Three- versus six-month adjuvant FOLFOX or CAPOX for high-risk stage II and stage III colon cancer patients: the efficacy results of Hellenic Oncology Research Group (HORG) participation to the International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy (IDEA) project.

BACKGROUND: The International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy (IDEA) aimed to investigate whether a 3 months (3M) of oxaliplatin/fluoropyrimidine-based adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) is non-inferior to the 6-month (6M) administration in 3-year disease-free survival (3yDFS) in high-risk (HR) stage II or stage III colon cancer (CC). METHODS: Hellenic Oncology Research Group (HORG)-IDEA randomized patients between 3M and 6M of CT with FOLFOX4 or CAPOX. RESULTS: In total 1115 patients, 413 with HR stage II and 702 with stage III CC, were randomized. The median follow-up was 67.0 (38.3-126.0) months. Overall, 394 DFS events (202 in 3M arm and 192 in 6M arm) where recorded. The 3yDFS rate was 77.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 72.1% to 82.3%] for 3M and 77.9% (72.6% to 82.5%) for 6M of treatment [hazard ratio (HR) 1.05 (95% CI 0.61-1.55); P = 0.647]. Eighty DFS events (3M N = 41; 6M N = 39) were observed in HR stage II patients for a 3yDFS rate of 82.7% and 83.4%, respectively (HR 1.05; 95% CI 0.68-1.63, P = 0.829). For stage III patients, 314 DFS events (3M N = 161 and 6M N = 153) were observed, for a 3yDFS rate of 72.9% for 3M versus 74.1% for 6M (HR 1.06; 95% CI 0.81-1.42, P = 0.622). For HR stage II patients receiving FOLFOX4, 3yDFS rate was 76.7% for 3M and 79.3% for 6M (HR 1.21; 95% CI 0.54-2.70). For HR stage II patients receiving CAPOX the 3yDFS rate was 85.4% for 3M and 83.8% for 6M (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.59-1.67). For stage III patients receiving FOLFOX4, the 3yDFS rate was 71.5% for 3M and 77.3% for 6M (HR 1.18; 95% CI 0.74-1.86). For stage III patients receiving CAPOX, the 3yDFS rate was 74.5% for 3M and 74.7% for 6M (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.70-1.44). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the HORG-IDEA study are in line with those of the global IDEA project, indicating that the 3yDFS is dependent on the administered adjuvant regimen and the choice and duration of regimen should be personalized. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01308086.

Dose-dense FEC followed by docetaxel versus docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide as adjuvant chemotherapy in women with HER2-negative, axillary lymph node-positive early breast cancer: a multicenter randomized study by the Hellenic Oncology Research Group (HORG).

BACKGROUND: Sequential administration of anthracycline and taxane is the current standard of care adjuvant regimen for node-positive early breast cancer. Due to long-term toxicity concerns, anthracycline-free regimens have been developed. We compared a sequential dose-dense anthracycline and taxane regimen with the anthracycline-free regimen of docetaxel and cyclophosphamide. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomized, non-inferiority, phase III trial, women with HER2-negative invasive breast cancer and at least one positive axillary lymph node were randomized to receive either epirubicin (75 mg/m(2)), 5-fluorouracil (500 mg/m(2)) and cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m(2)) every 2 weeks for four cycles, followed by four cycles of docetaxel (75 mg/m(2)) every 2 weeks with prophylactic G-CSF support (FEC → D) or docetaxel (75 mg/m(2)) and cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m(2)) every 21 days for six cycles (TC). The primary end point of the study was the 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate. RESULTS: Six hundred and fifty women were randomized to either FEC → D (n = 326) or TC (n = 324). After a median follow-up of 46 and 47 months, the 3-year DFS rate was 89.5% and 91.1% for the FEC → D and TC arm, respectively (hazard ratio = 1.147, 95% confidence interval 0.716-1.839, P = 0.568). Grade 3-4 neutropenia was higher in the TC arm (32.4% versus 10.5%, P = 0.0001). The incidence of neutropenic fever was low (<1%). Nausea, vomiting, hand-foot syndrome and fatigue (grade 3-4) were more common with FEC → D. Acute cardiotoxicity was rare (1 event in each group). There were no toxic deaths. CONCLUSIONS: This trial did not clearly demonstrate that TC is non-inferior to dose-dense FEC → D. However, 3-year DFS rates were excellent in both arms for women with node-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. CLINICALTRIALSGOV: NCT01985724.

Six versus 12 months of adjuvant trastuzumab in combination with dose-dense chemotherapy for women with HER2-positive breast cancer: a multicenter randomized study by the Hellenic Oncology Research Group (HORG).

