A Web-Based Self-assessment Model for Evaluating Multidisciplinary Cancer Teams in Spain: Development and Validation Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Tumor boards constitute the main consensus and clinical decision-making body of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) in cancer care. With the increasing clinical complexity of treatment options (eg, targeted therapies, multimodal treatments) and the progressive incorporation of new areas of intervention (eg, survivorship care), tumor boards are now required to play a central role in all cancer processes. However, although frameworks are in place to evaluate MDT quality, only few web-based tools are available for this purpose; indeed, no web-based MDT evaluation tools have been developed for or adapted to the Spanish National Health System. OBJECTIVE: The first aim of this study was to develop a web-based self-assessment model (Autoevaluación de Equipos Multidisciplinares de Atención al Cáncer [AEMAC]) for evaluating multidisciplinary cancer teams in Spain and the second aim was to validate this tool by testing its metric properties, acceptability, and usability. METHODS: We designed and validated the AEMAC program in 3 stages. In the first stage (research), we reviewed the available scientific evidence and performed a qualitative case study of good practice in multidisciplinary care within the Spanish National Health System (n=4 centers and 28 health care professionals). The results were used to define the thematic areas and quality criteria for the self-evaluation model, which were then discussed and validated by a group of experts. The second stage (development) involved the technological development of a web app that would be accessible from any mobile device. In the third stage (piloting and validation), we conducted 4 pilot tests (n=15 tumor boards, 243 professionals) and used the results to analyze the acceptability and usefulness of the tool. RESULTS: We designed a self-assessment model based on 5 thematic areas encompassing a total of 25 quality components, which users rated on a 3-option development scale. The evaluation process, which was managed entirely from the web app, consisted of individual self-assessment, group prioritization, and creation of an improvement plan. Cronbach alpha (.86), McDonald's omega (0.88), and various fit indices (comparative fit index between 0.95 and 1 and goodness-of-fit index between 0.97 and 0.99 for all 5 aspects) confirmed internal consistency. The mean rating for overall satisfaction with the tool and for consistency between the content of the tool and the reality of tumor boards was 7.6 out of 10. CONCLUSIONS: The results obtained during the period of research and piloting of the AEMAC program showed that it has an appropriate structure and metric properties and could therefore be implemented in a real context and generalized to other hospitals. As a virtual tool, it helps to measure the key aspects of MDT quality, such as effectiveness of collaboration and communication, leadership, and the organizational environment.

Prospective Exploratory Analysis of Angiogenic Biomarkers in Peripheral Blood in Advanced NSCLC Patients Treated With Bevacizumab Plus Chemotherapy: The ANGIOMET Study.

Finding angiogenic prognostic markers in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer is still an unmet medical need. We explored a set of genetic variants in the VEGF-pathway as potential biomarkers to predict clinical outcomes of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer treated with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. We prospectively analyzed the relationship between VEGF-pathway components with both pathological and prognostic variables in response to chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in 168 patients with non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. Circulating levels of VEGF and VEGFR2 and expression of specific endothelial surface markers and single-nucleotide polymorphisms in VEGF-pathway genes were analyzed. The primary clinical endpoint was progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints included overall survival and objective tumor response. VEGFR-1 rs9582036 variants AA/AC were associated with increased progression-free survival (p = 0.012 and p = 0.035, respectively), and with improved overall survival (p = 0.019) with respect to CC allele. Patients with VEGF-A rs3025039 harboring allele TT had also reduced mortality risk (p = 0.049) compared with the CC allele. The VEGF-A rs833061 variant was found to be related with response to treatment, with 61.1% of patients harboring the CC allele achieving partial treatment response. High pre-treatment circulating levels of VEGF-A were associated with shorter progression-free survival (p = 0.036). In conclusion, in this prospective study, genetic variants in VEGFR-1 and VEGF-A and plasma levels of VEGF-A were associated with clinical benefit, progression-free survival, or overall survival in a cohort of advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer patients receiving chemotherapy plus antiangiogenic therapy.

