Efficacy and Safety of Panitumumab in Patients With RAF/RAS-Wild-Type Glioblastoma: Results From the Drug Rediscovery Protocol.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis of malignant primary high-grade brain tumors, predominantly glioblastomas, is poor despite intensive multimodality treatment options. In more than 50% of patients with glioblastomas, potentially targetable mutations are present, including rearrangements, altered splicing, and/or focal amplifications of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) by signaling through the RAF/RAS pathway. We studied whether treatment with the clinically available anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody panitumumab provides clinical benefit for patients with RAF/RAS-wild-type (wt) glioblastomas in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP). METHODS: Patients with progression of treatment refractory RAF/RASwt glioblastoma were included for treatment with panitumumab in DRUP when measurable according to RANO criteria. The primary endpoints of this study are clinical benefit (CB: defined as confirmed objective response [OR] or stable disease [SD] ≥ 16 weeks) and safety. Patients were enrolled using a Simon-like 2-stage model, with 8 patients in stage 1 and up to 24 patients in stage 2 if at least 1 in 8 patients had CB in stage 1. RESULTS: Between 03-2018 and 02-2022, 24 evaluable patients were treated. CB was observed in 5 patients (21%), including 2 patients with partial response (8.3%) and 3 patients with SD ≥ 16 weeks (12.5%). After median follow-up of 15 months, median progression-free survival and overall survival were 1.7 months (95% CI 1.6-2.1 months) and 4.5 months (95% CI 2.9-8.6 months), respectively. No unexpected toxicities were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Panitumumab treatment provides limited CB in patients with recurrent RAF/RASwt glioblastoma precluding further development of this therapeutic strategy.

Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy in Patients With Gastroesophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy for various stages of gastroesophageal cancer (GEC) is often neurotoxic. Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) impairs health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study investigates the incidence and severity of CIPN and its association with HRQoL in patients with GEC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who received chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy for GEC were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patient-reported data (measured using the EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 and EORTC QLQ-C30) were collected through the Prospective Observational Cohort Study of Esophageal-Gastric Cancer Patients (POCOP) at baseline and at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months after treatment initiation. Linear mixed effects models were constructed to assess CIPN and the correlation between CIPN and HRQoL was analyzed using Spearman's correlation. RESULTS: A total of 2,135 patients were included (chemoradiotherapy: 1,593; chemotherapy with curative intent: 295; palliative chemotherapy: 247). In all 3 treatment groups, CIPN significantly increased during treatment (adjusted mean score of CIPN at 6 months: chemoradiotherapy, 8.3 [baseline: 5.5]; chemotherapy with curative intent, 16.0 [baseline: 5.6]; palliative therapy, 25.4 [baseline: 10.7]). For chemoradiotherapy, the adjusted mean score continued to increase after treatment (24 months: 11.2). For chemotherapy with curative intent and palliative therapy, the adjusted mean score of CIPN decreased after treatment but did not return to baseline values. CIPN was negatively correlated with HRQoL in all treatment groups, although significance and strength of the correlation differed over time. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the poor prognosis of GEC, it is essential to consider side effects of (neurotoxic) treatment. The high prevalence and association with HRQoL indicate the need for early recognition of CIPN.

Ex vivo drug sensitivity screening predicts response to temozolomide in glioblastoma patients and identifies candidate biomarkers.

BACKGROUND: Patient-derived glioma stem-like cells (GSCs) have become the gold-standard in neuro-oncological research; however, it remains to be established whether loss of in situ microenvironment affects the clinically-predictive value of this model. We implemented a GSC monolayer system to investigate in situ-in vitro molecular correspondence and the relationship between in vitro and patient response to temozolomide (TMZ). METHODS: DNA/RNA-sequencing was performed on 56 glioblastoma tissues and 19 derived GSC cultures. Sensitivity to TMZ was screened across 66 GSC cultures. Viability readouts were related to clinical parameters of corresponding patients and whole-transcriptome data. RESULTS: Tumour DNA and RNA sequences revealed strong similarity to corresponding GSCs despite loss of neuronal and immune interactions. In vitro TMZ screening yielded three response categories which significantly correlated with patient survival, therewith providing more specific prediction than the binary MGMT marker. Transcriptome analysis identified 121 genes related to TMZ sensitivity of which 21were validated in external datasets. CONCLUSION: GSCs retain patient-unique hallmark gene expressions despite loss of their natural environment. Drug screening using GSCs predicted patient response to TMZ more specifically than MGMT status, while transcriptome analysis identified potential biomarkers for this response. GSC drug screening therefore provides a tool to improve drug development and precision medicine for glioblastoma.