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy improves survival of women with HER2-positive early breast cancer. In this study, we compared 12 versus 6 months of adjuvant trastuzumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Axillary node-positive or high-risk node-negative women with HER2-positive early breast cancer were randomized to receive 12 or 6 months of adjuvant trastuzumab concurrently with dose-dense, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF)-supported docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) every 14 days for four cycles). All patients received upfront dose-dense, G-CSF-supported FEC (5-fluorouracil 700 mg/m(2), epirubicin 75 mg/m(2), cyclophosphamide 700 mg/m(2) every 14 days for four cycles). Randomization was carried out before commence of chemotherapy. The primary end point was the 3-year disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: A total of 481 patients were randomized to receive 12 months (n = 241) or 6 months (n = 240) of adjuvant trastuzumab. Chemotherapy was completed in 99% and 98% of patients, while trastuzumab therapy in 100% and 96% of patients in the 12- and 6-month groups, respectively. After 47 and 51 months of median follow-up, there were 17 (7.1%) and 28 (11.7%) disease relapses in the 12- and 6-month groups (P = 0.08). The 3-year DFS was 95.7% versus 93.3% in favor of the 12-month treatment group (hazard ratio = 1.57; 95% confidence interval 0.86-2.10; P = 0.137). There was no difference in terms of overall survival and cardiac toxicity between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study failed to show noninferiority for the 6-month arm. The results further support the current standard of care that is administration of adjuvant trastuzumab for 12 months.

Evaluation of the attributable fraction and burden of HPV-related oropharyngeal cancers in Greece-the ORPHEAS study.

BACKGROUND: Herein, we evaluated the attributable fraction (AF) of human papillomavirus (HPV)-mediated (HPV+) oropharyngeal carcinomas (OPCs) in Greece over a recent calendar period. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ORPHEAS, a retrospective, observational, multicenter, cross-sectional study with prospective recruitment, included adult patients with OPC in 2017-2022, each of them with a high-quality, treatment-naïve tumor specimen. The primary endpoint was the HPV-AF, defined as combined positivity for p16INK4a (p16) overexpression and HPV DNA presence by central laboratory testing, among included patients. Other endpoints evaluated the HPV+/HPV- patient/disease characteristics at OPC diagnosis and the HPV subtypes for HPV+ patients. RESULTS: 144/147 patients with available HPV status by central laboratory testing were analyzed [median age: 60.0 years; males: 111 (77.1%)]. The most common tumor anatomical sites were the tonsils (70/147, 48.6%) and the base of the tongue (51, 35.4%), and most patients were at the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition TNM (tumor-node-metastasis) stages III (25, 22.7%) and IV (43, 39.1%). The HPV-AF was 52.1% (75/144; 95% confidence interval 43.6% to 60.5%). Most HPV+ patients were infected by an HPV type targeted by the 9-valent HPV vaccine (72/75, 96.0%), especially HPV16 (70/75, 93.3%). HPV+ compared with HPV- patients were younger (median age 58.0 versus 64.0 years; P = 0.003); more likely to have tumors in the tonsils (65.0% versus 30.4%; P < 0.001); less likely to have tumors in the base of the tongue (25.3% versus 46.4%; P = 0.008); and less frequently at TNM stage IV (20.4% versus 57.1%; overall P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In Greece, we observed a high HPV-AF (52.1%) in OPC, approximating the AFs reported for some Northern European countries. HPV+ versus HPV- patients were younger, more frequently with tonsillar tumors, and less frequently at TNM stage IV. Since most patients were infected by ≥1 HPV type targeted by the 9-valent vaccine, the HPV+ OPC burden could be mitigated through a routine HPV gender-neutral vaccination program.

Randomised phase-II trial of CAPIRI (capecitabine, irinotecan) plus bevacizumab vs FOLFIRI (folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan) plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment of patients with unresectable/metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

BACKGROUND: To compare the efficacy and safety of CAPIRI+bevacizumab (Bev) in comparison with FOLFIRI+Bev as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: Patients were randomised to receive either FOLFIRI plus Bev 5 mg kg(-1) every 2 weeks (Arm-A) or CAPIRI plus Bev 7.5 mg kg(-1) every 3 weeks (Arm-B). RESULTS: Three hundred thirty-three patients (Arm-A=167; Arm-B=166) were enrolled into the study. No difference was observed in median progression-free survival (PFS) (10.0 and 8.9 months; P=0.64), overall survival (25.7 and 27.5 months; P=0.55) or response rates (45.5 and 39.8.7%; P=0.32) for FOLFIRI-Bev and CAPIRI-Bev, respectively. Patients treated with CAPIRI-Bev presented significantly higher incidence of diarrhoea (P=0.005), febrile neutropenia (P=0.003) and hand-foot skin reactions (P=0.02) compared with patients treated with FOLFIRI-Bev. Treatment delays (P=0.05), dose reduction (P<0.001) and treatment discontinuation owing to toxicity (P=0.01) occurred more frequently in the CAPIRI-Bev arm. CONCLUSION: The PFS of FOLFIRI-BEV is not superior to that observed with the CAPIRI-Bev regimen. CAPIRI-Bev has a less favourable toxicity profile, requiring dose reductions, in order to be considered as an option in first-line treatment of patients with mCRC.

