Feasibility and safety of exercise during chemotherapy in people with gastrointestinal cancers: a pilot study.

PURPOSE: Sarcopenia is a poor prognostic factor in cancer patients, and exercise is one of the treatments to improve sarcopenia. However, there is currently insufficient evidence on whether exercise can improve sarcopenia in patients with advanced cancers. This study examined the feasibility of exercise in advanced gastrointestinal (GI) cancer patients treated with palliative chemotherapy. METHODS: Between 2020 and 2021, 30 patients were enrolled in a resistance and aerobic exercise program for six weeks. The exercise intervention program (EIP) consisted of low, moderate, and high intensity levels. Patients were asked to select the intensity level according to their ability. The primary endpoint was the feasibility of the EIP measured by compliance during the six weeks. A compliance of over 50% was considered acceptable. The secondary endpoints were changes in weight and muscle mass, safety, quality of life (QoL) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The median age of the study's participants was 60 (30-77). The total compliance to the EIP was 63.3% (19/30 patients). Sixteen (53.3%) patients had a compliance of over 80%. The attrition rate was 30.0% (9/30). The mean exercise time was 41.4 min, and the aerobic exercise was 92.3% and the resistant exercise was 73.7%, and both exercise was 66.5%. Most patients performed the moderate intensity level exercises at home or near their home. The mean skeletal muscle index (SMI) was 43.5 cm2/m2 pre-chemotherapy and 42.2 cm2/m2 after six weeks of chemotherapy, with a decrease of -1.2 ± 2.8 cm2/m2 (-3.0%) (p = 0.030). In the poor compliance group, the mean SMI decrease was -2.8 ± 3.0 cm2/m2 which was significantly different (p = 0.033); however, in the good compliance group, the mean SMI decrease was -0.5 ± 2.5 cm2/m2 which was maintained over the six weeks (p = 0.337). The good compliance group had a significantly longer median OS compared with the poor compliance group (25.3 months vs. 7.9 months, HR = 0.306, 95% CI = 0.120-0.784, p = 0.014). The QoL showed a better score for insomnia (p = 0.042). There were no serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The EIP during palliative chemotherapy in advanced GI cancer patients showed good compliance. In the good compliance group, muscle mass and physical functions were maintained for six weeks. The EIP was safe, and the QoL was maintained. Based on this study, further research in exercise intervention in advanced cancer patients is needed. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The clinical trial registration number is KCT 0005615 (CRIS, https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/en/ ); registration date, 23rd Nov 2020.

A randomised phase 2b study comparing the efficacy and safety of belotecan vs. topotecan as monotherapy for sensitive-relapsed small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study compared the efficacy/safety of the camptothecin analogues belotecan and topotecan for sensitive-relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). METHODS: One-hundred-and-sixty-four patients were randomised (1:1) to receive five consecutive daily intravenous infusions of topotecan (1.5 mg/m2) or belotecan (0.5 mg/m2), every 3 weeks, for six cycles. Main outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), tolerability and toxicity. The study statistical plan was non-inferiority design with ORR as the endpoint. RESULTS: In the belotecan vs. topotecan groups, ORR (primary endpoint) was 33% vs. 21% (p = 0.09) and DCR was 85% vs. 70% (p = 0.030). PFS was not different between groups. Median OS was significantly longer with belotecan than with topotecan (13.2 vs. 8.2 months, HR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.48-0.99), particularly in patients aged <65 years, with more advanced disease (i.e., extensive-stage disease, time to relapse: 3-6 months), or Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 1 or 2. More belotecan recipients completed all treatment cycles (53% vs. 35%; p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy/safety of belotecan warrants further evaluation in Phase 3 trials. Belotecan potentially offers an alternative to topotecan for sensitive-relapsed SCLC, particularly in patients aged <65 years, with more advanced disease, or poor performance.

Obstructive sleep apnea in airline pilots during daytime sleep following overnight flights.

