Ventilator-associated pneumonia and bloodstream infections in intensive care unit cancer patients: a retrospective 12-year study on 3388 prospectively monitored patients.

PURPOSE: Some publications suggest high rates of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) and of nosocomial pneumonia portending a poor prognosis in ICU cancer patients. A better understanding of the epidemiology of HAIs in these patients is needed. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all the patients hospitalized for ≥ 48 h during a 12-year period in the 12-bed ICU of the Gustave Roussy hospital, monitored prospectively for ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and bloodstream infection (BSI) and for use of medical devices. RESULTS: During 3388 first stays in the ICU, 198 cases of VAP and 103 primary, 213 secondary, and 77 catheter-related BSIs were recorded. The VAP rate was 24.5/1000 ventilator days (95% confidence interval [CI] 21.2-28.0); the catheter-related BSI rate was 2.3/1000 catheter days (95% CI 1.8-2.8). The cumulative incidence during the first 25 days of exposure was 58.8% (95% CI 49.1-66.6%) for VAP, 8.9% (95% CI, 6.2-11.5%) for primary, 15.1% (95% CI 11.6-18.5%) for secondary and 5.0% (95% CI 3.2-6.8%) for catheter-related BSIs. VAP or BSIs were not associated with a higher risk of ICU mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to report HAI rates in a large cohort of critically ill cancer patients. Although both the incidence of VAP and the rate of BSI are higher than in general ICU populations, this does not impact patient outcomes. The occurrence of device-associated infections is essentially due to severe medical conditions in patients and to the characteristics of malignancy.

Prognostic and predictive value of primary tumour side in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with chemotherapy and EGFR directed antibodies in six randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence that metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a genetically heterogeneous disease and that tumours arising from different sides of the colon (left versus right) have different clinical outcomes. Furthermore, previous analyses comparing the activity of different classes of targeted agents in patients with KRAS wild-type (wt) or RAS wt mCRC suggest that primary tumour location (side), might be both prognostic and predictive for clinical outcome. METHODS: This retrospective analysis investigated the prognostic and predictive influence of the localization of the primary tumour in patients with unresectable RAS wt mCRC included in six randomized trials (CRYSTAL, FIRE-3, CALGB 80405, PRIME, PEAK and 20050181), comparing chemotherapy plus EGFR antibody therapy (experimental arm) with chemotherapy or chemotherapy and bevacizumab (control arms). Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for patients with left-sided versus right-sided tumours, and odds ratios (ORs) for objective response rate (ORR) were estimated by pooling individual study HRs/ORs. The predictive value was evaluated by pooling study interaction between treatment effect and tumour side. RESULTS: Primary tumour location and RAS mutation status were available for 2159 of the 5760 patients (37.5%) randomized across the 6 trials, 515 right-sided and 1644 left-sided. A significantly worse prognosis was observed for patients with right-sided tumours compared with those with left-sided tumours in both the pooled control and experimental arms for OS [HRs = 2.03 (95% CI: 1.69-2.42) and 1.38 (1.17-1.63), respectively], PFS [HRs = 1.59 (1.34-1.88) and 1.25 (1.06-1.47)], and ORR [ORs = 0.38 (0.28-0.50) and 0.56 (0.43-0.73)]. In terms of a predictive effect, a significant benefit for chemotherapy plus EGFR antibody therapy was observed in patients with left-sided tumours [HRs = 0.75 (0.67-0.84) and 0.78 (0.70-0.87) for OS and PFS, respectively] compared with no significant benefit for those with right-sided tumours [HRs = 1.12 (0.87-1.45) and 1.12 (0.87-1.44) for OS and PFS, respectively; P value for interaction <0.001 and 0.002, respectively]. For ORR, there was a trend (P value for interaction = 0.07) towards a greater benefit for chemotherapy plus EGFR antibody therapy in the patients with left-sided tumours [OR = 2.12 (1.77-2.55)] compared with those with right-sided tumours [OR = 1.47 (0.94-2.29)]. Exclusion of the unique phase II trial or the unique second-line trial had no impact on the results. The predictive effect on PFS may depend of the type of EGFR antibody therapy and on the presence or absence of bevacizumab in the control arm. CONCLUSION: This pooled analysis showed a worse prognosis for OS, PFS and ORR for patients with right-sided tumours compared with those with left-sided tumours in patients with RAS wt mCRC and a predictive effect of tumour side, with a greater effect of chemotherapy plus EGFR antibody therapy compared with chemotherapy or chemotherapy and bevacizumab, the effect being greatest in patients with left-sided tumours. These predictive results should be interpreted with caution due to the retrospective nature of the analysis, which was carried out on subpopulations of patients included in these trials, and because none of these studies contemplated a full treatment sequence strategy.