A multicenter randomized phase III trial of vinorelbine/gemcitabine doublet versus capecitabine monotherapy in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated women with metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The Breast Cancer Study Group of the Hellenic Oncology Research Group conducted a phase III trial of single-agent capecitabine versus the vinorelbine/gemcitabine doublet in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) pretreated with anthracyclines and taxanes. The primary objective was to demonstrate superiority of combination treatment in terms of progression-free survival (PFS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women with MBC were randomly assigned to receive either capecitabine (Cap arm: 1250 mg/m(2) twice daily, on days 1-14) or vinorelbine/gemcitabine doublet (VG arm: vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2); gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2); both drugs on days 1 and 15). RESULTS: Seventy-four women were treated on each arm and median PFS was 5.4 versus 5.2 months (P = 0.736), for VG and Cap, respectively. Median overall survival was 20.4 months for the VG arm and 22.4 months for the Cap arm (P = 0.319). Overall response rate was 28.4% in the VG arm and 24.3% in the Cap arm (P = 0.576). Both regimens were generally well tolerated. Neutropenia and fatigue were more common with VG arm and hand-foot syndrome with Cap arm. CONCLUSIONS: This trial failed to demonstrate superiority of vinorelbine/gemcitabine doublet over single-agent capecitabine in terms of PFS. Given the favorable toxicity and convenience of oral administration, single-agent capecitabine is recommended for compliant patients.

Adjuvant therapy in primary GIST: state-of-the-art.

BACKGROUND: The management of primary gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) has evolved with the introduction of adjuvant therapy. Recently reported results of the SSG XVIII/AIO trial by the Scandinavian Sarcoma Group (SSG) and the German Working Group on Medical Oncology (AIO) represent a significant change in the evidence for adjuvant therapy duration. The objectives of this European Expert Panel meeting were to describe the optimal management and best practice for the systemic adjuvant treatment of patients with primary GISTs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A panel of medical oncology experts from European sarcoma research groups were invited to a 1-day workshop. Several questions and discussion points were selected by the organising committee prior to the conference. The experts reviewed the current literature of all clinical trials available on adjuvant therapy for primary GISTs, considered the quality evidence and formulated recommendations for each discussion point. RESULTS: Clinical issues were identified and provisional clinical opinions were formulated for adjuvant treatment patient selection, imatinib dose, duration and patient recall, mutational analysis and follow-up of primary GIST patients. Adjuvant imatinib 400 mg/day for 3 years duration is a standard treatment in all patients with significant risk of recurrence following resection of primary GISTs. Patient selection for adjuvant therapy should be based on any of the three commonly used patient risk stratification schemes. R1 surgery (versus R0) alone is not an indication for adjuvant imatinib in low-risk GIST. Recall and imatinib restart could be proposed in patients who discontinued 1-year adjuvant imatinib within the previous 3 months and may be considered on a case-by-case basis in patients who discontinued within the previous year. Mutational analysis is recommended in all cases of GISTs using centralised laboratories with good quality control. Treatment is not recommended in an imatinib-insensitive D842V-mutated GIST. During adjuvant treatment, patients are recommended to be clinically assessed at 1- to 3-month intervals. Upon discontinuation, computed tomography scan (CT) scans are recommended every 3 to 4 months for 2 years when the risk of relapse is highest, followed by every 6 months until year 5 and annually until year 10 after treatment discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: Key points in systemic adjuvant treatment and clinical management of primary GISTs as well as open questions were identified during this European Expert Panel meeting on GIST management.

Vaccine third dose and cancer patients: necessity or luxury?

The current state of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is an equilibrium between expanding vaccine coverage on the one hand, and emergence of variants of concern which compromise vaccine effectiveness and enhance viral transmission on the other. Inequity in vaccine distribution, primarily an ethical issue, challenges this equilibrium, as industrialized countries prepare to administer a third booster dose to their population. Solid tumor cancer patients typically respond well to initial full vaccination and someone could argue that they should not be prioritized for an adjuvant third dose, since protection from severe disease has largely been achieved with the two-dose regimen. Nevertheless, their immune status is dynamic and not all of them exhibit an adequate immune response. A booster third dose is necessary for the inadequate responders, while it will result in better protection of all patients from mild disease as well, which if presented could have ominous consequences due to their overall frailty, and their need to adhere to strict therapeutic schemes. International scientific and public health communities should develop approaches that allow for wide immediate vaccination coverage of the developing world, in parallel with administration of adjuvant doses to solid tumor cancer patients (and other at-risk categories) of the developed nations, in order to avoid prolonging the pandemic, which will be prospectively against cancer patients' best interest.