To identify the vulnerability of recovery sleep, this study investigated the occurrence of obstructive sleep apnea during daytime sleep following overnight flights in healthy airline pilots. We conducted daytime polysomnography following a long-haul night-time flight in 103 pilots. The following variables were assessed: apnea-hypopnea index, respiratory disturbance index and oxygen desaturation index. Moderate-to-severe obstructive sleep apnea was defined as an apnea-hypopnea index ≥15. Seventy-three pilots (70.9%) with no known history of obstructive sleep apnea presented with moderate-to-severe obstructive sleep apnea. Pilots showed high mean apnea-hypopnea, respiratory disturbance and oxygen desaturation indices. The body mass index, Berlin questionnaire score and cumulative flight time contributed to these indices, with both body mass index and cumulative flight time remaining significant at an apnea-hypopnea index ≥15. We found that pilots are vulnerable to obstructive sleep apnea during daytime sleep after night-time flights, which may deteriorate their health, increase fatigue and impair overall flight safety. Further research is needed to ensure flight safety, as daytime recovery sleep is unavoidable for night-time flight pilots. The pilots' normal and recovery sleep patterns should both be studied to develop an effective sleep management protocol.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Epidermal Growth Factor Ointment for Treating Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitor-Induced Skin Toxicities.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of epidermal growth factor (EGF) receptor (EGFR) inhibitors in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), pancreatic cancer (PC), or colorectal cancer (CRC) has been demonstrated. However, dermatological reactions to these inhibitors can cause significant physical and psychosocial discomfort. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of EGF ointment for EGFR inhibitor-related skin adverse events (ERSEs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter, pilot phase III trial enrolled patients with NSCLC, PC, or CRC treated with EGFR inhibitors. Patients with grade ≥2 ERSEs were included. Patients were randomized to three treatment arms: arm 1, placebo; arm 2, 1 ppm of EGF ointment; and arm 3, 20 ppm of EGF ointment. Patients applied ointment to their skin lesions twice daily. RESULTS: Efficacy evaluation was available for 80 patients (9 for PC, 28 for NSCLC, and 43 for CRC). Responses were 44.4% in arm 1, 61.5% in arm 2, and 77.8% in arm 3. There was a linear correlation between EGF concentrations and responses (p = .012). Quality of life (QoL) was assessed for 74 patients. Maximum changes in composite scores by Skindex-16 after treatment were significantly different among arms (mean ± SD: -5.2 ± 8.6 for arm 1, -11.7 ± 14.2 for arm 2, and - 18.6 ± 17.7 for arm 3; p = .008). EGF arms showed significant improvement in emotions (p = .005) and functioning (p = .044) scores over the placebo arm. CONCLUSION: EGF ointment is effective for managing ERSEs. It can also improve patients' QoL compared with placebo. Clinical trial identification number. NCT02284139 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Patients with non-small cell lung cancer, pancreatic cancer, or colorectal cancer who are treated with epidermal growth factor (EGF) receptor (EGFR) inhibitors may experience dermatologic reactions to their treatment. This study investigated the benefit of an EGF ointment in the treatment of these adverse events and observed the ointment to be effective in managing EGFR inhibitor-related skin adverse events.

Interference with daily functioning by breakthrough pain in patients with cancer.

PURPOSE: To investigate the association between quality of life (QOL) and breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP) intensity in patients who met the commonly accepted definition of BTCP. METHODS: This study was a subset analysis of a South Korean multicenter, non-interventional, cross-sectional, nationwide survey. Participants were recruited from March 2016 to December 2017. BTCP was defined as a controlled background pain of less than a numeric rating scale (NRS) of 3 and any flare-up pain intensity. Pain intensity data were collected using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), which includes an interference assessment of the affective and physical domains. Patients were categorized by BTCP intensity into mild (NRS 1-3), moderate (4-6), and severe (7-10) groups. RESULTS: Of the 969 screened patients with cancer, 679 had ≤ NRS 3 background pain, of whom 438 completed the BPI. Of these 438 patients, 40, 204, and 194 were in the mild, moderate, and severe BTCP groups, respectively. The median NRS of BTCP was 6.0 (interquartile range = 5.0-8.0). Patients with moderate-severe BTCP had significantly higher interference with daily functioning (IDF) scores than did mild BTCP patients (3.3 vs. 5.7; p < 0.01). Both domains of IDF were significantly hampered proportionally by increased BTCP intensity (p < 0.001). The median total IDF scores of the no, moderate, and severe BTCP groups were 3.3, 5.0, and 6.9, respectively. Furthermore, IDF depended on BTCP intensity, duration, and frequency (p < 0.01) but not on pain type and cause. CONCLUSION: An increase in BTCP intensity is likely to result in IDF, regardless of the cause or type of BTCP.