Population-based study of treatment and outcome of recurrent oesophageal or junctional cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer of the oesophagus or gastro-oesophageal junction have a high risk of recurrence after treatment with curative intent. The aim of this study was to analyse the site of recurrence, treatment, and survival in patients with recurrent disease. METHODS: Patients with non-metastatic oesophageal or junctional carcinoma treated with curative intent between January 2015 and December 2016 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Data on recurrence were collected in the second half of 2019. Overall survival (OS) was assessed by Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: In total, 862 of 1909 patients (45.2 per cent) for whom information on follow-up was available had disease recurrence, and 858 patients were included. Some 161 of 858 patients (18.8 per cent) had locoregional recurrence only, 415 (48.4 per cent) had distant recurrence only, and 282 (32.9 per cent) had combined locoregional and distant recurrence. In all, 518 of 858 patients (60.4 per cent) received best supportive care only and 315 (39.6 per cent) underwent tumour-directed therapy. Patients with locoregional recurrence alone more often received chemoradiotherapy than those with distant or combined locoregional and distant recurrence (19.3 per cent versus 0.7 and 2.8 per cent), and less often received systemic therapy (11.2 per cent versus 30.1 and 35.8 per cent). Median OS was 7.6, 4.2, and 3.3 months for patients with locoregional, distant, and combined locoregional and distant recurrence respectively (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Disease recurred after curative treatment in 45.2 per cent of patients. Locoregional recurrence developed in only 18.8 per cent. The vast majority of patients presented with distant or combined locoregional and distant recurrence, and received best supportive care.

Beyond Median Overall Survival: Estimating Trends for Multiple Survival Scenarios in Patients With Metastatic Esophagogastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, clinical trials have shown improved survival of patients with metastatic esophageal or gastric cancer. The number of patients participating in clinical trials is limited, and survival improvements observed from clinical trials are unrepresentative for the full population. The aim of our study was to assess trends in survival for the best-case, typical, and worst-case scenarios in patients with metastatic esophageal or gastric cancer. METHODS: We selected patients with metastatic esophageal or gastric cancer diagnosed between 2006 and 2020 from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry. Survival was calculated for different percentiles of the survival curve for each incidence year (eg, the 10th percentile [p10] represents the top 10% of patients with the best survival): p10 (best-case), p25 (upper-typical), p50 (median), p75 (lower-typical), and p90 (worst-case). Weighted linear regression analyses were performed to test whether changes in survival were significant. RESULTS: The overall median survival between 2006 and 2020 remained unchanged for patients with esophageal cancer (n=10,448; from 5.2 to 5.2 months, respectively; P=.06) and improved for patients with gastric cancer (n=10,512; from 3.5 to 4.3 months, respectively; P=.001). For patients with esophageal cancer, survival for the best-case scenario (p10; best 10% of patients) significantly improved from 17.2 to 21.0 months (P=.006). For patients with gastric cancer, survival significantly improved for the best-case scenario (p10) from 15.9 to 23.5 months (P<.001) and the upper-typical scenario (p25) scenario improved from 7.9 to 9.9 months (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant survival improvements in clinical trials, survival improvements were not observed for the majority of patients treated in daily clinical practice. An increase in survival was only observed for patients with the best prognosis.

Barriers and facilitators for shared decision-making in oncology inpatient practice: an explorative study of the healthcare providers' perspective.

BACKGROUND: In cancer care, shared decision-making (SDM) is especially relevant as different treatment options have a different impact on prognosis and patients' quality of life. However, evidence suggests that SDM is not routinely practiced. Furthermore, literature is mostly focussed on the outpatient setting. This study explored healthcare providers' perspectives on SDM for oncology inpatients and identified barriers and facilitators. METHOD: In this qualitative study, focus groups and semi-structured interviews were held with five nurses, eleven residents, four oncologists, and two healthcare managers caring for oncology inpatients of the Elisabeth-TweeSteden hospital. RESULTS: Healthcare professionals do not always clearly state when a decision is required. On a patient level, comprehension barriers, language barrier, and distraction by emotions or sickness are recognized as barriers for adequate patient's communication. On a healthcare professional level, having awareness to inform about choices, being able to transfer this information, connecting to the patient, having substantial experience, and a good patient-physician relationship were facilitators. On an organizational, level, time, private rooms, continuity in care, and suboptimal use of the electronic health record were barriers. CONCLUSION: While SDM is recognized and valued, its implementation is inconsistent. Addressing the several barriers found and optimizing the facilitators is imperative. A start could be by raising awareness for SDM in the inpatient setting, adding SDM as part of the care pathway, stating to patients when a decision is required, reporting on the SDM process in the electronic health record, and describing the nurses' role in SDM.

