Changes in anticancer treatment plans in patients with solid cancer hospitalized with COVID-19: analysis of the nationwide BSMO-COVID registry providing lessons for the future.

BACKGROUND: Solid cancer is an independent prognostic factor for poor outcome with COVID-19. As guidelines for patient management in that setting depend on retrospective efforts, we here present the first analyses of a nationwide database of patients with cancer hospitalized with COVID-19 in Belgium, with a focus on changes in anticancer treatment plans at the time of SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Nineteen Belgian hospitals identified all patients with a history of solid cancer hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 2020 and February 2021. Demographic, cancer-specific and COVID-specific data were pseudonymously entered into a central Belgian Society of Medical Oncology (BSMO)-COVID database. The association between survival and primary cancer type was analyzed through multivariate multinomial logistic regression. Group comparisons for categorical variables were carried out through a Chi-square test. RESULTS: A total of 928 patients were registered in the database; most of them were aged ≥70 years (61.0%) and with poor performance scores [57.2% Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) ≥2]. Thirty-day COVID-related mortality was 19.8%. In multivariate analysis, a trend was seen for higher mortality in patients with lung cancer (27.6% versus 20.8%, P = 0.062) and lower mortality for patients with breast cancer (13.0% versus 23.3%, P = 0.052) compared with other tumour types. Non-curative treatment was associated with higher 30-day COVID-related mortality rates compared with curative or no active treatment (25.8% versus 14.3% versus 21.9%, respectively, P < 0.001). In 33% of patients under active treatment, the therapeutic plan was changed due to COVID-19 diagnosis, most frequently involving delays/interruptions in systemic treatments (18.6%). Thirty-day COVID-related mortality was not significantly different between patients with and without treatment modifications (21.4% versus 20.5%). CONCLUSION: Interruption in anticancer treatments at the time of SARS-CoV-2 infection was not associated with a reduction in COVID-related mortality in our cohort of patients with solid cancer, highlighting that treatment continuation should be strived for, especially in the curative setting.

Treatment of patients with newly diagnosed metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) in Belgium: a real world data analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Abiraterone acetate + prednisone (AAP) and docetaxel have proven their efficacy in the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) in clinical trials. However, real-world data are scarce. The goal of this study is to evaluate real-world data on the efficacy and safety of these therapies in mHSPC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Records of 93 patients from 21 different centres were retrospectively reviewed. Primary and secondary endpoints were radiographic and PSA progression-free survival (RPFS - PSA-PFS) and cancer specific and overall survival (CSS - OS), respectively. Adverse events (AEs) were evaluated according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Differences in oncological outcome and AEs were evaluated between three treatment groups: ADT only (N=26) - ADT + AAP (N=48) - ADT + docetaxel (N=19). Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier statistics. RESULTS: Median RPFS was 13 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9-17) for ADT only, 21 months (95% CI: 19-23) for ADT + AAP and 12 months (95% CI: 11-14) for ADT + docetaxel (p = 0.004). The 1-year PSA-PFS, CSS and OS were 73.5%, 90.7% and 88.7%, respectively, with no significant differences between the three groups. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were not observed more frequently. CONCLUSION: Retrospective real-world data show a significantly longer RPFS for mHSPC patients treated with ADT + AAP compared to ADT only or ADT + docetaxel at short-term follow-up. This can aid in counselling of mHSPC patients in daily clinical practice.

Radiological tumor size decrease at week 6 is a potent predictor of outcome in chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab (BOND trial).

BACKGROUND: Early radiological tumor shrinkage may be associated with better long-term outcome in chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer (cmCRC) treated with cetuximab. We aimed at validating this in a large and independent series. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Of the 329 patients, 289 had a measurement both at baseline and week 6. Tumor shrinkage was expressed as a relative decrease compared with baseline and categorized according to a previously reported cut-off value ( approximately 10%) or used as a continuous variable. RESULTS: Median time to progression (TTP) was 6.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.1-7.2] versus 1.5 months (95% CI 1.4-1.7) in patients with [99 patients (34.3%)] or without [190 patients (65.7%)] tumor shrinkage, respectively, at week 6 [hazard ratio (HR) 0.23 (95% CI 0.17-0.32)]. The median overall survival (OS) was 13.7 (CI NA) versus 6.9 months (95% CI 6.1-7.7) [HR 0.21 (95% CI 0.14-0.32)], respectively. In a multivariate model, early tumor decrease outperformed skin toxicity as a predictor of long-term outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Tumor shrinkage at 6 weeks is a strong predictor of TTP and OS in cmCRC patients treated with cetuximab with or without irinotecan. This suggests early tumor shrinkage is the hallmark of efficacy of cetuximab and reliably identifies the subpopulation that is sensitive to the drug. Early tumor shrinkage can be used as a marker of efficacy in clinical practice, as such or in combination.

KRAS wild-type state predicts survival and is associated to early radiological response in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab.

BACKGROUND: KRAS mutation status is a candidate marker for predicting survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with cetuximab (CTX). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We studied the KRAS mutation status of 113 patients with irinotecan refractory mCRC treated with CTX in clinical trials. A predictive model for objective response (OR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was constructed using logistic and Cox regression. RESULTS: OR was seen in 27 of 66 KRAS wild-type (WT) patients versus 0 of 42 in KRAS mutants. Median OS was significantly better in KRAS WT versus mutants (43.0 versus 27.3 weeks; P = 0.020). Decrease in tumor sizes was significantly larger at all time points in WT patients. KRAS WT patients with an initial relative decrease of tumor size >9.66% at week 6 had a significantly better median OS compared with all other patients (74.9 versus 30.6 weeks; P = 0.0000025). Within KRAS WT patients OS was significantly better in patients with an initial decrease compared with those without [median OS: 74.9 versus 30.6 weeks (P = 0.00000012)]. CONCLUSIONS: KRAS WT status is associated to survival benefit in CTX treated mCRC. This benefit is even more pronounced in those patients with early radiological response. These characteristics may be exploited for response prediction.

Treatment of Zenker's diverticulum through a flexible endoscope with a transparent oblique-end hood attached to the tip and a monopolar forceps.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Zenker's diverticulum was commonly treated by means of external transcervical diverticulectomy, myotomy or diverticulopexy, or by means of an endoscopic myotomy through a rigid endoscope. Gastroenterologists first described flexible endoscopic therapy for Zenker's diverticulum in 1995. In our single-center study we report the safety and feasibility of endoscopic myotomy through a flexible endoscope, performed at a secondary referral centre. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A series of 21 patients with Zenker's diverticulum were treated using a flexible endoscope with a transparent oblique-end hood attached to the tip and a monopolar coagulation forceps. Relief of the dysphagia was the main outcome measure with evaluation of safety and complications. Dysphagia was graded on a scale of 0 to 4 before and after treatment. General anesthesia was not used. RESULTS: Access to the esophagus was attained without problems in all patients. Oral feeding was resumed the following day. Complete relief of dysphagia was reported by all patients after 1 month. Dysphagia recurred in two patients (9.5%) after the first session. These patients were successfully treated again in the same way. Adverse events were limited to transient cervical emphysema in a single patient. CONCLUSIONS: This endoscopic technique is an efficient, safe and minimally invasive method for the treatment of Zenker's diverticulum. General anesthesia is not necessary and oral feeding can be resumed the next day. In view of the excellent results and minimal complications, it can be considered a safe alternative for the treatment of Zenker's diverticulum.