PD-L1 protein expression assessed by immunohistochemistry is neither prognostic nor predictive of benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in resected non-small cell lung cancer.

Background: The expression of programmed death (PD) ligand 1 (PD-L1) protein expression assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) has been correlated with response and survival benefit from anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies in advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). The efficacy of several agents appears correlated with PD-L1 expression. It remains controversial whether PD-L1 is prognostic in NSCLC. We assessed the prognostic value of PD-L1 IHC and its predictive role for adjuvant chemotherapy in early stage NSCLC. Patients and methods: Tumor sections from three pivotal adjuvant chemotherapy trials (IALT, JBR.10, CALGB 9633) using the E1L3N antibody were studied in this pooled analysis. PD-L1 staining intensity and percentage in both tumor cells (TCs) and immune cells (ICs) were scored by two pathologists. The average or consensus PD-L1 expression levels across intensities and/or percent cells stained were correlated with clinicopathological and molecular features, patient survivals and potential benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy. Results: Results from 982 patients were available for analysis. Considering staining at any intensities for overall PD-L1 expression, 314 (32.0%), 204 (20.8%) and 141 (14.3%) tumor samples were positive for PD-L1 staining on TCs using cut-offs at ≥1%, ≥10% and ≥25%, respectively. For PD-L1 expressing ICs, 380 (38.7%), 308 (31.4%) and 148 (15.1%) were positive at ≥ 1%, ≥10% and 25% cut-offs, respectively. Positive PD-L1 was correlated with squamous histology, intense lymphocytic infiltrate, and KRAS but not with TP53 mutation. EGFR mutated tumors showed statistically non-significant lower PD-L1 expression. PD-L1 expression was neither prognostic with these cut-offs nor other exploratory cut-offs, nor were predictive for survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Conclusions: PD-L1 IHC is not a prognostic factor in early stage NSCLC patients. It is also not predictive for adjuvant chemotherapy benefit in these patients.

Pazopanib or placebo in completely resected stage I NSCLC patients: results of the phase II IFCT-0703 trial.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant treatment in resected stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is generally not recommended. Pazopanib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor of VEGFR-1/2/3 and PDGFR-α/ß. We explored the feasibility and efficacy of adjuvant pazopanib in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this double-blind phase II/III trial, patients with resected stage I NSCLC were randomized to placebo or pazopanib 800 mg/day (P800) for 6 months with a two-step Fleming design. The primary endpoint was compliance (percentage of patients receiving ≥3 months pazopanib). From the interim analysis after 64 patients were included, the IDMC recommended reducing to pazopanib 400 mg/day (P400) due to insufficient compliance, with a one-step Fleming. Although unplanned, survival data were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 71 patients were enrolled in each arm; 61% were male, 91% were smokers, median age was 60 years, 80% had pathological stage IA, and 16% had squamous cell carcinoma. Pazopanib compliance was 38% [95% confidence interval (CI) 23-55] with P800, increasing to 69% (95% CI 50-84; P = 0.027) with P400. Two patients had grade 4 toxicities with P800. The most common grade 3 toxicities were increased transaminases (16%), hypertension (13%), and diarrhea (9%) with P800, and gastrointestinal disorders (16%; 6% diarrhea) and hypertension (6%) with P400. Median follow-up was 47 months. Three-year recurrence-free survival was 76% (95% CI 65%-86%) with pazopanib and 83% (95% CI 74%-92%) with placebo [hazard ratio = 1.3 (95% CI 0.6-2.7), P = 0.53]. Five-year overall survival was 83% (95% CI 72-94) with pazopanib and 94% [95% CI 88-100] with placebo [hazard ratio = 1.8 (95% CI 0.6-5.5), P = 0.26]. CONCLUSIONS: In resected stage I NSCLC patients adjuvant 400 mg/day pazopanib but not 800 mg/day was feasible, although possibly infra-therapeutic and failed to improve relapse-free survival.

