RESUMO
BACKGROUND: High-grade neuroendocrine cancers (NEC) of the head and neck (HN) are rare and aggressive, accounting for ≤1 % of all HN cancers, with a 5-year overall survival (OS) of ≤20 %. This case series examines clinical characteristics, treatments, and outcomes of patients diagnosed at a regional UK HN cancer centre over the last 23 years. METHODS: A retrospective review of medical records was conducted for all patients diagnosed with NEC HN from 1st January 2000 until 1st March 2023 at Velindre Cancer Centre. RESULTS: During the study period, 19 cases of NEC HN were identified, primarily affecting males (n = 15, 79 %). Median age of 67 years (range: 44-86). At diagnosis, 32 % of patients (n = 6) were smokers. The most common primary tumour sites were larynx (n = 5, 26.3 %) and sinonasal (n = 5, 26.3 %). Most patients presented with advanced loco-regional disease or distant metastasis, with stage IVA (n = 6, 32 %) and stage IVC (n = 6, 32 %) being the most common. The key pathology marker was synaptophysin, present in 100 % of the tested patients (n = 15). In the study, of the 12 patients with non-metastatic disease, 10 received a combination of treatments that included radiotherapy (RT). Some of these patients also received chemotherapy (CT) at the same time as their radiotherapy. Surgery alone was used in two patients with stage II disease. Seven subjects had complete responses, and one achieved a partial response. Among the seven metastatic patients, three received CT, and one underwent palliative RT, all achieving a partial response. In all cases, the CT used was carboplatin and etoposide. After a median follow-up of 11 months (range: 1-96), the median OS was 27 months for the overall population, 51 months for those treated radically, and three months for metastatic patients with palliative treatment. The 1-year OS for all patients was 54.3 %, the 2-year OS was 46.5 %, and the 5-year OS was 23.3 %. Among patients treated radically, these rates were 65.3 %, 52.2 %, and 26.1 %, respectively. For patients treated palliatively, the 1-year OS was 33.3 %. CONCLUSION: This case series contributes preliminary observations on the characteristics and management of non-metastatic NEC HN, suggesting potential benefits from multimodality treatment strategies. Given the small cohort size, these observations should be interpreted cautiously and seen as a foundation for further research.
RESUMO
The three approved cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors, including abemaciclib, have shown differences in their preclinical, pharmacological, and clinical data. Abemaciclib stands out for its broader target range and more rapid and intense activity. It has demonstrated efficacy as a monotherapy or in combination with tamoxifen in endocrine-refractory metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients with prior chemotherapy. However, the clinical data on abemaciclib after exposure to previous CDK4/6 inhibitors are limited. In this single-center retrospective case series, we identified all patients who received abemaciclib until February 2022 after experiencing documented progression on palbociclib or ribociclib. The safety profile and clinical outcomes of abemaciclib treatment in this specific patient cohort were evaluated. Eleven patients were included in this retrospective case series, nine receiving abemaciclib with tamoxifen. Eight patients had visceral involvement, and the median age was 69 (ranging from 42 to 84). The median time from the end of prior CDK4/6 inhibitor treatment to abemaciclib initiation was 17.5 months (ranging from 3 to 41 months). Patients had undergone a median of three prior therapies (ranging from 1 to 7), including chemotherapy in 54.5% of cases. The median follow-up time was six months (ranging from 1 to 22 months). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8 months (95% CI 3.9-12). Five patients continued abemaciclib treatment, and one patient with liver metastases achieved a complete hepatic response. The most common adverse events were diarrhea (72.7%, no grade ≥ 3) and asthenia (27.3%, no grade ≥ 3). Our preliminary findings suggest that abemaciclib could be an effective and safe treatment option for MBC patients who have previously received palbociclib or ribociclib.