Carboplatin dose calculations for patients with lung cancer: significant dose differences found depending on dosing equation choice.

BACKGROUND: Carboplatin is the backbone cytotoxic agent for many chemotherapy regimens for lung cancer. Dosing of carboplatin is complicated due to its relationship to renal function and narrow therapeutic index. Overestimation of renal function may lead to supratherapeutic dosing and toxicity, while underestimation may lead to underdosing and therapeutic failure. Although the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) and the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations have higher accuracy in estimating glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), the Cockcroft Gault (CG) formula has been historically used for carboplatin dosing internationally. METHODS: We compared these formulae to identify patient profiles that were associated with significant carboplatin dose variation by retrospectively analysing the carboplatin dosing of 96 patients with lung cancer. Carboplatin doses were calculated using eGFR generated by MDRD, CKD-EPI 2009 and CKD-EPI 2021 equations. These three hypothetical doses were compared to actual CG-based doses prescribed. RESULTS: MDRD and CKD-EPI equations resulted in comparable carboplatin doses; however, CG doses diverged markedly with up to 17% of the patients receiving a carboplatin dose that was at least 20% higher than a non-CG formula would have predicted, and 20% received a dose that was at least 20% lower than a non-CG formula would have predicted. Our data suggest CG use overestimates kidney function in patients with a higher bodyweight and body surface area (BSA) while underestimating it in patients with a lower bodyweight and BSA. Importantly, we demonstrate potential real-world benefit as CKD-EPI predicted lower doses for patients whose (CG-derived) carboplatin dose was later reduced following clinical assessment prior to infusion. CONCLUSIONS: We have therefore confirmed significant differences in carboplatin dosing depending on the equation used in our modern patient population and suggest that use of CKD-EPI provides the most clinically appropriate carboplatin dosing and should be implemented as the new standard of care internationally.

Psychosocial well-being and supportive care needs of cancer patients and survivors living in rural or regional areas: a systematic review from 2010 to 2021.

PURPOSE: To summarise what is currently known about the psychosocial morbidity, experiences, and needs of people with cancer and their informal caregivers, who live in rural or regional areas of developed countries. METHODS: Eligible studies dating from August 2010 until May 2021 were identified through several online databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, and RURAL (Rural and Remote Health Database). Results were reported according to the PRISMA guidelines and the protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020171764). RESULTS: Sixty-five studies were included in this review, including 20 qualitative studies, 41 quantitative studies, and 4 mixed methods studies. Qualitative research demonstrated that many unique psychosocial needs of rural people remain unmet, particularly relating to finances, travel, and accessing care. However, most (9/19) quantitative studies that compared rural and urban groups reported no significant differences in psychosocial needs, morbidity, or quality of life (QOL). Five quantitative studies reported poorer psychosocial outcomes (social and emotional functioning) in urban cancer survivors, while three highlighted poorer outcomes (physical functioning, role functioning, and self-reported mental health outcomes) in the rural group. CONCLUSION: Recent research shows that rural people affected by cancer have unique unmet psychosocial needs relating to rurality. However, there was little evidence that rural cancer survivors report greater unmet needs than their urban counterparts. This contrasts to the findings from a 2011 systematic review that found rural survivors consistently reported worse psychosocial outcomes. More population-based research is needed to establish whether uniquely rural unmet needs are due to general or cancer-specific factors.

Chemoradiotherapy Using Carboplatin plus Paclitaxel versus Cisplatin plus Fluorouracil for Esophageal or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Trimodality therapy (TMT) with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) using concurrent carboplatin plus paclitaxel (CP) followed by surgery is the standard of care for locoregional esophageal or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers. Alternatively, nCRT with cisplatin plus fluorouracil (CF) can be used. Definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) with CP or CF can be used if surgery is not planned. In the absence of comparative trials, we aimed to evaluate outcomes of CP and CF in the settings of TMT and dCRT. METHODS: A single-site, retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre to identify all patients who received CRT for locoregional esophageal or GEJ cancer. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox regression model. The inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) method was used for sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2015, 93 patients with esophageal (49%) and GEJ (51%) cancers underwent nCRT (n = 67; 72%) or dCRT (n = 26; 28%). Median age was 62.3 years and 74% were male. Median follow-up was 23.9 months. Comparing CP to CF in the setting of TMT, the OS and DFS rates were similar. In the setting of dCRT, CP was associated with significantly inferior 3-year OS (36 vs. 63%; p = 0.001; HR 3.1; 95% CI: 1.2-7.7) and DFS (0 vs. 41%; p = 0.004; HR 3.6; 95% CI: 1.4-8.9) on multivariable and IPTW sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: TMT with CF and CP produced comparable outcomes. However, for dCRT, CF may be a superior regimen.

