Safety, Immunogenicity, and 1-Year Efficacy of Universal Cancer Peptide-Based Vaccine in Patients With Refractory Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase Ib/Phase IIa De-Escalation Study.

PURPOSE: Universal cancer peptide-based vaccine (UCPVax) is a therapeutic vaccine composed of two highly selected helper peptides to induce CD4+ T helper-1 response directed against telomerase. This phase Ib/IIa trial was designed to test the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of a three-dose schedule in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with refractory NSCLC were assigned to receive three vaccination doses of UCPVax (0.25 mg, 0.5 mg, and 1 mg) using a Bayesian-based phase Ib followed by phase IIa de-escalating design. The primary end points were dose-limiting toxicity and immune response after three first doses of vaccine. Secondary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients received UCPVax; 95% had three prior lines of systemic therapy. No dose-limiting toxicity was observed in 15 patients treated in phase Ib. The maximum tolerated dose was 1 mg. Fifty-one patients were eligible for phase IIa. The third and sixth dose of UCPVax induced specific CD4+ T helper 1 response in 56% and 87.2% of patients, respectively, with no difference between three dose levels. Twenty-one (39%) patients achieved disease control (stable disease, n = 20; complete response, n = 1). The 1-year OS was 34.1% (95% CI, 23.1 to 50.4), and the median OS was 9.7 months, with no significant difference between dose levels. The 1-year progression-free survival and the median OS were 17.2% (95% CI, 7.8 to 38.3) and 11.6 months (95% CI, 9.7 to 16.7) in immune responders (P = .015) and 4.5% (95% CI, 0.7 to 30.8) and 5.6 months (95% CI, 2.5 to 10) in nonresponders (P = .005), respectively. CONCLUSION: UCPVax was highly immunogenic and safe and provide interesting 1-year OS rate in heavily pretreated advanced NSCLC.

Metastatic renal cell cancer and first-line combinations: for which patients? (focus on tolerance and health-related quality of life).

Until recently, the first-line treatments used in metastatic renal cell carcinoma were based on first-generation anti-VEGFR (vascular endothelial growth factor receptor) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) as monotherapy. Trials combining immunotherapy (IO) (anti-CTLA4 + anti-PD-1) or immunotherapy with TKIs showed striking results in the first-line setting with improvement in overall response rates, progression-free survival and overall survival versus sunitinib. This allowed the combinations to gain registration in the US and Europe in the first-line advanced or metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma setting. However, this improved activity comes at the cost of increased toxicity. Immunotherapy-related toxicities usually occur earlier within the first six months. With immunotherapy came a new range of toxicities making it more necessary to work with networks of specialists to better address autoimmune toxicity in particular. The safety profile is also impacted by the type of TKI used. In most cases, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) favours combinations over the comparator sunitinib. This article aims to review and assess the safety and HRQoL data on these new combinations.

Prognostic value of CD4+ T lymphopenia in non-small cell lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data regarding the prognostic influence of peripheral blood CD4+ T lymphopenia in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Therefore, we investigated the prognostic value of T lymphopenia in NSCLC. MATERIALS: Treatment-naive patients with a pathological diagnosis of NSCLC, at clinical stage I to IV were included in the prospective TELOCAP1 study. Lymphocytes count was evaluated in peripheral blood by flow cytometry. CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphopenia were defined as an absolute count of < 500/µL and < 224/µL respectively. The prognostic value of T lymphopenia was analyzed in the whole population, in local/loco-regional (stage I-IIIB) and in advanced (stage IV) NSCLC disease, using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression models for survival curves and multivariate analysis, respectively. RESULTS: Between July 2010 and January 2014, 169 evaluable patients with clinical stage I to IV NSCLC were prospectively enrolled. The prevalence of CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphopenia was similar in the study population (around 29%). Patients with CD4+ T lymphopenia showed lower overall survival than those with CD4+ T lymphocytes count > 500/µL (median overall survival (OS) 16.1 versus 21.7 months, hazard ratio (HR): 1.616 [95% CI: 1.1-2.36], p = 0.012). This association with OS was especially marked in local/loco-regional NSCLC stages (median OS, 21.8 versus 72 months, respectively, HR: 1.88 [95% CI: 0.9-3.8], p = 0.035). Multivariate analysis confirmed the worse prognosis associated with CD4+ T lymphopenia in local/loco-regional NSCLC, but not in metastatic patients (HR 2.028 [95% CI = 1.065-3.817] p = 0.02). Restricted cubic spline analysis showed that patients with CD4+ T lymphocytes count ≤500/µL displayed a high risk of death regardless of NSCLC clinical stage. There was no obvious relationship between CD8+ T lymphopenia and clinical outcome. CONCLUSION: We identified CD4+ T lymphopenia as an independent prognostic factor in local/loco-regional stages of NSCLC and CD4+ T lymphopenia is also associated with a high risk of death, regardless of NSCLC clinical stage. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EUDRACT: 2009-A00642-55.

