was progression-free survival.ResultsA total of 168 patients (86% with disease refractory to anti–programmed death 1 treatment) were assigned to receive TILs (84 patients) or ipilimumab (84 patients). In the intention-to-treat population, median progression-free survival was 7.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2 to 13.1) in the TIL group and 3.1 months (95% CI, 3.0 to 4.3) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.72; P<0.001); 49% (95% CI, 38 to 60) and 21% (95% CI, 13 to 32) of the patients, respectively, had an objective response. Median overall survival was 25.8 months (95% CI, 18.2 to not reached) in the TIL group and 18.9 months (95% CI, 13.8 to 32.6) in the ipilimumab group. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in all patients who received TILs and in 57% of those who received ipilimumab; in the TIL group, these events were mainly chemotherapy-related myelosuppression.ConclusionsIn patients with advanced melanoma, progression-free survival was significantly longer among those who received TIL therapy than among those who received ipilimumab. (Funded by the Dutch Cancer Society and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02278887.)