Pretreatment PLR Is Preferable to NLR and LMR as a Predictor in Locally Advanced and Metastatic Bladder Cancer.

Background/Aim: Advanced bladder cancer (BC) is associated with an inflammatory nature and poor prognosis Inflammatory biomarkers are potential predictors in BC. We conducted a study to assess the prognostic value of the pretreatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) in advanced bladder cancer. Patients and Methods: A total of 226-patients with muscle-invasive BC (MIBC) were included. Overall (OS) and progression-free survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test was used for comparison. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine NLR, PLR, and LMR association with OS. Results: Our patients' median progression-free survival and OS were 12.18 and 15.54 months, respectively. Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed cut-off values for our chosen inflammatory markers. The patients with high NLR or PLR had inferior median OS compared to their counterparts with lower ratios for both (NLR: 22.51 vs. 9.84 months, respectively, p≤0.001; PLR: 17.68 vs. 14.08 months, respectively, p=0.08). Meanwhile, patients with low LMR had inferior median OS compared to patients with higher LMR (LMR: 20.14 months vs. 10.55 months, respectively, p<0.001). The multivariate Cox regression analysis identified a high PLR as an independent predictive factor of worse OS (hazard ratio=2.774, 95% confidence interval=1.486-5.178, p=0.001) but not NLR or LMR. Conclusion: PLR, C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio, and serum LDH levels, but not NLR and LMR, may function as independent predictors in patients with advanced BC prior to systemic treatment.

Treatment efficacy of ribociclib or palbociclib plus letrozole in hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer.

Background: Ribociclib, palbociclib and abemaciclib are currently approved CDK4/6 inhibitors along with aromatase inhibitors as the first-line standard-of-care for patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. Methods: The authors report retrospective real-life data for 600 patients with estrogen receptor- and/or progesterone receptor-positive and HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer who were treated with ribociclib and palbociclib in combination with letrozole. Results & conclusion: The results demonstrated that the combination of palbociclib or ribociclib with letrozole has similar progression-free survival and overall survival benefit in real life for the patient group with similar clinical features. Specifically, endocrine sensitivity may be a factor to be considered in the treatment preference.

Efficacy of subsequent treatments in patients with hormone-positive advanced breast cancer who had disease progression under CDK 4/6 inhibitor therapy.

BACKGROUND: There is no standard treatment recommended at category 1 level in international guidelines for subsequent therapy after cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6) based therapy. We aimed to evaluate which subsequent treatment oncologists prefer in patients with disease progression under CDKi. In addition, we aimed to show the effectiveness of systemic treatments after CDKi and whether there is a survival difference between hormonal treatments (monotherapy vs. mTOR-based). METHODS: A total of 609 patients from 53 centers were included in the study. Progression-free-survivals (PFS) of subsequent treatments (chemotherapy (CT, n:434) or endocrine therapy (ET, n:175)) after CDKi were calculated. Patients were evaluated in three groups as those who received CDKi in first-line (group A, n:202), second-line (group B, n: 153) and ≥ 3rd-line (group C, n: 254). PFS was compared according to the use of ET and CT. In addition, ET was compared as monotherapy versus everolimus-based combination therapy. RESULTS: The median duration of CDKi in the ET arms of Group A, B, and C was 17.0, 11.0, and 8.5 months in respectively; it was 9.0, 7.0, and 5.0 months in the CT arm. Median PFS after CDKi was 9.5 (5.0-14.0) months in the ET arm of group A, and 5.3 (3.9-6.8) months in the CT arm (p = 0.073). It was 6.7 (5.8-7.7) months in the ET arm of group B, and 5.7 (4.6-6.7) months in the CT arm (p = 0.311). It was 5.3 (2.5-8.0) months in the ET arm of group C and 4.0 (3.5-4.6) months in the CT arm (p = 0.434). Patients who received ET after CDKi were compared as those who received everolimus-based combination therapy versus those who received monotherapy ET: the median PFS in group A, B, and C was 11.0 vs. 5.9 (p = 0.047), 6.7 vs. 5.0 (p = 0.164), 6.7 vs. 3.9 (p = 0.763) months. CONCLUSION: Physicians preferred CT rather than ET in patients with early progression under CDKi. It has been shown that subsequent ET after CDKi can be as effective as CT. It was also observed that better PFS could be achieved with the subsequent everolimus-based treatments after first-line CDKi compared to monotherapy ET.

The Effect of Continuing Chemotherapy after Chemoradiotherapy during the Time to Surgery on Tumor Response and Survival for Local Advanced Rectal Cancer.

Aim: The current standard treatment of locally advanced rectal carcinoma is total mesorectal excision and postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy after neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (NCRT). Many studies have shown that pathological complete response (pCR) is an important prognostic factor for patients receiving NCRT. Many studies have therefore been conducted to increase pCR rates by changing the perioperative treatment strategies. Prolonging the chemotherapy time may be a reasonable way to increase the effectiveness of NCRT, pCR, and survival rates. We investigated whether neoadjuvant consolidation chemotherapy had an effect on tumor response and survival. Methods: The data of 163 patients diagnosed with locally advanced rectal carcinoma were evaluated. The data of 107 patients (Group 1) who were radiologically T3-T4 and/or N+ and received chemotherapy after NCRT until their operations were compared with the data of 56 patients (Group 2) who were operated after NCRT. Results: Group 1 patients had tumor and node downstaging. Their pCR was found significantly higher than in Group 2 (p = 0.005). In Group 1 patients with T3, pCR was significantly higher than for those with T4. The elapsed time between NCRT and surgery was significantly longer in patients with pCR (respectively, p = 0.012 and p = 0.008). Conclusion: Neoadjuvant consolidation chemotherapy after NCRT is a safe approach that can lead to higher pathological complete response rates. The time until surgery with neoadjuvant consolidation chemotherapy may provide the chance to follow the patient without surgery in addition to increasing pCR.