Interest of the Addition of Taxanes to Standard Treatment in First-Line Advanced HER2 Positive Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma in Selective Patients.

Background: Studies have reported a beneficial role of the addition of trastuzumab to platin-5-FU based chemotherapy in first-line advanced HER2 positive gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA). However, the effect of taxanes combined with platin-5FU + trastuzumab (PFT) is understudied. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study to evaluate the interest of taxanes among HER2-positive advanced GEA patients treated with PFT. We enrolled HER2-positive advanced GEA patients who underwent treatment between January 2009 to March 2021 in seven hospitals centers in France, treated with PFT alone (S group) or with taxanes + PFT regimen (T group). The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). Also, overall survival (OS), response rate, conversion surgery rate, and safety were evaluated. Results: Overall, 65 patients received PFT-based therapy, 24 patients in the T group, and 41 patients in the S group. To avoid the selection bias, only those patients presenting an ECOG-PS of 0-1 and synchronous metastasis (21 patients in the T group and 19 patients in the S group) were included for analysis. The median PFS was 9.3 months (95%CI 7.0 to 17.2) in the T group and 5.9 months (95%CI 3.7 to 9.6) in the S group (log-rank p=0.038). Treatment by taxanes was significantly associated with a better PFS in univariate (HR 0.49; 95%CI 0.25 to 0.98, p=0.042) and multivariate Cox regression analysis (HR 0.44; 95%CI 0.21 to 0.94, p=0.033), and IPTW method (HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.91, p=0.019). OS was prolonged (19.0 months (95%CI 7.8 to 45.2) vs 13.0 months (95%CI 5.5 to 14.8), log-rank p=0.033) in favor of the T group. Treatment by taxanes was significantly associated with a better OS in univariate Cox regression analysis (HR 0.49; 95%CI 0.21 to 0.96, p=0.038) and IPTW method (HR 0.49; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.84, p=0.009). The response rate was higher in the T group, with conversion surgery in five patients. No treatment-related death was observed in both groups. Conclusions: Given the improvement in PFS and OS, the addition of taxanes to standard chemotherapy could be considered as a promising treatment for selected HER2-positive advanced GEA patients, with PS 0-1 and synchronous metastasis (NCT04920747).

Second-line treatment after docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil in metastatic squamous cell carcinomas of the anus. Pooled analysis of prospective Epitopes-HPV01 and Epitopes-HPV02 studies.