Validation of Cell-Free DNA Collection Tubes for Determination of EGFR Mutation Status in Liquid Biopsy from NSCLC Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Precision medicine has revolutionized the understanding and treatment of cancer by identifying subsets of patients who are amenable to specific treatments according to their molecular characteristics, as exemplified by epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Although tissue biopsy is the gold standard for determining molecular alterations in tumors, its limitations have prompted the development of new techniques for studying tumor biomarkers in liquid biopsies, such as mutation analysis in cell-free DNA (cfDNA). cfDNA analysis can accurately determine tumor progression and prognosis and more effectively identify appropriate targeted therapies. However, cfDNA is vulnerable, particularly during plasma sample shipping. OBJECTIVE: We compared the cell- and DNA-stabilizing properties of cell-free DNA blood collection tubes (BCTs) with those of the traditional shipping method (frozen plasma) for EGFR mutation testing using the cobas® EGFR Mutation Test v2 in a prospective cohort of 49 patients from three different Spanish hospitals. METHODS: In total, 98 NSCLC samples, two from each patient, were studied; five of the 49 cases were considered invalid by cobas® with one of the two shipping methods analyzed. After excluding these samples, we analyzed 88 samples from 44 patients. Considering the current methodology (frozen plasma) for sending samples as the gold standard, we evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of cfDNA BCT shipment. RESULTS: The global agreement between the two methods was 95.4%, with 100% sensitivity and 94.6% specificity for the cfDNA BCTs. cfDNA BCTs had a positive predictive value of 81.8% and negative predictive value of 100%. CONCLUSION: cfDNA BCTs have the same sensitivity for EGFR mutation analysis in liquid biopsy as the current methodology and very high specificity. They also have some additional advantages in terms of collection and further shipment. Therefore, cfDNA BCTs can be perfectly incorporated into the routine practice for EGFR mutation determination. FUNDING: Roche Farma S.A., Spain.

Oral vinorelbine versus etoposide with cisplatin and chemo-radiation as treatment in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer: A randomized phase II (RENO study).

OBJECTIVES: Concomitant chemo-radiation is the standard treatment for unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC). The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of oral vinorelbine and cisplatin (OVP) compared with etoposide and cisplatin (EP), both in combination with radiotherapy, in this setting. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An open-label, randomized phase II trial was undertaken including 23 hospitals in Spain. Adults with untreated unresectable stage III NSCLC were randomized1:1 to receive: oral vinorelbine (days 1 and 8 with cisplatin on day 1 in 3-week cycles; 2 cycles of induction, 2 cycles in concomitance) or etoposide (days 1-5 and 29-32 with cisplatin on days 1 and 8 in 4-week cycles; 2 cycles in concomitance). Both groups received concomitant radiotherapy 2 Gy/day (66 Gy). The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). RESULTS: One hundred and forty patients were enrolled. Sixty-nine patients received OVP and 71 received EP. Globally adverse events grade 3/4 per cycle were fewer in the vinorelbine arm (19.4%) than in the etoposide arm (62.6%) (p < 0.001). One patient (1.5%) in the OVP arm and 12 pts (17.6%) in the EP arm presented esophagitis grade 3/4 (p = 0.002). Median PFS was similar in both groups (10.8 [95% CI 7.7-13.8] and 9.6 months [95% CI 4.4-14.8]; p = 0.457, respectively). Preliminary median overall survival was 30 months in the OVP arm and 31.9 months in the EP arm (p = 0.688). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that OVP could be considered a standard combination with similar efficacy and better safety profile for the treatment of LA-NSCLC patients.

Pharmacogenetic approach for capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil selection to be combined with oxaliplatin as first-line chemotherapy in advanced colorectal cancer.

We studied the role of TS (5'VNTR, 5'SNP and 3'UTR), XRCC1-399, XPD-751, ERCC1-118 and XRCC3-241 genetic polymorphisms in tailoring fluroropyrimidine/oxaliplatin treatment. For this purpose, 110 XELOX (capecitabine/oxaliplatin)- or FUOX (fluorouracil/oxaliplatin)-treated metastatic colorectal cancer patients were selected prospectively for genotyping. In the FUOX group, TS-3'UTR +6bp/+6bp (hazards ratio, HR=2.62, p=0.007) and ERCC1-118C/T or C/C (HR=1.96, p=0.050) genotypes correlated with a shorter progression-free survival (PFS). When analysed jointly, the higher the number of favourable genotypes (FG) the longer the PFS (6.8m, 9.6m and 25.8m for 0, 1 or 2 FG; p=0.005). Disease-control rate was 100% in patients with 2 FG (87% and 38.5% for 1 or 0 FG; p=0.001). In the multivariate analysis, ERCC1-118 (HR=2.12, p=0.0037) and TS-3'UTR (HR=2.68, p=0.006) were strong independent prognostic factors. According to this, patients harbouring TS-3'UTR +6bp/+6bp and ERCC1-118C/T or C/C genotypes may better receive capecitabine instead of 5FU in an oxaliplatin-based first-line treatment.

Irinotecan in combination with fluorouracil in a 48-hour continuous infusion as first-line chemotherapy for elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumors study.

