Gemcitabine plus sirolimus for relapsed and progressing osteosarcoma patients after standard chemotherapy: a multicenter, single-arm phase II trial of Spanish Group for Research on Sarcoma (GEIS).

BACKGROUND: Patients with relapsed unresectable osteosarcoma represents an unmet need, so active and safe systemic treatments are required. Fas cell surface death receptor and mammalian target of rapamycin pathways are implicated in progressing osteosarcoma, and we had preclinical and clinical experience with a scheme that targets both pathways. Therefore, we designed a phase II trial with gemcitabine plus rapamycin, to determine the efficacy and safety, in this subset of patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicenter, single-arm phase II trial was sponsored by the Spanish Group for Research on Sarcoma. Osteosarcoma patients, relapsed or progressing after standard chemotherapy and unsuitable for metastasectomy received gemcitabine and rapamycin p.o. 5 mg/day except for the same day of gemcitabine administration, and the day before. The main end point was 4-month progression-free survival rate (PFSR), with the assumption that rates higher than 40% would be considered as an active regimen. Translational research aimed to correlate biomarkers with the clinical outcome. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were enrolled and received at least one cycle. PFSR at 4 months was 44%, and after central radiologic assessment, 2 partial responses and 14 stabilizations (48.5%) were reported from 33 assessable patients. The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were: neutropenia (37%), thrombocytopenia (20%), anemia (23%), and fatigue (15%); however, only three patients had febrile neutropenia. Positive protein expression of RRM1 significantly correlated with worse PFS and overall survival, while positivity of P-ERK1/2 was correlated with significant better overall survival. CONCLUSION: Gemcitabine plus sirolimus exhibits satisfactory antitumor activity and safety in this osteosarcoma population, exceeding the prespecified 40% of 4-month PFSR. The significant correlation of biomarkers with clinical outcome encourages further prospective investigation.

An internally validated new clinical and inflammation-based prognostic score for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sorafenib.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib is a standard treatment for patients (pts) with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC), although the clinical benefit is heterogeneous between different pts groups. Among novel prognostic factors, a low baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (bNLR) and early-onset diarrhoea have been linked with a better prognosis. PURPOSE: To identify prognostic factors in pts with aHCC treated with 1st-line sorafenib and to develop a new prognostic score to guide management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of 145 pts bNLR, overall toxicity, early toxicity rates and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Univariate and multivariate analysis of prognostic factors for OS was performed. The prognostic score was calculated from the coefficients found in the Cox analysis. ROC curves and pseudoR2 index were used for internal validation. Discrimination ability and calibration were tested by Harrel's c-index (HCI) and Akaike criteria (AIC). RESULTS: The optimal bNLR cut-off for the prediction of OS was 4 (AUC 0.62). Independent prognostic factors in multivariate analysis for OS were performance status (PS) (p < .0001), Child-Pugh (C-P) score (p = 0.005), early-onset diarrhoea (p = 0.006) and BNLR (0.011). The prognostic score based on these four variables was found efficient (HCI = 0.659; AIC = 1.180). Four risk groups for OS could be identified: a very low-risk (median OS = 48.6 months), a low-risk (median OS = 11.6 months), an intermediate-risk (median OS = 8.3 months) and a high-risk group (median OS = 4.4 months). CONCLUSIONS: PS and C-P score were the main prognostic factors for OS, followed by early-onset diarrhoea and bNLR. We identified four risk groups for OS depending on these parameters. This prognostic model could be useful for patient stratification, but an external validation is needed.

Carcinoma of unknown primary site: development in a single institution of a prognostic model based on clinical and serum variables.

PURPOSE: To identify clinical and biologic variables with significant impact on survival in patients with carcinomas of an unknown primary site (CUP) and to develop a simple prognostic model. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, univariate and multivariate prognostic factors analyses were conducted in a population of 100 patients with CUP. Patients with features requiring well defined treatments had previously been excluded. RESULTS: Overall survival (OS) was significantly related to the following pretreatment adverse prognostic clinical factors: a poor performance status (2 or 3), weight loss more than 10% in the last six months, the presence of liver metastases and more than two metastatic sites. Two biological parameters predicted a significantly shorter survival: elevated serum levels of alkaline phosphatase and of lactate dehydrogenase. In the multivariate analysis, only two independent adverse prognostic parameters were retained: a poor performance status and the presence of liver metastases. We developed a prognostic model for OS based on the following subgroups: good prognosis (PS 0 or 1 and absence of liver metastases), intermediate prognosis (PS> or =2 or presence of liver metastases) and poor prognosis (PS> or =2 or presence of liver metastases). Median OS for the three groups was 10.8, 4 and 1.9 months respectively, p<0.0001. CONCLUSION: A simple prognostic model using performance status and presence of liver metastases was developed. It allowed the assignment of patients into three subgroups with different outcomes. Treatment strategies could be adapted for each subgroup. We think that this prognostic model could be useful and should be validated in other patient series.

SEOM Clinical Guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of esophageal cancer (2016).

Esophageal cancer (EC) is an aggressive tumor that represents the 6th most common cause of cancer death worldwide. The estimated incidence in Spain is 2090 cases/year. Two main pathological subtypes exist, squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma. The main differences between them are localization and underlying factors which are the principal cause of the recent incidence changes observed in west countries. Staging techniques and treatment options which combine surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy, reflected the high complexity of the EC management. An undeniably multidisciplinary approach is, therefore, required. In this guide, we review the status of current diagnosis and treatment, define evidence and propose recommendations.

Clinical guideline SEOM: hepatocellular carcinoma.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents the second leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Surveillance with abdominal ultrasound every 6 months should be offered to patients with a high risk of developing HCC: Child-Pugh A-B cirrhotic patients, all cirrhotic patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation, high-risk HBV chronic hepatitis patients (higher viral load, viral genotype or Asian or African ancestry) and patients with chronic hepatitis C and bridging fibrosis. Accurate diagnosis, staging and functional hepatic reserve are crucial for the optimal therapeutic approach. Characteristic findings on dynamic CT/MR of arterial hyperenhancement with "washout" in the portal venous or delayed phase are highly specific and sensitive for a diagnosis of HCC in patients with previous cirrhosis, but a confirmed histopathologic diagnosis should be done in patients without previous evidence of chronic hepatic disease. BCLC classification is the most common staging system used in Western countries. Surgical procedures, local therapies and systemic treatments should be discussed and planned for each patient by a multidisciplinary team according to the stage, performance status, liver function and comorbidities. Surgical interventions remain as the only curative procedures but both local and systemic approaches may increase survival and should be offered to patients without contraindications.

[Therapy-related acute leukaemia and myelodysplastic syndrome]. / Leucemias agudas y síndromes mielodisplásicos secundarios al tratamiento oncológico.

Secondary hematological malignancies represent a severe complication of cancer treatment. Their real incidence is unknown because of the heterogeneity of primary tumors, their therapies, and their prognosis. The usual presentation is an acute leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome. Two different diseases have been described with particular clinical and cytogenetic features, namely the one associated with alkylating drugs and that related to epipodophylotoxins. Diagnosis is based on clinical suspicion, morphological alterations and cytogenetic studies. Prognosis is uniformly dismal. Conventional chemotherapy is mainly palliative, whereas allogenic transplantation allows the cure of a small percentage of cases. Thus, potential curative therapies for solid tumors should be optimized and patients maintained in long-term surveillance programs.