Improving Outcomes in Resectable Gastric Cancer: A Review of Current and Future Strategies.

Gastric cancer is a highly fatal malignancy, and surgery alone often does not provide a cure, even for relatively early stages of disease. Various approaches have been adopted around the world to improve surgical outcomes; however, there currently is no global consensus with regard to the extent of surgery or the timing and choice of chemotherapy and radiation. Here we review the evidence supporting current approaches to resectable gastric cancer, including discussion of the optimal extent of surgery and lymphadenectomy, adjuvant chemotherapy, postoperative chemotherapy with chemoradiation, and perioperative chemotherapy. Additionally, we discuss novel approaches, including intensified chemotherapy (in neoadjuvant, perioperative, and adjuvant settings), pre- and postoperative chemoradiation in combination with chemotherapy, and the role of biologics and targeted therapy. Finally, we examine the promise of molecular subtyping and potential biomarkers for improved patient selection. Upcoming and future trials should help answer questions regarding the optimal sequencing and choice of treatments, in order to further improve survival and move us towards ultimately curing more patients with resectable gastric cancer.

Do teleoncology models of care enable safe delivery of chemotherapy in rural towns?

OBJECTIVES: To compare the dose intensity and toxicity profiles for patients undergoing chemotherapy at the Townsville Cancer Centre (TCC), a tertiary cancer centre in northern Queensland, with those for patients treated in Mount Isa, supervised by the same medical oncologists via teleoncology. DESIGN: A quasi-experimental design comparing two patient groups. SETTING: TCC and Mount Isa Hospital, which both operate under the auspices of the Townsville Teleoncology Network (TTN). PARTICIPANTS: Eligible patients who received chemotherapy at TCC or Mt Isa Hospital between 1 May 2007 and 30 April 2012. INTERVENTION: Teleoncology model for managing cancer patients in rural towns. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Dose intensity (doses, number of cycles and lines of treatment) and toxicity rates (rate of serious side effects, hospital admissions and mortality). RESULTS: Over 5 years, 89 patients received a total of 626 cycles of various chemotherapy regimens in Mount Isa. During the same period, 117 patients who received a total of 799 cycles of chemotherapy at TCC were eligible for inclusion in the comparison group. There were no significant differences between the Mount Isa and TCC patients in most demographic characteristics, mean numbers of treatment cycles, dose intensities, proportions of side effects, and hospital admissions. There were no toxicity-related deaths in either group. CONCLUSION: It appears safe to administer chemotherapy in rural towns under the supervision of medical oncologists from larger centres via teleoncology, provided that rural health care resources and governance arrangements are adequate.

The quality of clinical trials in neuroendocrine tumours; have we learnt from our mistakes? An evaluation of phase II and phase III clinical trials.

The quality and reporting of neuroendocrine tumour (NET) clinical trials has previously been found to be heterogeneous impairing trial interpretability. We aimed to perform an updated review of the quality of phase II/III clinical trials in NET to assess if trial design and reporting have improved since 2011. We performed a PubMed search for phase II/III trials evaluating systemic anticancer therapies or liver-directed therapies published between 2011 and 2018. Data collected comprised administrative data, study population characteristics, endpoints, reporting and statistical design parameters, and results. Sixty studies were included (5218 patients): 50 phase II and 10 phase III trials. Study populations were heterogeneous: 52% of trials allowed tumours from various primary sites, 28% allowed both well- and poorly-differentiated tumour morphology or did not specify, and 57% did not report proliferative indices and/or tumour grade in ≥80% of the study population. Only 36% of trials mandated radiological disease progression on participant enrolment using a validated measure. Statistical design and primary endpoint were clearly defined in 67% and 88% of trials, respectively. Toxicity (88%), radiological response rate (85%) and progression-free survival/time to progression (82%) were well reported in a majority of trials, but health-related quality of life was included in the minority. Of the randomised trials (n = 11), study populations were more homogeneous and study design was more often clearly defined; however, only 45% mandated radiological progression at baseline as measured per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours, and reporting of health-related quality of life (55%) remained suboptimal. The design and reporting of NET clinical trials, predominantly of single-arm phase II trials, remains suboptimal and has not considerably improved over time despite the growth in our knowledge of the biology and unique characteristics of NETs. Higher quality is seen in randomised trials, although certain design and reporting elements remain inadequate in some studies. We must prioritise the design and conduct of NET clinical trials to effectively inform future research and guide practice change.