PURPOSE: Elderly patients constitute a subpopulation with special characteristics that differ from those of the nonelderly and have been underrepresented in clinical trials. This study was performed to determine the efficacy and safety of irinotecan (CPT-11) in combination with fluorouracil (FU) administered as a 48-hour continuous infusion twice a month in elderly patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients > or = 72 years old with metastatic colorectal cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1, no geriatric syndromes, and no prior treatment were treated every 2 weeks with CPT-11 180 mg/m2 plus FU 3,000 mg/m2 in a 48-hour continuous infusion. RESULTS: By intent-to-treat analysis, in 85 assessable patients, the objective response rate was 35% (95% CI, 25% to 46%), and stable disease was 33% (95% CI, 23% to 44%). Median time to progression was 8.0 months (95% CI, 6.0 to 10.0 months), and median overall survival time was 15.3 months (95% CI, 13.8 to 16.9 months). Toxicity was moderate. Grade 3 and 4 neutropenia, diarrhea, and asthenia were observed in 21%, 17%, and 13% of patients, respectively. Only one case of neutropenic fever occurred. There were two toxic deaths, one was a result of grade 4 diarrhea and acute kidney failure, and the other was a result of massive intestinal hemorrhage in the first cycle. The study of prognostic factors did not reveal any predictive factor of response. Response to treatment and baseline lactate dehydrogenase were the main factors conditioning progression-free and overall survival. CONCLUSION: Twice a month continuous-infusion CPT-11 combined with FU is a valid therapeutic alternative for elderly patients in good general condition.

Preoperative uracil, tegafur, and concomitant radiotherapy in operable rectal cancer: a phase II multicenter study with 3 years' follow-Up.

PURPOSE: To assess tolerance and efficacy of preoperative treatment with uracil/tegafur and radiotherapy (RT) followed by surgery and postoperative flurouracil (FU)/leucovorin (LV) in patients with rectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (n = 94) with potentially resectable tumors, ultrasound at stages T2N+ (n = 4), T3 (n = 77), T4 (n = 13) were treated with UFT (400 mg/m2/d, 5 days a week for 5 weeks) and concomitant RT to the pelvis (45 Gy; 1.8 Gy/d over 5 weeks). Patients underwent surgery 5 to 6 weeks later followed by four cycles of FU/LV. Primary end points included downstaging, pathologic responses, and sphincter-preserving surgery. Secondary end points were recurrence-free survival and overall survival. RESULTS: All patients received the full RT dose. Fifteen patients (16%) needed UFT dose reduction. Preoperative G3+ toxicities included diarrhea (14%), leukopenia (1%), thrombocytopenia (1%), and nausea (4%). The downstaging rate was 54%, pathologic complete response (pCR) was 9% and, in an additional 23%, there were only residual microscopic foci. When cellular viability criteria were taken into account, the pCR was 15%. From 43 patients with abdominoperineal resection indication, 11 (25%) had sphincter-preserving surgery performed. Postoperative scheduled chemotherapy dose was not administered to 24% of patients because of G3+ toxicity (diarrhea, 8%; mucositis, 9%; and leukopenia, 7%). Patients with downstaging had significantly higher survival and recurrence-free survival rates than those without. At 3 years, actuarial patterns of failure were pelvic, 5% and distant, 11%. OS was 75%. CONCLUSION: UFT combined with RT is safe and effective. In resectable rectal cancer, if preoperative treatment is considered, this approach can be an option.

Effect of age on systemic exposure and haematological toxicity of carboplatin in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients.

The aim of this study was to evaluate systemic exposure to carboplatin and its haematological toxicity in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer both older and younger than 70 years when the target area under the curve (AUC) in elderly patients was reduced by 20%. For this purpose, a population pharmacokinetic model was developed and the haematological toxicity of the drug was assessed. A total of 33 patients received carboplatin on day 1 and gemcitabine (1250 mg/m(2) ) on days 1 and 8. This schedule was repeated every 21 days. The Calvert-Crokcoft-Gault formula was employed to calculate a dose of carboplatin with a target AUC of 5 mg/min./mL in patients under 70 years and 4 mg/min./mL in patients aged 70 or older. The data of 24 patients were treated for population modelling performed with the nonmem (University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA) approach. Haematological toxicity was evaluated for all 33 patients enrolled in the study. The carboplatin systemic exposure measured by the AUC (mg/min./mL) was 5.98 (5.45; 6.51) and 5.36 (5.02; 5.69) for the younger patients and older groups, respectively. No significant differences were observed between the two groups with respect to rates of grade 3+ anaemia, neutropenia or thrombocytopenia. In clinical practice, a target AUC of 4 mg/min./mL carboplatin is applied to patients aged 70 and over, but the actual systemic exposure to the drug is higher. This supports a target AUC of 4 mg/min./mL carboplatin for patients older than 70 years when the dose is calculated by means of the Calvert-Crokcoft-Gault formula.

