Prevalence and survival implications of malnutrition and sarcopenia in metastatic breast cancer: A longitudinal analysis.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition and sarcopenia are challenges for patients with metastatic breast cancer and have been proposed as independent prognostic factors. Very few studies have addressed the temporal evolution of these parameters and, notably, the separate and combined analysis of sarcopenia and malnutrition. This study aimed to i) determine the prevalence of malnutrition and sarcopenia, individually and combined, and their evolution over time, ii) identify risk factors for each condition, and iii) explore their impact on overall survival (OS). METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted on 111 patients treated for at least a third-line metastatic breast cancer at the Institut Curie between January 1st and March 31st, 2018. Solitary malnutrition was defined from weight loss and body mass index values while solitary sarcopenia was defined solely based on low muscle mass. We analyzed solitary malnutrition, solitary sarcopenia, and then malnutrition with or without sarcopenia, at three key stages (T1: diagnosis of metastasis, T2: initiation of third-line treatment, and T3: 3-month re-evaluation). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to investigate the risk factors. We performed Cox proportional hazards analyses for each variable. RESULTS: At T1, the prevalence of solitary malnutrition, solitary sarcopenia and malnutrition with or without sarcopenia was 18.6%, 36.1% and 48.9% respectively, increasing to 27.7%, 45.5% and 56.6% at T2. At T2, in multivariate logistic regression analyses, patients aged over 60 years were at an elevated risk of experiencing solitary malnutrition as well as malnutrition with or without sarcopenia, but not solitary sarcopenia. In multivariate analyses, solitary malnutrition was significantly associated with poorer OS (HR 2.2 [95% CI 1.1-4.1], p = 0.02), while solitary sarcopenia and malnutrition with or without sarcopenia showed no association. CONCLUSION: Solitary malnutrition and sarcopenia were highly prevalent in patients with metastatic breast cancer, affecting around a quarter and half of patients respectively at third-line treatment initiation. Notably, solitary malnutrition emerged as a prognostic factor for overall survival, whereas no significant association was observed for solitary sarcopenia or malnutrition with or without sarcopenia. This highlights the critical need for early identification of patients at risk of malnutrition and the importance of timely intervention.

An international phase II trial and immune profiling of SBRT and atezolizumab in advanced pretreated colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Immuno-radiotherapy may improve outcomes for patients with advanced solid tumors, although optimized combination modalities remain unclear. Here, we report the colorectal (CRC) cohort analysis from the SABR-PDL1 trial that evaluated the PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab in combination with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in advanced cancer patients. METHODS: Eligible patients received atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 weeks until progression or unmanageable toxicity, together with ablative SBRT delivered concurrently with the 2nd cycle (recommended dose of 45 Gy in 3 fractions, adapted upon normal tissue tolerance constraint). SBRT was delivered to at least one tumor site, with at least one additional measurable lesion being kept from the radiation field. The primary efficacy endpoint was one-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate from the start of atezolizumab. Sequential tumor biopsies were collected for deep multi-feature immune profiling. RESULTS: Sixty pretreated (median of 2 prior lines) advanced CRC patients (38 men [63%]; median age, 59 years [range, 20-81 years]; 77% with liver metastases) were enrolled in five centers (France: n = 4, Spain: n = 1) from 11/2016 to 04/2019. All but one (98%) received atezolizumab and 54/60 (90%) received SBRT. The most frequently irradiated site was lung (n = 30/54; 56.3%). Treatment-related G3 (no G4-5) toxicity was observed in 3 (5%) patients. Median OS and PFS were respectively 8.4 [95%CI:5.9-11.6] and 1.4 months [95%CI:1.2-2.6], including five (9%) patients with PFS > 1 year (median time to progression: 19.2 months, including 2/5 MMR-proficient). Best overall responses consisted of stable disease (n = 38; 64%), partial (n = 3; 5%) and complete response (n = 1; 2%). Immune-centric multiplex IHC and RNAseq showed that SBRT redirected immune cells towards tumor lesions, even in the case of radio-induced lymphopenia. Baseline tumor PD-L1 and IRF1 nuclear expression (both in CD3 + T cells and in CD68 + cells) were higher in responding patients. Upregulation of genes that encode for proteins known to increase T and B cell trafficking to tumors (CCL19, CXCL9), migration (MACF1) and tumor cell killing (GZMB) correlated with responses. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides new data on the feasibility, efficacy, and immune context of tumors that may help identifying advanced CRC patients most likely to respond to immuno-radiotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT N°: 2015-005464-42; Clinicaltrial.gov number: NCT02992912.