Impact of adjuvant therapy in patients with a microscopically positive margin after resection for gastric and esophageal cancers.

BACKGROUND: A microscopically positive (R1) resection margin following resection for gastric and esophageal cancers has been documented to be a poor prognostic factor. The optimal strategy and impact of different modalities of adjuvant treatment for an R1 resection margin remain unclear. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed for patients with gastric and esophageal adenocarcinoma treated at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (PMCC) from 2006-2016. Electronic medical records of all patients with an R1 resection margin were reviewed. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards methods were used to analyze recurrence free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) with stage and neoadjuvant treatment as covariates in the multivariate analysis. RESULTS: We identified 69 gastric and esophageal adenocarcinoma patients with a R1 resection. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation was used in 13% of patients, neoadjuvant chemotherapy in 12%, surgery alone in 75%. Margins involved included proximal in 30%, distal in 14%, radial in 52% and multiple margins in 3% of patients. Pathological staging showed 3% with stage I disease, 20% stage II and 74% stage III. Adjuvant therapy was given in 52% of R1 pts (28% CRT, 20% chemotherapy alone, 3% radiation alone, 1% reoperation). Median RFS was 14.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 11.1-17.2]. The site of first recurrence was 72% distant, 12% mixed, 16% locoregional alone. Median OS was 34.5 months (95% CI, 23.3-57.9) for all patients. There was no significant difference in RFS (adjusted P=0.26) or OS (adjusted P=0.83) comparing modality of adjuvant therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with positive margins after resection for gastric and esophageal cancer had advanced pathologic stage and prognosis was poor. Our study did not find improved RFS or OS with adjuvant treatment and only one patient had reresection. The main failure pattern was distant recurrence, suggesting that patients being considered for adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) should be carefully selected. Further studies are required to determine factors to select patients with good prognosis despite a positive margin, or those who may benefit from adjuvant treatment.

Surveillance and outcomes after curative resection for gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The goal of surveillance testing is to enable curative salvage therapy through early disease detection, however supporting evidence in gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma is limited. We evaluated frequency of successful salvage therapy and outcomes in patients who underwent surveillance. METHODS: A single-site, retrospective cohort study was conducted to identify all patients who received curative resection for gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Surveillance testing were those investigations not triggered by abnormal symptoms, physical examination, or blood tests. Successful salvage therapy was any potentially curative therapy for disease recurrence which resulted in postrecurrence disease-free survival ≥2 years. Time-to-event data were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log rank tests. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2016, 210 consecutive patients were reviewed. Esophageal (14%), gastroesophageal junction (40%), and gastric adenocarcinomas (45%) were treated with surgery alone (29%) or multimodality therapy (71%). Adjuvant therapy was administered in 35%. At median follow-up of 38.3 months, 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was 56%. Among 97 recurrences, 53% were surveillance-detected, and 46% were symptomatic. None was detected by surveillance endoscopy. Median time-to-recurrence (TTR) was 14.8 months. Recurrences included locoregional only (4%), distant (86%), and both (10%). Salvage therapy was attempted in 15 patients, 4 were successful. Compared to symptomatic recurrences, patients with surveillance-detected recurrences had longer median OS (36.2 vs 23.7 months, P = .004) and postrecurrence survival (PRS, 16.5 vs 4.6 months, P < .001), but similar TTR (16.2 vs 13.3 months, P = .40) and duration of palliative chemotherapy (3.9 vs 3.3 months, P = .64). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients surveyed, 96% of recurrences were distant, and salvage therapy was successful in only 1.9% of patients. Longer OS in patients with surveillance-detected compared to symptomatic recurrences was not associated with significant earlier disease detection, and may be contributed by differences in disease biology. Further prospective data are warranted to establish the benefit of surveillance testing in gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Referral rates to multidisciplinary team meetings: Is there disparity between tumour streams?