BACKGROUND: Squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) is a rare disease often diagnosed at a localised stage. For locally advanced recurrence or metastatic disease, DCF (docetaxel, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil) demonstrated high efficacy and became one of the standard regimens. However, there is no standard of care in the second line. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the Epitopes-HPV01 and Epitopes-HPV02 prospective trials, 115 patients with advanced SCCA were treated with a DCF regimen in the first line. In these studies, second-line data were registered per protocol. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of >40 months, at progression, 73 patients received a second-line (L2) treatment. In this L2 population, median overall survival (mOS) was 13.5 months (95%CI 9.4-19.8), and median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 5.7 months (3.4-7.3) in L2. Fourteen patients presented an oligometastatic progression and were treated with an ablative treatment (surgery or radiotherapy); mOS was 48.3 months (NE-NE), and mPFS was 31.3 months (23.2-NE). Fifty-nine patients received a systemic treatment (chemotherapy or immunotherapy); mOS was 11 months (8.4-15.4) and mPFS was 4.9 months (3.3-7). The most frequent chemotherapy regimens were the reintroduction of DCF, paclitaxel, FOLFIRI and mitomycin plus fluoropyrimidine. No significant difference was observed between regimens (p = 0.26). Six patients received anti-PD1/L1-based immunotherapy. CONCLUSION: Second-line treatments are effective in patients with SCCA. Ablative treatment is feasible and is probably the best option for patients with oligometastatic progression. If this is not possible, systemic therapy by an anti-PD1/L1 immunotherapy or chemotherapy can be recommended. Reintroduction of DCF, paclitaxel, FOLFIRI or mitomycin-C plus fluoropyrimidine are possible options.

Study of the SARS-CoV-2-specific immune T-cell responses in COVID-19-positive cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients are considered highly vulnerable to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, delaying cancer-specific therapies could have a deleterious effect on survival. The potential suppressive effects of chemotherapies or cancer-related microenvironment raised the question on how cancer patients' immune system responds to SARS-CoV-2 virus. METHODS: We have started a prospective monocentric trial entitled COV-CREM (NCT04365322) in April 2020. The primary objective of the trial was to assess specific immune response's intensity and diversity to SARS-CoV-2 in infected patients. RESULTS: In this study, we showed that cancer patients (28 solid tumours, 11 haematological malignancies) exposed to SARS-CoV-2 produced a high rate of specific antibodies, as observed in patients without a cancer history (n = 29). However, our results highlight a lack in the generation of T-cell responses against CoV-N, M and S proteins from the SARS-CoV-2 virus, suggesting that cancer patients failed to mount a protective T-cell immunity. Nevertheless, SARS-CoV-2 infection did not impair established immune memory since specific responses against common viruses were not hampered in cancer patients. CONCLUSION: Given the severity and the unknown evolution of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, it is of fundamental importance to integrate cancer patients in vaccination programs.

Feasibility of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessment for cancer patients using electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) in daily clinical practice.

INTRODUCTION: Routine Electronic Monitoring of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) (REMOQOL) in clinical care with real-time feedback to physicians could help to enhance patient-centered care. We evaluated the feasibility of REMOQOL in the French context in the QOLIBRY study. The primary objective was to assess the patients' compliance with REMOQOL. METHODS: The QOLIBRY study was a single-center, prospective study conducted in the University Hospital of Besançon (France). Eligible patients were those treated with systemic therapies for breast, lung or colorectal cancer at any stage. Patients were invited to complete the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire and cancer-site-specific modules before each visit on tablets and/or computers in the hospital or at home. During the consultation, physicians had real-time access to visual summaries of HRQoL scores. Compliance was assessed as adequate if at least 66% of HRQoL assessments were completed during the 4 months of follow-up. RESULTS: Between March 2016 and October 2018, 177 patients were included in the QOLIBRY study. Median age was 64 years (IQR 54-71). The proportion of patients with an adequate compliance rate was 95.5% (n = 63) in the breast cancer cohort, 98.2% (n = 55) in the colorectal cancer cohort, and 90.9% (n = 50) in the lung cancer cohort. The physicians checked the HRQoL results in 73.1% of visits and prescribed supportive care and adapted patient management in 8.3% and 5.2% of visits, respectively. CONCLUSION & PERSPECTIVES: The results of QOLIBRY study suggest that REMOQOL is feasible in the French context. However, information about HRQoL monitoring, training of the physicians in the use of the software, and recommendations for using HRQoL results to guide care are essential and must be improved.

[Systemic treatment of locally advanced or metastatic penile cancer]. / Traitement systémique du cancer du pénis localement avancé ou métastatique.