Investigating the heterogeneity of alkylating agents' efficacy and toxicity between sexes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide (MAIAGE study).

BACKGROUND: A marginal interaction between sex and the type of alkylating agent was observed for event-free survival in the Euro-EWING99-R1 randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide in Ewing sarcoma. To further evaluate this interaction, we performed an individual patient data meta-analysis of RCTs assessing cyclophosphamide versus ifosfamide in any type of cancer. METHODS: A literature search produced two more eligible RCTs (EICESS92 and IRS-IV). The endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS, main endpoint) and overall survival (OS). The hazard ratios (HRs) of the treatment-by-sex interaction and their 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were assessed using stratified multivariable Cox models. Heterogeneity of the interaction across age categories and trials was explored. We also assessed this interaction for severe acute toxicity using logistic models. RESULTS: The meta-analysis comprised 1,528 pediatric and young adult sarcoma patients from three RCTs: Euro-EWING99-R1 (n = 856), EICESS92 (n = 155), and IRS-IV (n = 517). There were 224 PFS events in Euro-EWING99-R1 and 200 in the validation set (EICESS92 + IRS-IV), and 171 and 154 deaths in each dataset, respectively. The estimated treatment-by-sex interaction for PFS in Euro-EWING99-R1 (HR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.00-3.00) was not replicated in the validation set (HR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.55-1.72), without heterogeneity across trials (P = 0.62). In the pooled analysis, the treatment-by-sex interaction was not significant (HR = 1.31, 95% CI = 0.89-1.95, P = 0.17), without heterogeneity across age categories (P = 0.88) and trials (P = 0.36). Similar results were observed for OS. No significant treatment-by-sex interaction was observed for leucopenia/neutropenia (P = 0.45), infection (P = 0.64), or renal toxicity (P = 0.20). CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis did not confirm the hypothesis of a treatment-by-sex interaction on efficacy or toxicity outcomes.

Impact of thoracic radiotherapy timing in limited-stage small-cell lung cancer: usefulness of the individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy (CT) combined with radiotherapy is the standard treatment of 'limited-stage' small-cell lung cancer. However, controversy persists over the optimal timing of thoracic radiotherapy and CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We carried out a meta-analysis of individual patient data in randomized trials comparing earlier versus later radiotherapy, or shorter versus longer radiotherapy duration, as defined in each trial. We combined the results from trials using the stratified log-rank test to calculate pooled hazard ratios (HRs). The primary outcome was overall survival. RESULTS: Twelve trials with 2668 patients were eligible. Data from nine trials comprising 2305 patients were available for analysis. The median follow-up was 10 years. When all trials were analysed together, 'earlier or shorter' versus 'later or longer' thoracic radiotherapy did not affect overall survival. However, the HR for overall survival was significantly in favour of 'earlier or shorter' radiotherapy among trials with a similar proportion of patients who were compliant with CT (defined as having received 100% or more of the planned CT cycles) in both arms (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.69-0.91), and in favour of 'later or longer' radiotherapy among trials with different rates of CT compliance (HR 1.19, 1.05-1.34, interaction test, P < 0.0001). The absolute gain between 'earlier or shorter' versus 'later or longer' thoracic radiotherapy in 5-year overall survival for similar and for different CT compliance trials was 7.7% (95% CI 2.6-12.8%) and -2.2% (-5.8% to 1.4%), respectively. However, 'earlier or shorter' thoracic radiotherapy was associated with a higher incidence of severe acute oesophagitis than 'later or longer' radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: 'Earlier or shorter' delivery of thoracic radiotherapy with planned CT significantly improves 5-year overall survival at the expense of more acute toxicity, especially oesophagitis.