A Mobile Game for Patients With Breast Cancer for Chemotherapy Self-Management and Quality-of-Life Improvement: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The application of game-based learning in clinical practice has shown potential advantages in previous studies. However, there have been little efforts to use smartphone-based mobile games in the management of adult patients with cancer. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to evaluate if patient education using a mobile game may increase drug compliance, decrease physical side effects of chemotherapy, and improve psychological status in breast cancer patients. METHODS: A total of 76 patients with metastatic breast cancer who were planned to receive cytotoxic chemotherapy were enrolled in this trial. Study participants were randomly assigned to a mobile game play group (game group, n=36) or a conventional education group (control group, n=40) in a ratio of 1:1. The patients were unblinded and followed prospectively for 3 weeks. Outcome measures included time spent for education, compliance to medication, physical side effects, and psychological side effects including quality of life (QoL). RESULTS: Overall, 72 out of 76 patients completed the study after 3 weeks (95%). The subjects in the game group showed high levels of satisfaction with the app. The time spent playing the mobile game in the game group was longer than that spent for self-education in the control group (mean 22.2, SD 6.1 vs mean 5.5, SD 4.0 minutes a day; P<.001). The mobile game group showed better drug adherence (Korean version of the Medication Adherence Rating Scale; mean 7.6, SD 0.7 vs mean 6.5, SD 0.5; P<.001). The use of the mobile game was associated with lower rates of chemotherapy-related side effects, such as nausea, fatigue, numbness of hand or foot, and hair loss, than the control group. The game group exhibited better QoL during chemotherapy (mean 74.9, SD 3.5 vs mean 72.2, SD 5.3; P=.01). However, there were no significant differences in terms of depression and anxiety scales. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests the feasibility and potentiality of the use of smartphone mobile games for patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy. Education using a mobile game led to better patient education, improved drug compliance, decreased side effects, and better QoL compared with conventional education. Mobile games can be used as easy, fun, and effective measures for patient education and have the potential to improve treatment outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03205969; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03205969 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/71jfSBOq9).

Antiemetic Corticosteroid Rotation from Dexamethasone to Methylprednisolone to Prevent Dexamethasone-Induced Hiccup in Cancer Patients Treated with Chemotherapy: A Randomized, Single-Blind, Crossover Phase III Trial.

BACKGROUND: To assess whether the rotation of dexamethasone to methylprednisolone decreases the intensity of dexamethasone-induced hiccup (DIH) in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adult patients who experienced DIH within 3 days after the administration of dexamethasone as an antiemetic were screened. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive dexamethasone (n = 33) or methylprednisolone (n = 32) as an antiemetic (randomization phase). In the next cycle of chemotherapy, the dexamethasone group received methylprednisolone and vice versa in the methylprednisolone group (crossover phase). The primary endpoint was the difference in hiccup intensity as measured using the numeric rating scale (NRS) between two groups. RESULTS: No female patients were enrolled, although the study did not exclude them. At the randomization phase, hiccup frequency was 28/33 (84.8%) in the dexamethasone group versus 20/32 (62.5%) in the methylprednisolone group (p = .04). Intensity of hiccup was significantly higher in the dexamethasone group than that in the methylprednisolone group (mean NRS, 3.5 vs. 1.4, p < .001). At the crossover phase, hiccup intensity was further decreased after the rotation of dexamethasone to methylprednisolone in the dexamethasone group (mean NRS, 3.5 to 0.9, p < .001), while it was increased by rotating methylprednisolone to dexamethasone in the methylprednisolone group (mean NRS, 1.4 to 3.3, p = .025). There were no differences in emesis intensity between the two groups at either the randomization or crossover phases. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01974024. CONCLUSION: Dexamethasone-induced hiccup is a male-predominant phenomenon that can be ameliorated by rotating dexamethasone to methylprednisolone without compromising the antiemetic efficacy. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: In this randomized, multicenter, phase III trial, hiccup intensity was significantly lower when the antiemetic corticosteroid was rotated from dexamethasone to methylprednisolone without a change in emesis intensity than that when dexamethasone was maintained. At the crossover phase, hiccup intensity was increased again if dexamethasone was readministered instead of methylprednisolone. The present study demonstrated that dexamethasone-induced hiccup can be improved by rotating from dexamethasone to methylprednisolone without compromising its antiemetic efficacy.