SOURCE: Prediction Models for Overall Survival in Patients With Metastatic and Potentially Curable Esophageal and Gastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Personalized prediction of treatment outcomes can aid patients with cancer when deciding on treatment options. Existing prediction models for esophageal and gastric cancer, however, have mostly been developed for survival prediction after surgery (ie, when treatment has already been completed). Furthermore, prediction models for patients with metastatic cancer are scarce. The aim of this study was to develop prediction models of overall survival at diagnosis for patients with potentially curable and metastatic esophageal and gastric cancer (the SOURCE study). METHODS: Data from 13,080 patients with esophageal or gastric cancer diagnosed in 2015 through 2018 were retrieved from the prospective Netherlands Cancer Registry. Four Cox proportional hazards regression models were created for patients with potentially curable and metastatic esophageal or gastric cancer. Predictors, including treatment type, were selected using the Akaike information criterion. The models were validated with temporal cross-validation on their C-index and calibration. RESULTS: The validated model's C-index was 0.78 for potentially curable gastric cancer and 0.80 for potentially curable esophageal cancer. For the metastatic models, the c-indices were 0.72 and 0.73 for esophageal and gastric cancer, respectively. The 95% confidence interval of the calibration intercepts and slopes contain the values 0 and 1, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The SOURCE prediction models show fair to good c-indices and an overall good calibration. The models are the first in esophageal and gastric cancer to predict survival at diagnosis for a variety of treatments. Future research is needed to demonstrate their value for shared decision-making in clinical practice.

Validation of the updated renal graded prognostic assessment (GPA) for patients with renal cancer brain metastases treated with gamma knife radiosurgery.

INTRODUCTION: Prognosis of patients with brain metastasis (BM) from renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is relevant for treatment decisions and can be estimated with the Renal Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA). The aim of this study is to validate the updated version of this instrument in a cohort treated with Gamma Knife radiosurgery (GKRS) without prior local intracerebral therapy. METHODS: Between 2007 and 2018, 106 RCC patients with BM were treated with GKRS. They were categorized according to the updated Renal GPA. Overall survival (OS), distant intracranial failure and local failure were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and risk factors were identified with Cox proportional hazard regressions. RESULTS: Median OS was 8.6 months. Median OS for GPA categories 0.0-1.0 (15%), 1.5-2.0 (12%), 2.5-3.0 (35%) and 3.5-4.0 (29%) was 2.9, 5.5, 8.1 and 20.4 months, respectively. Karnofsky performance status < 90, serum hemoglobin ≤ 12.5 g/dL, age > 65 years and time from primary diagnosis to brain metastasis < 1 year were significantly related with shorter survival, while presence of extracranial disease, the volume and total number of BM had no significant impact on OS. A total count of > 4 BM was the only predictive factor for distant intracranial failure, while none of the investigated factors predicted local failure. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the updated Renal GPA in an independent cohort as a valuable instrument to estimate survival in patients with BM from RCC treated with GKRS.

Heterogeneity of first-line palliative systemic treatment in synchronous metastatic esophagogastric cancer patients: A real-world evidence study.