Phase I trial of everolimus in combination with thoracic radiotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: This phase I study evaluated the safety and efficacy of the oral mTOR inhibitor everolimus in combination with thoracic radiotherapy followed by consolidation chemotherapy in locally advanced or oligometastatic untreated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Everolimus dose was escalated in incremental steps [sequential cohorts of three patients until the occurrence of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT)] and administered orally weekly (weekly group: dose of 10, 20 or 50 mg) or daily (daily group: 2.5, 5 or 10 mg), 1 week before, and during radiotherapy until 3.5 weeks after the end of radiotherapy. Two cycles of chemotherapy (cisplatin-navelbine) were administrated 4.5 weeks after the end of radiotherapy. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were included in two centers, 56% had adenocarcinoma and 84% had stage III disease. In the weekly group (12 assessable patients), everolimus could be administered safely up to the maximum planned weekly dose of 50 mg; however, one patient experienced a DLT of interstitial pneumonitis at the weekly dose level of 20 mg. In the daily group (9 assessable patients): one DLT of interstitial pneumonitis with a fatal outcome was observed at the daily dose level of 2.5 mg; two other DLTs (one grade 3 esophagitis and one bilateral interstitial pneumonitis) were found at the daily dose level of 5 mg. Overall there were five patients with G3-4 interstitial pneumonitis related to treatment. Among 22 assessable patients for response, there were 9 (41%) partial response and 7 (32%) stable disease. At a median follow-up of 29 months, the 2-year overall survival and progression-free survival actuarial rates were 31% and 12%, respectively. CONCLUSION: In previously untreated and unselected NSCLC patients, the recommended phase II dose of everolimus in combination with thoracic radiotherapy is 50 mg/week. Pulmonary toxicity is of concern and should be carefully monitored to establish the potential role of mTOR inhibitor with concomitant radiotherapy. EUDRACT N: 2007-001698-27.

Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy in nonsmall-cell lung cancer: new insights into the effect on failure type via a multistate approach.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy has become the standard therapy against resected nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Because of variable results on its late effect, we reanalyze the long-term data of the International Adjuvant Lung Cancer Trial (IALT) to describe in details the role of adjuvant chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the IALT, 1867 patients were randomized between adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy and control, who were followed up for a median of 7.5 years. Of these, 1687 patients were enrolled from 132 centers accepting to report the times to cancer events. We used event history methodology to estimate the effects of adjuvant chemotherapy on the risks of local relapse, distant metastasis, and death. RESULTS: Adjuvant chemotherapy was highly effective against local relapses [HR = 0.73; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60-0.90; P = 0.003] and nonbrain metastases (HR = 0.79; 95% CI 0.66-0.94; P = 0.008) but not against brain metastases (HR = 1.1; 95% CI 0.82-1.4; P = 0.61). The effect on noncancer mortality was nonsignificant during the first 5 years (HR = 1.1; 95% CI 0.81-1.5; P = 0.29), whereas the risk of noncancer mortality was subsequently higher with treatment (HR = 3.6; 95% CI 2.2-5.9; P < 0.001). This harmful effect, however, potentially concerned only about 2% of the patients at 8 years. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy reduced the risk of local relapse and of nonbrain metastasis, thereby improving survival. This treatment exerted no residual effect on mortality during the first 5 years, but a higher risk of noncancer mortality was found thereafter. Detailed long-term follow-up is strongly recommended for all patients in randomized trials evaluating adjuvant treatments in NSCLC.

The effect of the UGT1A1*28 allele on survival after irinotecan-based chemotherapy: a collaborative meta-analysis.