Association of the advanced lung cancer inflammation index (ALI) with immune checkpoint inhibitor efficacy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The advanced lung cancer inflammation index [ALI: body mass index × serum albumin/neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR)] reflects systemic host inflammation, and is easily reproducible. We hypothesized that ALI could assist guidance of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 672 stage IV NSCLC patients treated with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors alone or in combination with chemotherapy in 25 centers in Greece and Germany, and a control cohort of 444 stage IV NSCLC patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy without subsequent targeted or immunotherapy drugs. The association of clinical outcomes with biomarkers was analyzed with Cox regression models, including cross-validation by calculation of the Harrell's C-index. RESULTS: High ALI values (>18) were significantly associated with longer overall survival (OS) for patients receiving ICI monotherapy [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.402, P < 0.0001, n = 460], but not chemo-immunotherapy (HR = 0.624, P = 0.111, n = 212). Similar positive correlations for ALI were observed for objective response rate (36% versus 24%, P = 0.008) and time-on-treatment (HR = 0.52, P < 0.001), in case of ICI monotherapy only. In the control cohort of chemotherapy, the association between ALI and OS was weaker (HR = 0.694, P = 0.0002), and showed a significant interaction with the type of treatment (ICI monotherapy versus chemotherapy, P < 0.0001) upon combined analysis of the two cohorts. In multivariate analysis, ALI had a stronger predictive effect than NLR, PD-L1 tumor proportion score, lung immune prognostic index, and EPSILoN scores. Among patients with PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥50% receiving first-line ICI monotherapy, a high ALI score >18 identified a subset with longer OS and time-on-treatment (median 35 and 16 months, respectively), similar to these under chemo-immunotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The ALI score is a powerful prognostic and predictive biomarker for patients with advanced NSCLC treated with PD-L1 inhibitors alone, but not in combination with chemotherapy. Its association with outcomes appears to be stronger than that of other widely used parameters. For PD-L1-high patients, an ALI score >18 could assist the selection of cases that do not need addition of chemotherapy.

Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma, an ultra-rare cancer: a consensus paper from the community of experts.

Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) is an ultra-rare, translocated, vascular sarcoma. EHE clinical behavior is variable, ranging from that of a low-grade malignancy to that of a high-grade sarcoma and it is marked by a high propensity for systemic involvement. No active systemic agents are currently approved specifically for EHE, which is typically refractory to the antitumor drugs used in sarcomas. The degree of uncertainty in selecting the most appropriate therapy for EHE patients and the lack of guidelines on the clinical management of the disease make the adoption of new treatments inconsistent across the world, resulting in suboptimal outcomes for many EHE patients. To address the shortcoming, a global consensus meeting was organized in December 2020 under the umbrella of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) involving >80 experts from several disciplines from Europe, North America and Asia, together with a patient representative from the EHE Group, a global, disease-specific patient advocacy group, and Sarcoma Patient EuroNet (SPAEN). The meeting was aimed at defining, by consensus, evidence-based best practices for the optimal approach to primary and metastatic EHE. The consensus achieved during that meeting is the subject of the present publication.

Docetaxel plus gemcitabine as front-line chemotherapy in elderly patients with lung adenocarcinomas: a multicenter phase II study.

BACKGROUND: The docetaxel/gemcitabine (DG) combination is an active and well-tolerated regimen against non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A phase II study was conducted in order to evaluate its efficacy in elderly patients with lung adenocarcinomas. METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients, aged > or =70 years, with locally advanced or metastatic lung adenocarcinomas and performance status (PS) < or =2 (ECOG) received gemcitabine 1100 mg/m(2) (days 1+8) and docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) (day 8) with rhG-CSF support. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients were enrolled. One (1.3%) complete and 23 (29.9%) partial responses were achieved (intention to treat analysis: ORR 31.2%; 95% CI 20.82-41.51%) whereas tumor growth control was achieved in 53.3% of patients. The median TTP was 4.1 months, the median overall survival 9.4 months and the 1- and 2-year survival rate 37.9% and 10.7%, respectively. Grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred in 18.2% and febrile neutropenia in 3 (3.9%) patients. Non-haematological toxicity was mild with grade 2-3 asthenia occurring in 22.1% patients. CONCLUSIONS: The DG regimen is an active and well-tolerated front-line chemotherapy for elderly patients with lung adenocarcinomas and merits further evaluation in prospective randomized trials.