Efficacy and safety of aprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting during the first cycle of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy in Korean patients with a broad range of tumor types.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of a 3-day aprepitant regimen for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) during the first cycle of non-anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide (AC)-based moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) based on government guidelines in Korean patients. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase IV trial (NCT01636947) enrolled adult South Korean patients with a broad range of tumor types who were scheduled to receive a single dose of ≥1 MEC agent. Patients were randomized to a 3-day regimen of aprepitant (aprepitant regimen) or placebo (control regimen) on top of ondansetron plus dexamethasone. The primary and key secondary efficacy endpoints were the proportions of subjects who achieved no vomiting and complete response (CR) during the overall phase. RESULTS: Of the 494 randomized subjects, 480 were included in the modified intent-to-treat population. Response rates for no vomiting and CR in the overall phase were numerically higher for the aprepitant regimen compared with the control regimen groups, but failed to reach statistical significance (no vomiting 77.2 vs 72.0%; p = 0.191; CR 73.4 vs 70.4%; p = 0.458). Both the aprepitant and control regimens were generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION: A 3-day aprepitant regimen was numerically better but not statistically superior to a control regimen with respect to the achievement of no vomiting or CR during the overall phase in a non-AC MEC Korean population based on government reimbursement guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01636947 ( https://clinicaltrials.Gov/ct2/show/NCT01636947 ).

Multicenter, cross-sectional observational study of the impact of neuropathic pain on quality of life in cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Neuropathic cancer pain (NCP) is a common and potentially debilitating symptom in cancer patients. We investigated the prevalence of NCP, as well as its management and association with QOL. METHODS: Cancer patients with pain ≥1 on the visual analogue scale (VAS) were surveyed with the Douleur Neuropathique (DN4) questionnaire, the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF), and the EuroQOL five dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire. The associations between NCP and pain severity or NCP and QOL, while controlling for variables relevant to QOL, were then analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 2003 patients were enrolled in this survey; the prevalence of NCP was 36.0% (n = 722, 95% CI, 32.5-39.5). We found that NCP in cancer patients was closely correlated to a higher pain severity (BPI-SF; 4.96 ± 1.94 versus 4.24 ± 2.02, p < 0.001), and in patients with NCP, pain more severely interfered with daily living, as compared to those without NCP (BPI-SF; 4.86 ± 2.71 versus 4.41 ± 2.87, p < 0.001). Patients with NCP also had worse QOL than those without NCP, as measured by EQ-5D index score (0.47 ± 0.30 vs. 0.51 ± 0.30, p = 0.005), and this was confirmed using multivariate analysis (p < 0.001), even after controlling for other variables such as age, sex, disease stage, cancer duration, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and comorbidities. Importantly, adjuvant analgesics were used in less than half of patients with NCP (n = 358, 46.4%). CONCLUSIONS: We found that NCP in cancer patients was significantly associated with a worsened QOL, and current management is inadequate. Therefore, future research aimed at developing improved strategies for management of NCP is required.

Phase II trial of epidermal growth factor ointment for patients with Erlotinib-related skin effects.

PURPOSE: The efficacy of erlotinib, the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has been demonstrated in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and pancreatic cancer (PC). In the present study, we evaluated the effect of epidermal growth factor (EGF) ointment on erlotinib-related skin effects (ERSEs). METHODS: This was an open-label, non-comparative, multicenter, phase II trial. The patients included those diagnosed with NSCLC or PC who were treated with erlotinib. The effectiveness of the ointment was defined as follows: (1) grade 2, 3, or 4 ERSEs downgraded to ≤ grade 1 or (2) grade 3 or 4 ERSEs downgraded to grade 2 and persisted for at least 2 weeks. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients from seven institutes in Korea were enrolled with informed consent. The final assessment included 46 patients (30 males, 16 females). According to the definition of effectiveness, the EGF ointment was effective in 36 (69.2%) intention to treat patients. There were no statistically significant differences in the effectiveness of the EGF ointment by gender (p = 0.465), age (p = 0.547), tumor type (p = 0.085), erlotinib dosage (p = 0.117), and number of prior chemotherapy sessions (p = 0.547). The grading for the average National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) rating of rash/acne and itching improved from 2.02 ± 0.83 to 1.13 ± 0.89 and 1.52 ± 0.84 to 0.67 ± 0.90, respectively (p < 0.001). The most common reason for discontinuing the study was progression of cancer (37%). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results, the EGF ointment is effective for ERSEs, regardless of gender, age, type of tumor, and dosage of erlotinib. The EGF ointment evenly improved all kinds of symptoms of ERSEs. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NO: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01593995.

Ramosetron Versus Ondansetron in Combination With Aprepitant and Dexamethasone for the Prevention of Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Multicenter, Randomized Phase III Trial, KCSG PC10-21.