The optimal first-line palliative systemic treatment strategy for metastatic esophagogastric cancer is not well defined. The aim of our study was to explore real-world use of first-line systemic treatment in esophagogastric cancer and assess the effect of treatment strategy on overall survival (OS), time to failure (TTF) of first-line treatment and toxicity. We selected synchronous metastatic esophagogastric cancer patients treated with systemic therapy (2010-2016) from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry (n = 2,204). Systemic treatment strategies were divided into monotherapy, doublet and triplet chemotherapy, and trastuzumab-containing regimens. Data on OS were available for all patients, on TTF for patients diagnosed from 2010 to 2015 (n = 1,700), and on toxicity for patients diagnosed from 2010 to 2014 (n = 1,221). OS and TTF were analyzed using multivariable Cox regression, with adjustment for relevant tumor and patient characteristics. Up to 45 different systemic treatment regimens were found to be administered, with a median TTF of 4.6 and OS of 7.5 months. Most patients (45%) were treated with doublet chemotherapy; 34% received triplets, 10% monotherapy and 10% a trastuzumab-containing regimen. The highest median OS was found in patients receiving a trastuzumab-containing regimen (11.9 months). Triplet chemotherapy showed equal survival rates compared to doublets (OS: HR 0.92, 95%CI 0.83-1.02; TTF: HR 0.92, 95%CI 0.82-1.04) but significantly more grade 3-5 toxicity than doublets (33% vs. 21%, respectively). In conclusion, heterogeneity of first-line palliative systemic treatment in metastatic esophagogastric cancer patients is striking. Based on our data, doublet chemotherapy is the preferred treatment strategy because of similar survival and less toxicity compared to triplets.

Increased assessment of HER2 in metastatic gastroesophageal cancer patients: a nationwide population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Addition of trastuzumab to first-line palliative chemotherapy in gastroesophageal cancer patients with HER2 overexpression has shown to improve survival. Real-world data on HER2 assessment and administration of trastuzumab are lacking. The aim of this study was to assess HER2 testing, trastuzumab administration, and overall survival (OS) in a nationwide cohort of metastatic gastroesophageal cancer patients. METHODS: Data of patients with synchronous metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma diagnosed in 2010-2016 that received palliative systemic treatment (n = 2846) were collected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and Dutch Pathology Registry. The ToGA trial criteria were used to determine HER2 overexpression. Proportions of HER2 tested patients were analyzed between hospital volume categories using Chi-square tests, and over time using trend analysis. OS was tested using the Kaplan Meier method with log rank test. RESULTS: HER2 assessment increased annually, from 18% in 2010 to 88% in 2016 (P < 0.01). Median OS increased from 6.9 (2010-2013) to 7.9 months (2014-2016; P < 0.05). Between the hospitals, the proportion of tested patients varied between 29-100%, and was higher in high-volume hospitals (P < 0.01). Overall, 77% of the HER2 positive patients received trastuzumab. Median OS was higher in patients with positive (8.8 months) and negative (7.4 months) HER2 status, compared to non-tested patients (5.6 months; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Increased determination of HER2 and administration of trastuzumab have changed daily practice management of metastatic gastroesophageal cancer patients receiving palliative systemic therapy, and possibly contributed to their improved survival. Further increase in awareness of HER2 testing and trastuzumab administration may improve quality of care and patient outcomes.

Efficacy of gamma knife radiosurgery in brain metastases of primary gynecological tumors.

OBJECTIVE: Gynecological brain metastases (BM) are rare and usually develop as part of widespread disseminated disease. Despite treatment, the majority of these patients do not survive > 1 year due to advanced extracranial disease. The use of Gamma Knife Radiosurgery (GKRS) for gynecological BM is not well known. The goal of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of GKRS for gynecological BM. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients with gynecological BM who underwent GKRS between 2002 and 2015. A total of 41 patients were included. Outcome measures were local tumor control (LC), development of new BM and/or leptomeningeal disease, overall intracranial progression free survival (PFS) and survival. RESULTS: LC was 100%, 92%, 80%, 75% and 67% at 3, 6, 9, 12 and 15 months, respectively. PFS was 90%, 61%, 41%, 23% and 13% at 3, 6, 9, 12 and 15 months, respectively. During follow-up (FU), 18 (44%) patients had intracranial progression. Distant BM occurred in 29% of the patients. Local recurrence and distant recurrence occurred after a mean FU time of 15.5 (2.6-71.9) and 11.4 (2-40) months, respectively. Thirty-one (76%) patients died due to extracranial tumor progression and only 2 (5%) patients died due to progressive intracranial disease. The overall mean survival from time of GKRS was 19 months (1-109). The 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year survival rate from the time of GKRS were 71%, 46%, and 22%, respectively. CONCLUSION: GKRS is a good treatment option for controlling gynecological BM. As most patients die due to extracranial tumor progression, their survival might improve with better systemic treatment options in addition to GKRS.