To date, studies of irinotecan pharmacogenetics have mostly focused on the effect of the UGT1A1*28 allele on irinotecan-related toxicity. However, the clinical utility of routine UGT1A1*28 genotyping to pre-emptively adjust irinotecan dosage is dependent upon whether UGT1A1*28 also affects patient survival following irinotecan therapy. Previous observational studies evaluating the influence of UGT1A1*28 on survival have shown contradictory results. A systematic review and meta-analysis of both published and unpublished data were performed to summarize the available evidence of the relationship between the UGT1A1*28 allele and patient survival related to irinotecan therapy. Overall and progression-free survival meta-analysis data were available for 1524 patients and 1494 patients, respectively. The difference in the survival between patients of different UGT1A1*28 genotypes (homozygous, heterozygous or wild-type) who had received irinotecan was not found to be statistically significant. There was also no evidence of irinotecan dose, regimen or line of therapy having an impact on this association.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised, phase II/III trials adding bevacizumab to platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Summary data from randomised trials comparing first-line bevacizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy with chemotherapy alone for inoperable locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic NSCLC were meta-analysed. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and pooled odds ratio (OR) for adverse events were calculated. The chi-squared tests evaluated interactions between treatment effects, and prognostic factors and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Data of 2194 patients (1313 bevacizumab; 881 controls) from four phase II and III trials: AVF-0757g, JO19907,ECOG 4599 and AVAiL, were analysed. Compared with chemotherapy alone, bevacizumab significantly prolonged OS(HR 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81, 0.99; P=0.03), and PFS (0.72; 95% CI 0.66, 0.79; P<0.001). Bevacizumab showed a significantly greater effect on OS in patients with adenocarcinoma versus other histologies (P=0.03), and patients with body weight loss ≤5% versus >5% (P=0.04). Bevacizumab significantly increased the risk of grade ≥3 proteinuria, hypertension,haemorrhagic events, neutropenia, and febrile neutropenia [corrected]. CONCLUSIONS: Bevacizumab significantly prolonged OS and PFS when added to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC; no unexpected toxicity was evident.

Unexpected toxicity of cetuximab combined with conventional chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced anal cancer: results of the UNICANCER ACCORD 16 phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: The ACCORD 16 phase II trial aimed to evaluate the objective response rate after combination of conventional chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and cetuximab in locally advanced anal canal carcinoma (LAACC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Immunocompetent patients with histologically confirmed LAACC received CRT [45 gray (Gy)] in 25 fractions over 5 weeks, fluorouracil and cisplatin during weeks 1 and 5), in combination with weekly dose of cetuximab (250 mg/m(2) with a loading dose of 400 mg/m(2) 1 week before irradiation), and a standard dose boost (20 Gy). The trial was originally designed to include 81 patients to detect a 15% of objective response increase with the new combination in comparison with CRT. RESULTS: The trial was prematurely stopped after the declaration of 15 serious adverse events (SAEs) in 14 out of 16 patients. Five patients received the entire planned treatment, and the compliance was higher after amendments of the protocol. Among the 15 SAEs, 6 were unexpected. Grade (G) 3/4 acute toxic effects, observed in 88% patients, were general (n = 13, 81%), digestive (n = 9, 56%), dermatological (n = 5, 31%), infectious (n = 4, 25%), haematological (n = 3, 19%), and others (n = 9); and three patients suffered from six G3/4 late toxic effects. No treatment-related death was reported. All 11 assessable patients had an objective response consisting of six complete (55%) and five partial (45%) response 2 months after the end of the treatment. Thirteen patients were followed up with a median of 22 months [95% confidence interval (CI ): 18-27] and had a 1-year colostomy-free survival, progression-free and overall survival rate of 67% (95% CI: 40%-86%), 62% (95% CI: 36%-82%), and 92% (95% CI: 67%-99%), respectively. CONCLUSION: CRT plus cetuximab was unacceptably toxic in this population of patients. Results of others phase II trials evaluating this combination are awaited to confirm these findings. EUDRA CT NO: 2007-007029-38.