BACKGROUND: A combination of serotonin receptor (5-hydroxytryptamine receptor type 3) antagonists, NK-1 receptor antagonist, and steroid improves the complete response (CR) of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in cancer patients. Ramosetron's efficacy in this triple combination regimen has not been investigated. This prospective, multicenter, single-blind, randomized, phase III study compares a combination of ramosetron, aprepitant, and dexamethasone (RAD) with a combination of ondansetron, aprepitant, and dexamethasone (OAD) to prove the noninferiority of RAD in controlling highly emetogenic CINV. METHODS: Aprepitant and dexamethasone were orally administered for both arms. Ramosetron and ondansetron were intravenously given to the RAD and OAD groups. The primary endpoint was no vomiting and retching and no need for rescue medication during the acute period (day 1); the noninferiority margin was -15%. RESULTS: A total of 299 modified intention-to-treat cancer patients who received RAD (144 patients) and OAD (155 patients) were eligible for the efficacy analysis. The CR rates of RAD versus OAD were 97.2% versus 93.6% during the acute period, 77.8% versus 73.6% during the delayed period (day 2-5), and 77.1% versus 71.6% during the overall period. Furthermore, RAD was noninferior to OAD in subgroups stratified by age, cancer type, chemotherapeutic agents, and schedule. Repeated measures analysis showed that in male patients, RAD was superior to OAD. Profiles of adverse events were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: RAD is as effective and tolerable as OAD for CINV prevention in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Ramosetron could be considered one of the best partners for aprepitant.

Natural history of metastatic biliary tract cancer (BTC) patients with good performance status (PS) who were treated with only best supportive care (BSC).

BACKGROUND: Although chemotherapy is widely recommended for patients with metastatic biliary tract cancer, the natural course of these patients, especially those with good performance status who are indicated for chemotherapy, is not known. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients with metastatic or locally advanced biliary cancer who were diagnosed at six cancer centers. Patients were eligible if they had good performance (ECOG 0-2) and no history of any treatment for cancer. The primary objective was to evaluate the survival time of patients with advanced biliary cancer with good performance who were untreated. RESULTS: Of the 1677 patients, 204 met the inclusion criteria. The median age and overall survival were 72.0 years and 7.1 months. Overall survival (months) by location was 4.7 for intrahepatic, 9.7 for extrahepatic, 4.4 for gallbladder and 11.2 for ampulla of vater cancer. In subgroup analysis, overall survival of locally advanced biliary cancer was 13.8 months and that of patients with normal carcinoembryonic antigen/carbohydrate antigen 19-9 was 10.6 months. In multivariate analysis, variables that were associated with poor prognosis were metastatic biliary cancer [hazard ratio 2.19 (P = 0.001)], high baseline carcinoembryonic antigen level (defined as >4.0 ng/ml) [hazard ratio 1.51 (P = 0.024)] and high baseline carbohydrate antigen 19-9 level (defined as >100 U/ml) [hazard ratio 1.93 (P = 0.001)]. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced biliary tract cancer with good performance status showed modest survival without any treatment. Furthermore, subgroup analysis showed that patients with normal carbohydrate antigen 19-9 or carcinoembryonic antigen level or locally advanced status had favorable survival. Further studies comparing the outcome of chemotherapy with that of best supportive care in patients with unresectable biliary tract cancer are warranted.