CRITICS-II: a multicentre randomised phase II trial of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and subsequent chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery versus neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery in resectable gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although radical surgery remains the cornerstone of cure in resectable gastric cancer, survival remains poor. Current evidence-based (neo)adjuvant strategies have shown to improve outcome, including perioperative chemotherapy, postoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy. However, these regimens suffer from poor patient compliance, particularly in the postoperative phase of treatment. The CRITICS-II trial aims to optimize preoperative treatment by comparing three treatment regimens: (1) chemotherapy, (2) chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy and (3) chemoradiotherapy. METHODS: In this multicentre phase II non-comparative study, patients with clinical stage IB-IIIC (TNM 8th edition) resectable gastric adenocarcinoma are randomised between: (1) 4 cycles of docetaxel+oxaliplatin+capecitabine (DOC), (2) 2 cycles of DOC followed by chemoradiotherapy (45Gy in combination with weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin) or (3) chemoradiotherapy. Primary endpoint is event-free survival, 1 year after randomisation (events are local and/or regional recurrence or progression, distant recurrence, or death from any cause). Secondary endpoints include: toxicity, surgical outcomes, percentage radical (R0) resections, pathological tumour response, disease recurrence, overall survival, and health related quality of life. Exploratory endpoints include translational studies on predictive and prognostic biomarkers. DISCUSSION: The aim of this study is to select the most promising among three preoperative treatment arms in patients with resectable gastric adenocarcinoma. This treatment regimen will subsequently be compared with the standard therapy in a phase III trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT02931890 ; registered 13 October 2016. Date of first enrolment: 21 December 2017.

Bevacizumab combined with docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine, followed by maintenance with capecitabine and bevacizumab, as first-line treatment of patients with advanced HER2-negative gastric cancer: A multicenter phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: The current study was a multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 study performed to investigate the feasibility and efficacy of bevacizumab combined with docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine (B-DOC) in patients with advanced human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, previously untreated, gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Tumor HER2 status was determined centrally. Patients received 6 cycles of bevacizumab at a dose of 7.5 mg/kg, docetaxel at a dose of 50 mg/m(2) , and oxaliplatin at a dose of 100 mg/m(2) (all on day 1) combined with capecitabine at a dose of 850 mg/m(2) twice daily (days 1-14) every 3 weeks followed by maintenance with capecitabine and bevacizumab in patients with disease control. The primary objective was to demonstrate a progression-free survival (PFS) of >6.5 months, according to the 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Secondary endpoints included safety, objective response rate, overall survival (OS), analyses of circulating tumor cells (CTCs), and pharmacogenetic analyses. RESULTS: Sixty eligible patients were enrolled. The median PFS was 8.3 months (95% CI, 7.2-10.9 months). The objective response rate was 70% (95% CI, 55%-83%) and the disease control rate was 96% (95% CI, 85%-99%). The median OS was 12.0 months (95% CI, 10.2-16.1 months). According to CTC-AE v4.0, the most common treatment-related grade ≥3 adverse events were neutropenia (20%), leukocytopenia (18%), diarrhea (15%), and nausea/vomiting (15%). The presence of CTCs at baseline was strongly predictive of PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 3.8; P =.007) and OS (HR, 3.4; P =.014). The methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) 677C>T genotype was strongly associated with PFS (HR, 4.7 for TT vs CC or CT; P =.0007) and OS (HR, 5.9; P =.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The B-DOC regimen plus maintenance was feasible and active. CTCs were found to be prognostic in patients treated with B-DOC. Docetaxel-based triplet chemotherapy as a backbone for targeted therapies is feasible and deserves further study. Cancer 2016;122:1434-1443. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Trastuzumab and bevacizumab combined with docetaxel, oxaliplatin and capecitabine as first-line treatment of advanced HER2-positive gastric cancer: a multicenter phase II study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy of bevacizumab and trastuzumab combined with docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine (B-DOCT) as first-line treatment of advanced human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive gastric cancer (GC). METHODS: In this multicentre, single-arm, phase II study, tumor HER2 status was determined centrally prior to treatment. Patients with advanced HER2-positive adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction (immunohistochemistry 3+ or immunohistochemistry 2+/silver in-situ hybridization positive) were treated with six cycles of bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg (day 1), docetaxel 50 mg/m(2) (day 1), oxaliplatin 100 mg/m(2) (day 1), capecitabine 850 mg/m(2) b.i.d. (days 1-14), and trastuzumab 6 mg/kg (day 1) every three weeks, followed by maintenance with bevacizumab, capecitabine, and trastuzumab until disease progression. The primary objective was to demonstrate an improvement of progression-free survival (PFS) to >7.6 months (observed in the ToGA trial) determined according to the lower limit of the 95 % confidence interval (CI). Secondary endpoints were safety, objective response rate (ORR), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Twenty-five patients with HER2-positive tumors were treated with B-DOCT between March 2011 and September 2014. At a median follow-up of 17 months, median PFS was 10.8 months (95%CI: 9.0-NA), OS was 17.9 months (95%CI: 12.4-NA). One-year PFS and OS were 52 % and 79 %, respectively. The ORR was 74 % (95%CI: 52-90 %). Two patients became resectable during treatment with B-DOCT and achieved a pathological complete response. The most common treatment-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events were: neutropenia (16 %), diarrhoea (16 %), and hypertension (16 %). CONCLUSIONS: B-DOCT is a safe and active combination in HER2-positive GC, supporting further investigations of DOC with HER2/vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibition in HER2-positive GC.