Cross-validation study of class III beta-tubulin as a predictive marker for benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in resected non-small-cell lung cancer: analysis of four randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: The IALT, JBR.10, ANITA and Cancer and Leukemia Group B 9633 trials compared adjuvant chemotherapy with observation for patients with resected non-small-cell lung cancer (R-NSCLC). Data from the metastatic setting suggest high tumor class III beta-tubulin (TUBB3) expression is a determinant of insensitivity to tubulin-targeting agents (e.g. vinorelbine, paclitaxel). In 265 patients from JBR.10 (vinorelbine-cisplatin versus observation), high TUBB3 was an adverse prognostic factor and was associated (nonsignificantly) with 'greater' survival benefit from chemotherapy. We explored this further in additional patients from JBR.10 and the other three trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: TUBB3 immunohistochemical staining was scored for 1149 patients on the four trials. The original JBR.10 cut-off scores were used to classify tumors as TUBB3 high or low. The prognostic and predictive value of TUBB3 on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed by Cox models stratified by trial and adjusted for clinical factors. RESULTS: High TUBB3 expression was prognostic for OS [hazard ratio (HR)=1.27 (1.07-1.51), P=0.008) and DFS [HR=1.30 (1.11-1.53), P=0.001). TUBB3 was not predictive of a differential treatment effect [interaction P=0.20 (OS), P=0.23 (DFS)]. Subset analysis (n=420) on vinorelbine-cisplatin gave similar results. CONCLUSIONS: The prognostic effect of high TUBB3 expression in patients with R-NSCLC has been validated. We were unable to confirm a predictive effect for TUBB3.

Cisplatin benefit is predicted by immunohistochemical analysis of DNA repair proteins in squamous cell carcinoma but not adenocarcinoma: theranostic modeling by NSCLC constituent histological subclasses.

BACKGROUND: Most non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receive cisplatin-based chemotherapy though clinical response is restricted to a subset of patients. DNA repair protein levels are possible surrogates for cisplatin-induced DNA adduct (and subsequent cell death) repair efficiency and thus molecular determinants of therapeutic efficacy. The International Adjuvant Lung Trial (IALT)-Bio study previously suggested ERCC1 and MSH2 as predictive of cisplatin-based therapeutic benefit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: DNA repair protein expression (XPF, BRCA1, ERCC1, MSH2, p53, PARP1, and ATM) was assessed by immunohistochemistry on a large subset of patients (N = 769) from the IALT trial. Tissue Microarray slides were digitally scanned and signal quantified by user-defined macros. Statistical analyses (univariate and multivariate) of 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and 5-year overall survival used binary cut-offs (H score low/high expression). RESULTS: In patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), ATM, p53, PARP1, ERCC1, and MSH2 displayed significant (borderline) predictive values, mainly on DFS with chemotherapy efficacy limited to low marker levels. Adenocarcinoma (ADC) results were not significant. BRCA1 and XPF were not significant for predictive modeling in either SCC or ADCs. CONCLUSION: Here predictive utility of DNA repair enzymes co-segregates with SCC histology, focusing their predictive value to this histological subclass of NSCLC. Distinct mechanisms of chemotherapeutic response or resistance might exist among histological subclasses of solid tumors.

Cost-effectiveness of three strategies for second-line erlotinib initiation in nonsmall-cell lung cancer: the ERMETIC study part 3.

Several clinical and biological parameters are known to influence the efficacy of second-line erlotinib therapy for nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but their medico-economic impact has not been evaluated. The objective of this study was to compare the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of strategies for second-line erlotinib initiation in NSCLC: clinically guided initiation (nonsmoking females with adenocarcinoma received erlotinib; all other patients received docetaxel) and biologically guided selection (patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation received erlotinib; patients with wild-type EGFR or unknown status received docetaxel), compared with initiation with no patient selection (strategy reference). A Markov model was constructed. Outcomes (overall and progression-free survival), transition probabilities and direct medical costs (from the French third-party payer's perspective) were prospectively collected for individual patients treated with either erlotinib or docetaxel, from treatment initiation to disease progression. Published data were used to estimate utilities and post-progression costs. Sensitivity analyses were performed. The biologically and clinically guided strategies were both more efficient (incremental quality-adjusted life-yrs equal to 0.080 and 0.081, respectively) and less expensive (cost decrease equal to €5,020 and €5,815, respectively) than the no-selection strategy, and the biologically guided strategy was slightly less expensive than the clinically guided strategy. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results. The cost-effectiveness of second-line NSCLC treatment is improved when patients are selected on either clinical or biological grounds.