Penile cancers are rare, the vast majority is represented by squamous cell carcinoma, with HPV virus being found in 30 to 40% of cases. At a locally advanced or metastatic stage, first-line treatment relies on platinum and taxane based polychemotherapy. The prognosis for advanced or metastatic penile cancer remains poor, with overall survival ranging from 13.9 to 17.1 months. After the first line, guidelines recommend various chemotherapy treatments or targeted anti-EGFR therapies whose results as well as the level of evidence are limited. A better understanding of the oncogenic pathways involved in penile cancer and a frequent expression of PD-L1 are the rationale for the elaboration of new strategies. This review article presents the data, guidelines and ongoing studies in locally advanced or metastatic penile cancer.

FOLFOXIRI vs FOLFIRINOX as first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: A population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: FOLFIRINOX regimen is the first-line reference chemotherapy (L1) in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (aPDAC). FOLFOXIRI, a schedule with a lower dose of irinotecan and no bolus 5-fluorouracil, has demonstrated efficacy and feasibility in colorectal cancer. AIM: To investigate the potential clinical value of FOLFOXIRI in patients with aPDAC in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Analyses were derived from all consecutive aPDAC patients treated in L1 between January 2011 and December 2017 in two French institutions, with either FOLFOXIRI (n = 165) or FOLFIRINOX (n = 124) regimens. FOLFOXIRI consisted of irinotecan (165 mg/m2), oxaliplatin (85 mg/m2), leucovorin (200 mg/m2) and 5-fluorouracil (3200 mg/m2 as a 48-h continuous infusion) every 2 wk. Ninety-six pairs of patients were selected through propensity score matching, and clinical outcomes of the two treatment regimens were compared. RESULTS: Median overall survival was 11.1 mo in the FOLFOXIRI and 11.6 mo in the FOLFIRINOX cohorts, respectively. After propensity score matching, survival rates remained similar between the two regimens in terms of overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.22; P = 0.219) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio = 1.27; P = 0.120). The objective response rate was 37.1% in the FOLFOXIRI group vs 47.8% in the FOLFIRINOX group (P = 0.187). Grade 3/4 toxicities occurred in 28.7% of patients in the FOLFOXIRI cohort vs 19.5% in the FOLFIRINOX cohort (P = 0.079). FOLFOXIRI was associated with a higher incidence of grade 3/4 digestive adverse events. Hematopoietic growth factors were used after each chemotherapy cycle and the low hematological toxicity rates were below 5% with both regimens. CONCLUSION: FOLFOXIRI is feasible in L1 in patients with aPDAC but does not confer any therapeutic benefit as compared with FOLFIRINOX. The low hematological toxicity rates strengthened the relevance of primary prophylaxis with hematopoietic growth factors.

Let us not underestimate the long-term risk of SPLC after surgical resection of NSCLC.

OBJECTIVES: Several studies have reported that patients operated on for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are at high risk of second primary lung cancer (SPLC). However, widely varying estimates of this risk have been reported, with very few studies taking into account that these patients are at particularly high competing risk of death, due to recurrence of the initial disease and to comorbidities. Risk factor evaluation over time has significant repercussions on the post-surgery surveillance strategy offered for NSCLC. This study primarily sought to measure the risk of SPLC in a long-term follow-up series, using statistical methods considering competing risks of death. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cumulative SPLC risk was estimated using the cumulative incidence of patients with completely resected Stage I-III NSCLC diagnosed between 2002 and 2015 based on the Doubs and Belfort cancer registry (France). A proportional sub-distribution hazard model (sdRH) was used to investigate factors associated with SPLC risk in the presence of competing risks. RESULTS: Among the 522 patients, adenocarcinoma and Stage I or II disease accounted for 52.3% and 75.7% of patients, respectively. Overall, 84 patients developed SPLC (16.1%). The cumulative risk of SPLC was 20.2% at 10 years post-surgery (95% confidence interval [CI]: 15.3-23.2), and 25.2% (CI: 19.4-31.3) at 14 years post-surgery. On multivariate analysis, the SPLC risk was significantly higher in patients with postoperative thoracic radiotherapy (sdRH 2.79; 95% CI: 1.41-5.52; p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: This study using appropriate statistical methods to consider competing risks showed that after complete NSCLC resection, the cumulative incidence function of SPLC was high, with patients receiving postoperative thoracic radiotherapy at higher risk. These data support the need for life-long follow-up of patients who undergo NSCLC surgery, with the objective of screening for SPLC.