Age-related systemic treatment and survival of patients with metachronous metastases from colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although the spectrum of systemic treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has widened, there is a paucity of evidence for the feasibility and optimal use of these systemic agents in elderly patients. The present study provides real world data on the age-related systemic treatment and survival of CRC patients with non-resectable metachronous metastases. METHODS: All consecutive patients with non-resectable metastases from primary resected CRC were extracted from the Eindhoven area of the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Patients receiving palliative systemic therapy were enrolled (n = 385). Systemic treatment and survival were analyzed according to age at diagnosis of metastases. RESULTS: Patients aged ≥75 years more often received first-line single-agent chemotherapy than their younger counterparts (63% vs. 32%, p < .0001). First-line single-agent chemotherapy was often prescribed without additional targeted therapy (78%). Advanced age (≥75 years) was associated with a lower probability of receiving all active cytotoxic agents compared to patients aged <60 years at time of diagnosis of metastases (odds ratio (OR) 0.2, 95% CI 0.10-0.77). In a multivariable Cox regression analysis with adjustment for age and other relevant prognostic factors, the total number of received systemic agents was the only predictor of death (hazard ratio (HR) 0.7, 95% CI 0.61-0.81). CONCLUSION: The beneficial effect of treatment with all active systemic agents on survival (simultaneously or sequentially prescribed) should be taken into account when considering systemic therapy in patients with mCRC. In light of our results, future studies are warranted to clarify the role of potential targeted therapy in elderly mCRC patients, who are often not candidates for combination chemotherapy and treatment with all active cytotoxic agents.