Adjuvant chemotherapy, with or without postoperative radiotherapy, in operable non-small-cell lung cancer: two meta-analyses of individual patient data.

BACKGROUND: Many randomised controlled trials have investigated the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy in operable non-small-cell lung cancer. We undertook two comprehensive systematic reviews and meta-analyses to establish the effects of adding adjuvant chemotherapy to surgery, or to surgery plus radiotherapy. METHODS: We included randomised trials, not confounded by additional therapeutic differences between the two groups and that started randomisation on or after Jan 1, 1965, which compared surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy versus surgery alone, or surgery plus adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy versus surgery plus adjuvant radiotherapy. Updated individual patient data were collected, checked, and included in meta-analyses stratified by trial. The primary endpoint was overall survival, defined as time from randomisation until death by any cause. All analyses were by intention to treat. FINDINGS: The first meta-analysis of surgery plus chemotherapy versus surgery alone was based on 34 trial comparisons and 8447 patients (3323 deaths). We recorded a benefit of adding chemotherapy after surgery (hazard ratio [HR] 0.86, 95% CI 0.81-0.92, p<0.0001), with an absolute increase in survival of 4% (95% CI 3-6) at 5 years (from 60% to 64%). The second meta-analysis of surgery plus radiotherapy and chemotherapy versus surgery plus radiotherapy was based on 13 trial comparisons and 2660 patients (1909 deaths). We recorded a benefit of adding chemotherapy to surgery plus radiotherapy (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81-0.97, p=0.009), representing an absolute improvement in survival of 4% (95% CI 1-8) at 5 years (from 29% to 33%). In both meta-analyses we noted little variation in effect according to the type of chemotherapy, other trial characteristics, or patient subgroup. INTERPRETATION: The addition of adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery for patients with operable non-small-cell lung cancer improves survival, irrespective of whether chemotherapy was adjuvant to surgery alone or adjuvant to surgery plus radiotherapy. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council, Institut Gustave-Roussy, Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (AOM 05 209), Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer, and Sanofi-Aventis.

Individual patient data network meta-analysis using either restricted mean survival time difference or hazard ratios: is there a difference? A case study on locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinomas.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed at applying the restricted mean survival time difference (rmstD) as an absolute outcome measure in a network meta-analysis and comparing the results with those obtained using hazard ratios (HR) from the individual patient data (IPD) network meta-analysis (NMA) on the role of chemotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) recently published by the MAC-NPC collaborative group (Meta-Analysis of Chemotherapy [CT] in NPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty trials (5144 patients) comparing radiotherapy (RT) with or without CT in non-metastatic NPC were included. Treatments were grouped in seven categories: RT alone (RT), induction CT followed by RT (IC-RT), RT followed by adjuvant CT (RT-AC), IC followed by RT followed by AC (IC-RT-AC), concomitant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), IC followed by CRT (IC-CRT), and CRT followed by AC (CRT-AC). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints were progression-free survival and locoregional control. The rmstD was estimated at t* = 10 years in each trial. Random-effect frequentist NMA models were applied. P score was used to rank treatments. Heterogeneity and inconsistency were evaluated. RESULTS: The three treatments that had the highest effect on OS with rmstD were CRT-AC, IC-CRT, and CRT (respective P scores of 92%, 72%, and 64%) compared to CRT-AC, CRT, and IC-CRT when using HR (respective P scores of 96%, 71%, and 63%). Of the 32 HR and rmstD analyzed, 5 had a different interpretation, 3 with a direction change (different direction of treatment effect) and 2 with a change in significance (same direction but a change in statistical significance). Results for secondary endpoints were overall in agreement. CONCLUSION: The use of either HR or rmstD impacts the results of NMA. Given the sensitivity of HR to non-proportional hazards, this finding could have implications in terms of meta-analysis methodology.