INTRODUCTION: The multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM) approach is accepted as standard of care to optimise treatment for patients diagnosed with cancer. This retrospective audit reviews the proportion of patients whose care is being discussed at cancer MDTMs within the Sunshine Coast Hospital and Health Service (SCHHS). METHODS: Patients included were those diagnosed with cancer within the SCHHS between 2010 and 2015, and subsequently referred to a public MDTM for discussion. Data were extracted from the Queensland Cancer Control Analysis Team (QCCAT) database regarding the incidence of breast, lung, upper gastrointestinal (GI), colorectal, genitourinary and malignant haematological cancers and the number of patients referred to the corresponding MDTM. RESULTS: Data from 2015 show referral rates to MDTMs as follows: lung 100%, upper gastrointestinal 100%, colorectal 64%, breast 60%, malignant haematology 40% and genitourinary 28%. Of the genitourinary presentations, 70% were prostate cases and 14% bladder cases. Review of genitourinary MDTM outcomes found that, of the patients with prostate cancer discussed, 30% were metastatic, 19% were poor surgical candidates and 15% had biochemical recurrence. CONCLUSION: This audit demonstrates variable utilisation of MDTMs between tumour streams. Our study shows a high and increasing referral rate to all tumour stream MDTMs except for genitourinary. This suggests a possible underutilisation of genitourinary MDTMs to discuss treatment options for patients with genitourinary cancer. Collaborative research is warranted to further investigate whether this is a local or widespread issue.

Patterns of care for stage III non-small cell lung cancer in Australia.

Stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) makes up a third of all NSCLC cases and is potentially curable. Despite this 5-year survival rates remain between 15% and 20% with chemoradiation treatment alone given with curative intent. With the recent exciting breakthroughs in immunotherapy use (durvalumab) for stage III NSCLC, further improvements in patient survival can be expected. Most patients with stage III NSCLC present initially to their general practitioner (GP). The recommended time from GP referral to first specialist appointment is less than 14 days with treatment initiated within 42 days. Our review found that there is a shortfall in meeting these recommendations, however a number of initiatives have been established in Australia to improve timely and accurate diagnosis and treatment patterns. The lung cancer multidisciplinary team (MDT) is critical to consistency of evidence-based diagnosis and treatment and can improve patient survival. We aimed to review current patterns of care and clinical practice recommendations for stage III NSCLC across Australia and identify opportunities to improve practice in referral, diagnosis and treatment pathways.

Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor Producing Insulin and Vasopressin.

The objective of the study is to report a rare case of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (pNET) producing insulin and vasopressin. We describe the clinical presentation and management of a metastatic pNET with refractory hypoglycemia and progressive severe hyponatremia. A 52-year-old patient had abdominal pain leading to the diagnosis of a tumor that was initially presumed to be splenic in origin. Investigations ultimately identified a pancreatic mass that on biopsy proved to be a pNET. Eventually, he developed extensive liver metastases, and with tumor progression, he manifested hypoglycemia and severe hyponatremia. He was managed with multiple therapies including somatostatin analogue, peptide-receptor-radionuclide-therapy (PRRT), diazoxide, and everolimus; none of these therapeutic modalities was successful in controlling functional and structural progression of the tumor. Ultimately, the pNET proved fatal and autopsy confirmed widely metastatic disease that stained strongly and diffusely for vasopressin, a feature not seen in the previous liver biopsy. This case illustrates the challenges of diagnosis and management of aggressive insulin-producing pNETs and highlights the potential concomitant ectopic production of vasopressin leading to refractory hyponatremia.

Targeted therapy for non-small cell lung cancer: current standards and the promise of the future.

In recent years, there has been a major paradigm shift in the management of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). NSCLC should now be further sub-classified by histology and driver mutation if one is known or present. Translational research advances now allow such mutations to be inhibited by either receptor monoclonal antibodies (mAb) or small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI). Whilst empirical chemotherapy with a platinum-doublet remains the gold standard for advanced NSCLC without a known driver mutation, targeted therapy is pushing the boundary to significantly improve patient outcomes and quality of life. In this review, we will examine the major subtypes of oncogenic drivers behind NSCLC as well as the development of targeted agents available to treat them both now and in the foreseeable future.

Chemotherapy advances in small-cell lung cancer.

Although chemotherapeutic advances have recently been heralded in lung adenocarcinomas, such success with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) has been ominously absent. Indeed, the dismal outlook of this disease is exemplified by the failure of any significant advances in first line therapy since the introduction of the current standard platinum-etoposide doublet over 30 years ago. Moreover, such sluggish progress is compounded by the dearth of FDA-approved agents for patients with relapsed disease. However, over the past decade, novel formulations of drug classes commonly used in SCLC (e.g. topoisomerase inhibitors, anthracyclines, alkylating and platinum agents) are emerging as potential alternatives that could effectively add to the armamentarium of agents currently at our disposal. This review is introduced with an overview on the historical development of chemotherapeutic regimens used in this disease and followed by the recent encouraging advances witnessed in clinical trials with drugs such as amrubicin and belotecan which are forging new horizons for future treatment algorithms.