Single-agent bevacizumab or lomustine versus a combination of bevacizumab plus lomustine in patients with recurrent glioblastoma (BELOB trial): a randomised controlled phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for recurrent glioblastoma are scarce, with second-line chemotherapy showing only modest activity against the tumour. Despite the absence of well controlled trials, bevacizumab is widely used in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma. Nonetheless, whether the high response rates reported after treatment with this drug translate into an overall survival benefit remains unclear. We report the results of the first randomised controlled phase 2 trial of bevacizumab in recurrent glioblastoma. METHODS: The BELOB trial was an open-label, three-group, multicentre phase 2 study undertaken in 14 hospitals in the Netherlands. Adult patients (≥18 years of age) with a first recurrence of a glioblastoma after temozolomide chemoradiotherapy were randomly allocated by a web-based program to treatment with oral lomustine 110 mg/m(2) once every 6 weeks, intravenous bevacizumab 10 mg/kg once every 2 weeks, or combination treatment with lomustine 110 mg/m(2) every 6 weeks and bevacizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Randomisation of patients was stratified with a minimisation procedure, in which the stratification factors were centre, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and age. The primary outcome was overall survival at 9 months, analysed by intention to treat. A safety analysis was planned after the first ten patients completed two cycles of 6 weeks in the combination treatment group. This trial is registered with the Nederlands Trial Register (www.trialregister.nl, number NTR1929). FINDINGS: Between Dec 11, 2009, and Nov 10, 2011, 153 patients were enrolled. The preplanned safety analysis was done after eight patients had been treated, because of haematological adverse events (three patients had grade 3 thrombocytopenia and two had grade 4 thrombocytopenia) which reduced bevacizumab dose intensity; the lomustine dose in the combination treatment group was thereafter reduced to 90 mg/m(2). Thus, in addition to the eight patients who were randomly assigned to receive bevacizumab plus lomustine 110 mg/m(2), 51 patients were assigned to receive bevacizumab alone, 47 to receive lomustine alone, and 47 to receive bevacizumab plus lomustine 90 mg/m(2). Of these patients, 50 in the bevacizumab alone group, 46 in the lomustine alone group, and 44 in the bevacizumab and lomustine 90 mg/m(2) group were eligible for analyses. 9-month overall survival was 43% (95% CI 29-57) in the lomustine group, 38% (25-51) in the bevacizumab group, 59% (43-72) in the bevacizumab and lomustine 90 mg/m(2) group, 87% (39-98) in the bevacizumab and lomustine 110 mg/m(2) group, and 63% (49-75) for the combined bevacizumab and lomustine groups. After the reduction in lomustine dose in the combination group, the combined treatment was well tolerated. The most frequent grade 3 or worse toxicities were hypertension (13 [26%] of 50 patients in the bevacizumab group, three [7%] of 46 in the lomustine group, and 11 [25%] of 44 in the bevacizumab and lomustine 90 mg/m(2) group), fatigue (two [4%], four [9%], and eight [18%]), and infections (three [6%], two [4%], and five [11%]). At the time of this analysis, 144/148 (97%) of patients had died and three (2%) were still on treatment. INTERPRETATION: The combination of bevacizumab and lomustine met prespecified criteria for assessment of this treatment in further phase 3 studies. However, the results in the bevacizumab alone group do not justify further studies of this treatment. FUNDING: Roche Nederland and KWF Kankerbestrijding.

Induction chemotherapy followed by response evaluation and esophagectomy for advanced esophageal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with limited metastatic/advanced esophageal cancer not amenable for neoadjuvant therapy plus surgery have a poor prognosis and often receive palliative care. Alternatively, induction chemotherapy with response evaluation can be considered and in some patients surgery with curative intent may become feasible. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of patients treated with induction chemotherapy and to identify patient and/or tumor characteristics associated with survival. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with esophageal or junctional cancer who underwent induction chemotherapy between 2005 and 2021 were identified from an institutional database of a tertiary referral center. Response to therapy was assessed by (18F-FDG PET)/CT. Response to therapy and treatment options, including surgery or palliation, were discussed in the multidisciplinary tumor board. Overall survival (OS) was calculated using the Kaplan Meier method. Uni- and multivariable analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors for survival. RESULTS: 238 patients were identified. The majority had esophageal adenocarcinoma (68.9 %) and were treated with a taxane/platinum-based chemotherapy (79.4 %). Response evaluation was performed in 233 patients and 154 of 238 patients (64.7 %) underwent surgical exploration. Resection was performed in 127 patients (53.4 %) resulting in a median and 5-year OS of 26.3 months (95 % CI 18.8-33.8) and 29.6 %, respectively. Presence of T4b (HR = 2.01, 95 % CI 1.02-3.92) and poorly differentiated tumor (HR = 1.45, 95 % CI 1.02-2.10) was associated with worse survival (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: In carefully selected patients with advanced disease not amenable for standard curative treatment, induction chemotherapy followed by esophagectomy may result in a 5-year overall survival of approximately 30 %.

European clinical practice guidelines for the definition, diagnosis, and treatment of oligometastatic esophagogastric cancer (OMEC-4).