Elderly patients with advanced colorectal cancer derive similar benefit without excessive toxicity after first-line chemotherapy with oxaliplatin-based combinations: comparative outcomes from the 03-TTD-01 phase III study.

PURPOSE: Healthy elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer may benefit from chemotherapy as much as the younger population. This analysis compares the outcomes of first-line oxaliplatin plus fluoropyrimidines in elderly versus young patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 348 patients were randomized to capecitabine 1000 mg/(m2 12 h), days 1-14 plus oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 day 1, every 3 weeks or weekly infusional 5-FU 2250 mg/m2 over 48 h plus bimonthly oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2. We evaluated response rate, time to progression, overall survival and toxicity according to age. RESULTS: ORR for elderly and young patients were 34.9% and 44.7%, respectively (p=0.081). Median TTP did not differ between the two groups: 8.3 months for patients > or =70 years and 9.6 months for those <70 years (p=0.114). Median OS was 16.8 months and 20.5 months for the > or =70 and <70 years groups, respectively (p=0.74). With XELOX, mild paresthesia and an increase in transaminase levels were more frequent for young patients, whereas grade 3/4 diarrhea was higher in those > or =70 years (25% vs. 8%, p=0.005). For FUOX, only paresthesia was significantly lower in patients > or =70 years (53% vs. 71%, p=0.032). CONCLUSION: Elderly patients with MCRC benefit from first-line oxaliplatin-fluoropyrimidine combinations as much as younger patients, without increased toxicity.

First-line treatment with irinotecan and raltitrexed in metastatic colorectal cancer. Mature results of a multicenter phase II study.

OBJECTIVES: The combination of irinotecan and raltitrexed is safe and active in 5-fluorouracil-refractory, metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), with the advantage of its convenient three-weekly schedule. The aim of this multicenter phase II study was to assess its efficacy and toxicity in first-line treatment. METHODS: Between May 2000 and March 2001, 62 previously untreated patients received irinotecan (350 mg/m(2)) plus raltitrexed (3 mg/m(2)), with courses repeated every 21 days. Objective response was assessed every three courses, and treatment maintained until tumor progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: A total of 331 cycles were administered, with a median of five cycles per patient (range, 1-16). Seventeen patients achieved a partial response and 2 a complete response, for an overall intention-to-treat response rate of 30% (95% confidence interval, 18-44%). The incidence of grade 3-4 toxicity per patient was diarrhea (27%), emesis (13%), anemia (12%), neutropenia (9%), and asthenia (7%). Three patients (5%) died from treatment-related adverse events (diarrhea plus neutropenia). The median potential follow-up is now 37 months. Median survival was 12.2 months, and median time to progression was 6.3 months. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of irinotecan plus raltitrexed is an easy comfortable schedule for patients with metastatic CRC, but both efficacy and toxicity results seem suboptimal for first-line treatment.

Multicenter phase I study of irinotecan plus raltitrexed in patients with 5-fluorouracil-refractory advanced colorectal cancer.

Irinotecan and raltitrexed are active against advanced colorectal cancer, act through different mechanisms, and have non-overlapping toxicity profiles. In vitro studies have shown a schedule-dependent synergism between both drugs. The aim of this multicenter study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of this combination. Patients with 5-fluorouracil-refractory, advanced colorectal cancer were eligible. Dose escalation consisted of irinotecan (250-350 mg/m(2) as a 60-min infusion) in combination with a fixed dose of raltitrexed (3 mg/m(2) as a 15-min infusion, 1 h after irinotecan). Courses were repeated every 21 days. Three to 6 patients were to be included at each dose level. Dose limiting (NCI-CTC grade 3-4) toxicities (DLT) were assessed during the first 2 cycles. Thirteen patients were recruited (4, 3 and 6 in levels I, II and III, respectively). Main toxicity was diarrhea and asthenia, whereas myelotoxicity was mild. At level III, 2/6 patients experienced DLT (grade 4 diarrhea and neutropenia). The MTD was not reached, but further dose escalation was not attempted. Among 12 patients with measurable disease, 2 partial responses were observed for an overall response rate of 17%. The combination of single-agent full doses of irinotecan (350 mg/m(2)) and raltitrexed (3 mg/m(2)) in a 3-weekly schedule is feasible, with mild toxicity and a promising clinical activity. Diarrhea is the DLT, but it is not more common or severe than that described with irinotecan alone.