Gemcitabine and oxaliplatin with or without erlotinib in advanced biliary-tract cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine and a platinum-based agent is regarded as a standard treatment for patients with advanced biliary-tract cancer. Results of phase 2 trials of single-agent erlotinib in biliary-tract cancer and of gemcitabine plus erlotinib in pancreatic cancer have shown modest benefits. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the efficacy of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin plus erlotinib versus chemotherapy alone for advanced biliary-tract cancer. METHODS: In this open label, randomised, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients (in a 1:1 ratio) with metastatic biliary-tract cancer (cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder cancer, or ampulla of Vater cancer) to receive either first-line treatment with chemotherapy alone (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on day 1 and oxaliplatin 100 mg/m(2) on day 2) or chemotherapy plus erlotinib (100 mg daily). Treatment was repeated every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. Randomisation was done centrally (stratified by participating centre and presence of measurable lesion). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Analyses were by intention-to-treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01149122. FINDINGS: 133 patients were randomly assigned to the chemotherapy alone group and 135 to the chemotherapy plus erlotinib group. The groups were balanced except for a higher proportion of patients with cholangiocarcinoma in the group given erlotinib than in the chemotherapy alone group (96 [71%] patients vs 84 [63%]). Median progression-free survival was 4·2 months (95% CI 2·7-5·7) in the chemotherapy alone group and 5·8 months (95% CI 4·6-7·0) in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·80, 95% CI 0·61-1·03; p=0·087). Significantly more patients had an objective response in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib group than in the chemotherapy alone group (40 patients vs 21 patients; p=0·005), but median overall survival was the same in both groups (9·5 months [95% CI 7·5-11·5] in the chemotherapy alone group and 9·5 months [7·6-11·4] in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib group; HR 0·93, 0·69-1·25; p=0·611). All-cause deaths within 30 days of random assignment occurred in one (1%) of the patients in the chemotherapy alone group and in four (3%) of those in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib group. The most common grade 3-4 adverse event was febrile neutropenia (eight [6%] patients in the chemotherapy alone group and six [4%] in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib group). No patient died of treatment-related causes during the study. Subgroup analyses by primary site of disease showed that for patients with cholangiocarcinoma, the addition of erlotinib to chemotherapy significantly prolonged median progression-free survival (5·9 months [95% CI 4·7-7·1] for chemotherapy plus erlotinib vs 3·0 months [1·1-4·9] for chemotherapy alone; HR 0·73, 95% CI 0·53-1·00; p=0·049). INTERPRETATION: Although no significant difference in progression-free survival was noted between groups, the addition of erlotinib to gemcitabine and oxaliplatin showed antitumour activity and might be a treatment option for patients with cholangiocarcinoma. FUNDING: None.

Trastuzumab plus FOLFOX for HER2-positive biliary tract cancer refractory to gemcitabine and cisplatin: a multi-institutional phase 2 trial of the Korean Cancer Study Group (KCSG-HB19-14).

BACKGROUND: HER2 overexpression or amplification, which is present in 15% of all cases of biliary tract cancer, has been identified as a druggable molecular target by genomic profiling. In the phase 3 ABC-06 trial, the folinic acid, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) regimen showed a survival benefit compared with active symptom control as second-line therapy for biliary tract cancer. We aimed to evaluate the clinical activity of FOLFOX plus anti-HER2 antibody trastuzumab as a second-line or third-line treatment for HER2-positive biliary tract cancer. METHODS: This study was an investigator-initiated, open-label, non-randomised, single-arm, multi institutional, phase 2 trial in participants aged 19 years or older with HER2-positive (defined as immunohistochemistry 3+ or immunohistochemistry 2+ and in-situ hybridisation positive or ERBB2 gene copy number ≥6·0 by next-generation sequencing) biliary tract cancer (intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and gallbladder cancer) who progressed on chemotherapy containing gemcitabine and cisplatin (with one or two previous chemotherapy lines permitted). In cycle one, patients received intravenous trastuzumab-pkrb at 6 mg/kg on day 1, and FOLFOX (consisting of intravenous oxaliplatin [85 mg/m2], intravenous leucovorin [200 mg/m2], and fluorouracil [400 mg/m2 bolus] all on day 1, and fluorouracil [2400 mg/m2 infusion] on days 1-2. In cycle two onwards, participants were administered intravenous trastuzumab-pkrb at 4 mg/kg and FOLFOX, every 2 weeks, until unacceptable toxic effects or disease progression. The primary endpoint of the study was objective response rate based on RECIST version 1.1, assessed in the participants who completed at least one study cycle. The response rate threshold for a positive objective response rate was 25%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04722133) and is ongoing. FINDINGS: 34 participants were enrolled between June 26, 2020, and Sept 1, 2021. At the time of data cutoff on May 1, 2022, median follow-up was 13·0 months (IQR 11·0-16·9), with three participants remaining on treatment. Ten patients had a partial response and 17 had stable disease; the overall response rate was 29·4% (95% CI 16·7-46·3) and the disease control rate was 79·4% (95% CI 62·9-89·9). Median progression-free survival was 5·1 months (95% CI 3·6-6·7); median overall survival was 10·7 (95%CI 7·9-not reached). The most common treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (ten [29%] participants with grade 3 and nine [26%] with grade 4), grade 3 anaemia (five [15%] participants), and grade 3 peripheral sensory neuropathy (four [12%] participants). There were no treatment-related cardiac toxic effects or deaths. The overall health assessment (EuroQoL-VAS) score did not change significantly throughout the treatment. Sensory and motor neuropathy symptoms as assessed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy twenty-item scale questionnaire did not change significantly over time. INTERPRETATION: For HER2-positive biliary tract cancer, second-line or third-line trastuzumab biosimilar plus FOLFOX exhibited promising activity with acceptable toxicity, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: Boryung Pharmaceutical, Celltrion, National Research Foundation of Korea, National R&D Program for Cancer Control through the National Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine.