INTRODUCTION: The OligoMetastatic Esophagogastric Cancer (OMEC) project aims to provide clinical practice guidelines for the definition, diagnosis, and treatment of esophagogastric oligometastatic disease (OMD). METHODS: Guidelines were developed according to AGREE II and GRADE principles. Guidelines were based on a systematic review (OMEC-1), clinical case discussions (OMEC-2), and a Delphi consensus study (OMEC-3) by 49 European expert centers for esophagogastric cancer. OMEC identified patients for whom the term OMD is considered or could be considered. Disease-free interval (DFI) was defined as the time between primary tumor treatment and detection of OMD. RESULTS: Moderate to high quality of evidence was found (i.e. 1 randomized and 4 non-randomized phase II trials) resulting in moderate recommendations. OMD is considered in esophagogastric cancer patients with 1 organ with ≤ 3 metastases or 1 involved extra-regional lymph node station. In addition, OMD continues to be considered in patients with OMD without progression in number of metastases after systemic therapy. 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging is recommended for baseline staging and for restaging after systemic therapy when local treatment is considered. For patients with synchronous OMD or metachronous OMD and a DFI ≤ 2 years, recommended treatment consists of systemic therapy followed by restaging to assess suitability for local treatment. For patients with metachronous OMD and DFI > 2 years, upfront local treatment is additionally recommended. DISCUSSION: These multidisciplinary European clinical practice guidelines for the uniform definition, diagnosis and treatment of esophagogastric OMD can be used to standardize inclusion criteria in future clinical trials and to reduce variation in treatment.

Assessing real-world representativeness of prospective registry cohorts in oncology: insights from patients with esophagogastric cancer.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore the real-world representativeness of a prospective registry cohort with active accrual in oncology, applying a representativeness metric that is novel to health care. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We used data from the Prospective Observational Cohort Study of Esophageal-Gastric Cancer Patients (POCOP) registry and from the population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). We used Representativeness-indicators (R-indicators) and overall survival to investigate the degree to which the POCOP cohort and clinically relevant subgroups were a representative sample compared to the NCR database. Calibration using inverse propensity score weighting was applied to correct differences between POCOP and NCR. RESULTS: The R-indicator of the entire POCOP registry was 0.72 95% confidence interval [0.71, 0.73]. Representativeness of palliative patients was higher than that of potentially curable patients (R-indicator 0.88 [0.85, 0.90] and 0.70 [0.68, 0.71], respectively). Stratification to clinically relevant subgroups based on treatment resulted in higher R-indicators of the respective subgroups. Both after stratification and calibration weighting survival estimates in the POCOP registry were more similar to that in the NCR population. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the assessment of real-world representativeness of patients who participated in a prospective registry cohort and showed that real-world representativeness improved when the variability in treatment was accounted for.

Incidence, Stage, Treatment, and Survival of Noncardia Gastric Cancer.

Importance: Gastric cancer is the fifth most common cancer worldwide, and investigating its incidence, characteristics, treatment, and outcomes over the past decades can help in selecting clinical strategies and future research directions. Objective: To analyze the trends in incidence, staging, and treatment of gastric cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationwide, population-based cohort study included patients diagnosed with noncardia gastric cancer (NCGC) between 1989 and 2021 in the Netherlands. Main Outcomes and Measures: Differences in tumor characteristics, treatment, and survival were analyzed per fixed time periods (1989-1993, 1994-1998, 1999-2003, 2004-2008, 2009-2013, 2014-2018, and 2019-2021). Results: In total, 47 014 patients (median [IQR] age, 73 [64-80] years; 28 032 [60%] male patients) were identified with mostly adenocarcinomas of the antrum region (when location was known). Age-standardized incidence decreased from 20.3 to 6.1 per 100 000 person-years between 1989 and 2021. During the study period, unknown T and N stages were recorded less frequently, and metastatic disease was diagnosed more frequently (1989-1993: 2633 of 9493 patients [28%]; 2019-2021: 1503 of 3200 patients [47%] in 2019-2021). Over time, fewer patients with metastatic disease underwent surgery with or without other treatment modalities (68% in 1989-1993 vs 64% in 2019-2021), and palliative chemotherapy in metastatic NCGC increased from 9% to 40%. For patients with nonmetastatic disease, 5-year relative survival improved from 28% (95% CI, 26.5%-29.2%) to 36% (95% CI, 33.5%-37.6%) between 1989 and 2021. For patients with nonmetastatic disease undergoing a resection, 5-year survival increased from 40% (95% CI, 38.3%-41.8%) to 51% (95% CI, 47.9%-53.3%). For patients with metastatic disease, 1-year relative survival increased from 10% (95% CI, 8.7%-11.1%) to 19% (95% CI, 17.2%-21.6%), but 3-year relative survival remained poor at 5% (95% CI, 3.6%-7.5%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this nationwide cohort study involving 47 014 patients diagnosed with NCGC (1989-2021), the results showed a decrease in incidence, more accurate staging, a shift in treatment modalities, and improved patient survival.