Open-label, randomized multicentre phase II study to assess the efficacy and tolerability of sunitinib by dose administration regimen (dose modification or dose interruptions) in patients with advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma: study protocol of the SURF trial.

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved in the first-line metastatic renal cell carcinoma (MRCC) setting at the dose of 50 mg daily for 4 weeks followed by a pause of 2 weeks. Due to toxicity, this standard schedule (50 mg daily 4/2) can induce up to 50% of sunitinib dose modification (reduction and/or interruption). The current recommendation in such case is to reduce the dose to 37.5 mg per day (standard schedule 4/2). Recent data highlight an alternative schedule: 2 weeks of treatment followed by 1 week of pause (experimental schedule 2/1). The SURF trial is set up to evaluate prospectively experimental schedule 2/1 when toxicity occurs. This article displays the key elements of the study protocol. METHODS/DESIGN: SURF [NCT02689167] is a prospective, randomized, open-label phase IIb study. Patients are included at sunitinib initiation while receiving standard schedule 4/2 (50 mg daily) according to the marketing authorization indication. When a dose adjustment of sunitinib is required, patients are randomized between standard schedule 4/2 (37.5 mg daily) and experimental schedule 2/1 (50 mg daily). Key eligibility criteria are the following: patients with locally advanced inoperable or MRCC who are starting first-line treatment with sunitinib, with histologically or cytologically confirmed renal cancer clear cell variant or with a clear cell component, and with Karnofsky performance status ≥70%. The primary objective is to assess the median duration of sunitinib treatment (DOT) in each group. The key secondary objectives are progression-free survival, overall survival, time to randomization, objective response rate, safety, sunitinib dose intensity, health-related quality of life, and the description of main drivers triggering randomization. We hypothesized that experimental schedule 2/1 would result in an improvement in median DOT from 6 to 8.5 months. It was estimated that 112 patients would be needed in each arm during 24 months. In order to take into account the possibility of treatment discontinuation before randomization, 248 patients are necessary. DISCUSSION: The SURF trial is asking a pragmatic question adapted to the current practice on what is the best way to adapt sunitinib when treatment-related adverse events occur. The results of the SURF trial will bring high-value data to support the use of an alternative schedule in sunitinib treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02689167 . Registered on 26 February 2016.

Factors Influencing Overall Survival for Patients With Metastatic Clear-Cell Renal-Cell Carcinoma in Daily Practice.

PURPOSE: To describe factors associated with overall survival (OS) among patients with metastatic clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma (mccRCC) in regard to evolution of systemic therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred twenty-four consecutive patients with histologically confirmed mccRCC who received targeted therapy on first-line treatment between January 2007 and March 2015 were included. The primary end point was OS for metastatic first-line or second-line treatment. An analysis of prognostic factors of long survival was performed using a 2-step approach: univariate, then multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Median OS [95% confidence interval] was 19.4 months [16.1-24.9]. Three prognostic factors were identified in first-line treatment: Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) favorable and intermediate risks (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] = 0.362 [0.207-0.630] and 0.561 [0.393-0.801], respectively, P = 4.10-4), metastasectomy (0.667 [0.468-0.951], P = .03), and lack of lymph node metastasis (0.715 [0.513-0.994], P = .049). In second-line treatment, median OS [95% confidence interval] was 11.0 months [8.9-14.4] for 167 patients. Three different prognostic factors predicted long survival: toxicity for first-line treatment discontinuation (HR [95% confidence interval] = 0.298 [0.180-0.493], P < 10-4), duration of disease control in first-line therapy (0.961 [0.942-0.979], P = 2.10-4), and MSKCC favorable and intermediate risks (0.461 [0.252-0.843] and 0.936 [0.607-1.443], respectively, P = .02). CONCLUSION: These real-life data confirm the positive impact of targeted therapy in the mccRCC setting. Moreover, it emphasizes the importance of considering many factors in order to better estimate prognosis in patient pretreated with systemic therapy.