A phase II trial of Erlotinib in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin in advanced pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine has been recognized as a standard chemotherapy in advanced pancreas cancer(APC). We conducted a phase II study of a triple combination regimen (GPT) consisting of gemcitabine (G), cisplatin(P) and erlotinib (T) in patients with APC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve patients with locally advanced or metastatic, histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were treated with erlotinib 100 mg daily, 1,000 mg/m2 of gemcitabine and 25 mg/m2 of cisplatin administered on days 1 and 8, respectively, every 3 weeks.The primary end point was objective response. Secondary end points included progression-free survival, overall survival and toxicity. The study was designed according to the optimal two-stage design. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were enrolled between June 2009 and August 2010. No complete response was achieved and partial response was observed in 5 patients (26%), Stable disease in 7 (37%), and progressive disease in 7 (37%). The median time to progression was 4.0 months (95% CI: 2.9­5.1 months), and the median overall survival 6.8 months (95% CI: 3.7­9.9 months). The response rate in stage I reached the target (≥3/22,p0010%) established for movement to stage II but this study was determined to close earlier than planned because of unexpected treatment-related deaths (3 patients). CONCLUSION: The triple regimen of GPT is effective for APC. Treatment related mortalities factored early closure of this GPT protocol. Considering effect and toxicity, this triple regimen seems to offer few benefits to the patients compared with gemcitabine based doublets. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00922896).

Totality outcome of afatinib sequential treatment in patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer in South Korea (TOAST): Korean Cancer Study Group (KCSG) LU-19-22.

Background: Irrespective of the first-line epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor chosen, acquired resistance to therapy is inevitable. Therefore, a key consideration when assessing therapeutic choices is the availability of subsequent treatment options following disease progression. We assessed clinical outcomes in patients who received first-line afatinib treatment with various second-line treatments including osimertinib for patients acquiring the T790M mutation. Methods: A total of 737 EGFR mutation-positive (EGFR M+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving first-line afatinib treatment were categorized by second-line treatment: T790M+ sequentially treated with osimertinib (cohort A, n=116); T790M- given chemotherapy or others (cohort B, n=143); patients with unknown T790M status (cohort C, n=111); and patients who were undergoing afatinib treatment at the time of data collection, were dead, had discontinued afatinib treatment due to serious adverse events or were lost to follow-up (cohort D, n=367). The primary outcomes were total time on treatment (TOT) and TOT for first-line (TOT-1) and second-line treatments (TOT-2). Secondary outcomes were objective response rates (ORR), overall survival (OS), and central nervous system (CNS) efficacy. Results: Median total TOT in cohorts A, B, C, and D were 35.10 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 30.09-43.53 months], 18.80 months (95% CI: 16.92-20.20 months), 12.00 months (95% CI: 10.22-14.98 months), and 42.60 months (95% CI: 30.95-59.23 months), respectively. The ORR of patients given afatinib was 75.7%. In patients with initial brain metastasis without local treatment, the CNS response rate was 67.0% and CNS progression-free survival was 24.70 months (95% CI: 19.84-33.15 months). Conclusions: This study showed that sequential approach of afatinib followed by second line treatment is an effective therapeutic strategy for EGFR M+ NSCLC patients.

Phase II study of second line gemcitabine single chemotherapy for biliary tract cancer patients with 5-fluorouracil refractoriness.