Circulating innate immune markers and outcomes in treatment-naïve advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: Innate immunity represents the first step of activation of the immune system and dictates the quality of adaptive immune responses. Studies have reported links between systemic inflammatory or innate immune markers and prognosis in patients with lung cancer. To our knowledge, the prospective and concomitant study of these systemic markers has never been performed. METHODS: Advanced treatment-naive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients eligible for first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were prospectively included from December 2012 to July 2015 (N = 148). Blood samples of patients were collected before the first cycle for fresh NK cell phenotyping. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were cryopreserved for natural cytotoxicity receptor (NCR) genotyping as well as sera for NCR's ligand quantification. Data on leukocytes, neutrophils and monocyte counts and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels were extracted from electronic medical records. RESULTS: Among all studied markers, monocytosis, neutrophilia, leucocytosis, high LDH and sBAG6 levels and reduced levels of NCR3 transcripts were associated with poor overall survival (OS) in univariate analysis. The levels of NCR3 transcripts was linked to age, number of metastatic sites, monocyte counts, LDH and sBAG6 levels. Neutrophilia was associated to high sBAG6 levels. NCR3 was the unique innate immune parameter that remained as an independent factor associated with both OS (P = 0.003) and progression-free survival (P = 0.009) in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: This study brought evidence that these biomarkers are entangled; parameters associated with an inflammatory process were related to reduced levels of NCR3 transcripts. Finally, the level of NCR3 transcripts was independently associated with outcomes in treatment-naive patients with advanced NSCLC.

Treatment outcome and survival in participants of phase I oncology trials carried out from 2003 to 2006 at Institut Gustave Roussy.

BACKGROUND: The oncology community usually perceives phase I oncology trials as associated with poor or limited benefits and substantial risks. There is scarce data concerning outcome and survival of patients enrolled in current phase I oncology trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed all phase I oncology trials conducted by investigators from the Adult Phase I Unit at Institut Gustave Roussy from 2003 to 2006. We report data concerning patient demographics, treatment outcome, toxicity, survival and type of care after trial exit. RESULTS: We analyzed 10 trials involving 180 participants. The overall response rate was 7.2%. Disease control (objective response plus stable disease) was achieved in 48.2% of patients. The rate of toxic death was 0.5%. In all, 38% of patients had at least one episode of grade 3 or 4 toxic events. The median progression-free survival and the median overall survival (OS) were 2.3 and 8.7 months, respectively. On multivariate analysis, a time between diagnosis of disease and inclusion in the phase I trial > or =24 months and evidence of disease control were statistically significant predictors of improved OS. CONCLUSION: Current phase I oncology trials are safe and are associated with clinical benefit in a substantial proportion of patients.

[Complete (R0) resection is the only valid prognostic factor in abdominoperineal resection for recurrent cancer of the anal canal (a consecutive series of 95 patients)]. / Résection R0, seul facteur pronostique dans les amputations abdominopérinéales de rattrapage des cancers du canal anal (série consécutive de 95 patients).

INTRODUCTION: When radiation therapy fails to control cancer of the anal canal, the only therapeutic alternative is salvage abdomino-perineal resection (APR). Its role remains debatable since very few long-term survivals have been reported. No prognostic factors have yet been identified in the limited series of reported cases. PATIENTS: 95 APR's performed over a 20 year period are reviewed and analyzed. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 5.5 years. Only one prognostic factor was identified: an R0 resection (n=76) versus either R1 (n=9) or R2 (n=9) resection. Median survival for R0 APR was more than 10 years versus 1 year for R1 and R2 resections (p=0.001). There was no prognostic difference between salvage APR for disease progression (n=55) or for late recurrence (n=40). The sub-group of women<45 years of age (n=5) had a particularly poor prognosis with no survivors beyond 2 years. CONCLUSION: When anal cancer recurs after radiation therapy, a salvage APR is indicated. If an R0 resection can be achieved, median survival is greater than 10 years. However, the justification for APR when only an R1 or R2 resection can be achieved is much less clear; in such cases there was no survival beyond 3 years.