[Prevalence and management of pain in patients with metastatic cancer in Franche-Comté]. / Prévalence et prise en charge de la douleur chez les patients présentant un cancer métastatique en Franche-Comté.

INTRODUCTION: Pain management is a major public health problem, especially in oncology. In order to assess professional practice, the IRFC-FC conducted a survey amongst patients with metastatic osteophilic solid tumor in Franche-Comté. The aims were to assess the pain prevalence, and its characteristics, its management and its impact on patients' quality of life in patients in pain. METHODS: An observational, prospective and multicenter survey was conducted using a self-report questionnaire. Patients with metastatic breast or prostate cancer managed in 5 day-hospitals of the IRFC-FC over a period of three months were included. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-three questionnaires were analyzed. Pain prevalence rate was 48.5%. Three quarters of patients in pain had chronic background pain, moderate to severe, with or without breakthrough pain. Considering their pain intensity and their analgesic therapy, 42.0% of patients seem to have an inadequate treatment. Eighty-five percent of treated patients reported to be compliant and felt that their pain was well managed despite a strong impact on their quality of life. CONCLUSION: The setting of a specific clinical pathway is essential to secure the standardized, optimal and efficient management of patients in pain. The assessment of patient satisfaction and quality of life must be integrated in clinical practice to identify patients in pain for which the treatment is inappropriate.

Carboplatin-etoposide combination chemotherapy in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: A retrospective study.

The combination of cisplatin or carboplatin and etoposide is the standard treatment for certain poorly differentiated neuroendocrine cancers, such as small-cell lung cancer. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of the carboplatin-etoposide regimen in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). A total of 27 patients treated by carboplatin [area under the curve (AUC)=5] and etoposide (100 mg/m2 intravenous infusion on days 1-3 or 75 mg orally/day for 10 days) for mCRPC were included for analysis. The median progression-free survival was 3.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.9-4.2] and the median overall survival (OS) was 8.1 months (95% CI: 4.06-12.36). The main grade 3-4 toxicities were haematological, namely anemia (33.3%), neutropenia (25.9%) and thrombocytopenia (22.2%), whereas the most common non-hematological toxicity was asthenia (22.2%). The efficacy, compliance and safety profile were generally similar between the oral and intravenous etoposide groups. Pretreated patients with mCRPC may benefit from the carboplatin-etoposide regimen in terms of OS. The toxicities were acceptable, without reported treatment-related mortality. Therefore, the oral etoposide regimen may be an viable alternative for improving the quality of life of the patients. However, this regimen requires further prospective investigation to confirm its efficacy.

Specific anticancer treatments in the last 3 months of life: a French experience.

PURPOSE: The treatment of patients with advanced cancer is becoming increasingly aggressive near the end of life, whereas poor literature is available. This study analyzes the management of patients with a solid cancer in their last 3 months of life in the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Besançon, France. METHODS: This retrospective study includes all adult patients with a solid tumor who died in medical oncology or radiotherapy unit in 2005, 2006, and 2007. Group A had received at least one specific anticancer treatment at the end of life, while group B did not. RESULTS: Of 167 included patients, 139 (83.2 %) received a specific treatment during the last 3 months of life. The reference unit was medical oncology for 76 % and radiotherapy for 24 % patients; overall survival was 18 and 9 months, and median age of metastatic evolution was 59 and 71 in group A and B, respectively. The number of previous lines of chemotherapy was on average 1.96 and 0.39, respectively. In a univariate analysis, differences appear for reference unit, age of death, and number of previous lines of chemotherapy, with a trend for chemosensitivity of the tumor in this small-sized study. No significant difference was found for sex, life-threatening metastases, or performance status. CONCLUSION: These preliminary data suggest that when evaluating the utilization of care at the end of life, one needs to take into account factors such as the age of the patient and the chemosensitivity of the tumor.