AIM: We conducted this phase II study in an effort to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a gemcitabine single chemotherapy as a second-line treatment for biliary tract cancer (BTC) patients who evidenced disease progression after the administration of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based palliative chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Patients treated previously with 5-FU-based palliative treatment as a BTC were enrolled in this study. Treatment consisted of gemcitabine at a dosage of 1,250 mg/m(2) administered intravenously over a 30-minute period on days 1 and 8 of each 21-day cycle until progression. RESULTS: Between Feb. 2006 and July 2009, a total of 32 patients were assigned to treatment groups. 16 patients (50%) had cancers of intra-hepatic cholangiocarcinoma, 12 patients (37.5%) had gall bladder cancer, and 4 patients (12.5%) had extra-hepatic cholangiocarcinoma. In the 29 patients whose tumor responses were evaluated, two achieved a partial response, with an overall response rate of 6.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.0-16.7%). Six patients (20.7%) evidenced stable disease and 21 patients (72.4%) evidenced progression during the course of treatment. The median follow-up duration was 23.2 months (range: 3.0-53.1 months). The median time to progression (TTP) was 1.6 months (95% CI: 1.3-1.9 months), and the median overall survival (OS) time was 4.1 months (95% CI: 2.7-5.5 months). Poor performance status (ECOG 2) in patients was predictive of shorter TTP. Lower albumin levels (<3.5 g/dL) in patients were predictive of shorter TTP and OS. CONCLUSIONS: Despite first salvage chemotherapy in the phase II study for patients with 5-FU refractory BTC, the results in terms of RR, TTP, and OS were lower than expected. However, selected patients with good performance status and sufficient albumin levels may have derived some survival benefits from salvage chemotherapy.

Modified FOLFIRINOX versus S-1 as second-line chemotherapy in gemcitabine-failed metastatic pancreatic cancer patients: A randomised controlled trial (MPACA-3).

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX) as a second-line chemotherapy treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPAC), remains unclear. This multi-center randomised phase III trial aimed to elucidate the efficacy of mFOLFIRINOX as a second-line chemotherapy treatment for mPAC patients with good performance status. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty mPAC patients (age, 19-75 years) refractory to first-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were randomly selected to receive mFOLFIRINOX or S-1. mFOLFIRINOX comprised oxaliplatin (65 mg/m2), irinotecan (135 mg/m2), and leucovorin (400 mg/m2) on day 1 and continuous 5-FU infusion (1000 mg/m2) over 24 h on days 1-2 every 2 weeks. S-1 comprised body surface area-dependent oral S-1, divided into two doses per day on days 1-28 every 6 weeks. RESULTS: Overall survival was the primary endpoint. The objective response and disease control rates were higher in the mFOLFIRINOX than in the S-1 group (15% versus 2%; p = .04 and 67% versus 37%; p = .007). The median progression-free survival rates were 5.2 and 2.2 months in the mFOLFIRINOX and S-1 groups, respectively (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: .4; 95% confidence interval [CI]: .2-.6; p < .001). The median overall survival rates were 9.2 and 4.9 months in the mFOLFIRINOX and S-1 groups, respectively (adjusted HR: .4; 95% CI: .2-.7; p = .002). Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 56% and 17% of the patients in the mFOLFIRINOX and S-1 groups, respectively (p < .001). CONCLUSION: Administration of mFOLFIRINOX as a second-line chemotherapy treatment for mPAC patients refractory to gemcitabine-based chemotherapy resulted in increased survival rates than S-1 treatment alone.

Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index as a prognostic marker in patients with extensive-stage disease small cell lung cancer: Results from a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Clinical impact of the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) in patients with extensive-stage disease small cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC) have not previously been reported. METHODS: This study analyzed 352 patients enrolled in a previous randomized phase III trial comparing the efficacy of irinotecan plus cisplatin with that of etoposide plus cisplatin as the first-line therapy for ED-SCLC. GNRI values were calculated using serum albumin levels and actual and ideal bodyweights. Patients with a GNRI > 98, 92-98, and <92 were grouped into no, low, and moderate/major risk groups, respectively. RESULTS: The objective response rates were 63.2%, 52.6%, and 49.2% in the no, low, and moderate/major risk groups, respectively (P = 0.024). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was shorter in patients with a lower GNRI than in those with a higher GNRI (no vs. low vs. moderate/major risk group; 6.5 vs. 5.8 vs. 5.9 months, respectively; P = 0.028). There were significant differences in median overall survival (OS) according to GNRI (no vs. low vs. moderate/major risk group; 13.2 vs. 10.3 vs. 8.4 months, respectively; P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that being in the moderate/major risk group was an independent poor prognostic factor for PFS (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.300, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.012-1.670; P = 0.040) and OS (HR: 1.539; 95% CI: 1.069-2.216; P = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: This prospective study shows that a low GNRI value was associated with a poor prognosis, and it supports the relationship between systemic inflammation, nutritional status, and clinical outcomes in patients with ED-SCLC.Key points SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS OF THE STUDY: The lower GNRI group had a low response rate to chemotherapy for ED-SCLC. The HRs for PFS and OS were 1.300 and 1.539 in the patients with GNRI < 92. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: Low GNRI is associated with poor prognosis in ED-SCLC.