Sequential genomic analysis using a multisample/multiplatform approach to better define rhabdomyosarcoma progression and relapse.

The genomic spectrum of rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) progression from primary to relapse is not fully understood. In this pilot study, we explore the sensitivity of various targeted and whole-genome NGS platforms in order to assess the best genomic approach of using liquid biopsy in future prospective clinical trials. Moreover, we investigate 35 paired primary/relapsed RMS from two contributing institutions, 18 fusion-positive (FP-RMS) and 17 fusion-negative RMS (FN-RMS) by either targeted DNA or whole exome sequencing (WES). In 10 cases, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) from multiple timepoints through clinical care and progression was analyzed for feasibility of liquid biopsy in monitoring treatment response/relapse. ctDNA alterations were evaluated using a targeted 36-gene custom RMS panel at high coverage for single-nucleotide variation and fusion detection, and a shallow whole-genome sequencing for copy number variation. FP-RMS have a stable genome with relapse, with common secondary alterations CDKN2A/B, MYCN, and CDK4 present at diagnosis and impacting survival. FP-RMS lacking major secondary events at baseline acquire recurrent MYCN and AKT1 alterations. FN-RMS acquire a higher number of new alterations, most commonly SMARCA2 missense mutations. ctDNA analyses detect pathognomonic variants in all RMS patients within our collection at diagnosis, regardless of type of alterations, and confirmed at relapse in 86% of FP-RMS and 100% FN-RMS. Moreover, a higher number of fusion reads is detected with increased disease burden and at relapse in patients following a fatal outcome. These results underscore patterns of tumor progression and provide rationale for using liquid biopsy to monitor treatment response.

Clinical utility of circulating tumour cell-based monitoring of late-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: the randomised CirCe01 trial.

BACKGROUND: CirCe01 trial aimed to assess the clinical utility of circulating tumour cell (CTC)-based monitoring in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients beyond the third line of chemotherapy (LC). METHODS: CirCe01 was a prospective, multicentre, randomised trial (NCT01349842) that included patients with MBC after two systemic LC. Patients with ≥5 CTC/7.5 mL (CellSearch®) were randomised between the CTC-driven and the standard arm. In the CTC arm, changes in CTC count were assessed at the first cycle of each LC; patients in whom CTC levels predicted early tumour progression had to switch to a subsequent LC. RESULTS: Greater than or equal to 5 CTC/7.5 mL were observed in N = 101/204 patients. In the CTC arm (N = 51), 43 (83%) and 18 (44%) patients completed CTC monitoring in the third and fourth lines, respectively, and 18 (42%) and 11 (61%) of these patients, respectively, had no CTC response. Thirteen (72%) and 5 (46%) of these patients underwent early switch to the next LC. Overall survival was not different between the two arms (hazard ratio = 0.95, 95% confidence interval = [0.6;1.4], p = 0.8). In subgroup analyses, patients with no CTC response who switched chemotherapy experienced longer survival than patients who did not. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the limited accrual and compliance, this trial failed to demonstrate the clinical utility of CTC monitoring. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT, NCT01349842, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01349842 , registered 9 May 2011.

Head and neck tumors in children and adolescents: Impact of a multidisciplinary tumor board.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer treatment in France is based on Multidisciplinary Tumor Board (MTB). In the Ile-de-France region (IDF), which includes 12 million inhabitants from Paris and the surrounding area, pediatric tumors of head and neck are discussed since 2013 in a dedicated Interregional Pediatric Multicentric MTB (IPMTB). The purpose of this study is to analyze the impact of the IDF head and neck IPMTB on the management of these tumors, 5 years after their implementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective study of all patient files presented in the IPMTB for a benign or malignant head-and-neck tumor, between 2013 and 2018. RESULTS: A total of 679 discussions were analyzed representing 428 patients. Median age was 7.5 years (range: 0-31 years). Malignant tumors represented 71% of cases, including 36% of rhabdomyosarcoma. Overall, 12% percent of the cases discussed came from centers outside of IDF. All meetings complied with multidisciplinary criteria required by French law. Proposals made during the IPMTB were followed in 86% of cases. Among the 251 proposals made by the referring teams prior to the IPMTB, 29% were secondarily modified after being discussed in the IPMTB. CONCLUSION: Thanks to their multidisciplinarity, high number of cases discussed and usual respect of their proposals, the IPMTB have made it possible to improve the coordination between all specialties involved in the patient's management, to apply the most recent and scientifically validated protocols, and to share the knowledge of different teams concerning the management of particularly rare tumors.