Personalized dendritic cell vaccine in multimodal individualized combination therapy improves survival in high-risk pediatric cancer patients.

A lot of hope for high-risk cancers is being pinned on immunotherapy but the evidence in children is lacking due to the rarity and limited efficacy of single-agent approaches. Here, we aim to assess the effectiveness of multimodal therapy comprising a personalized dendritic cell (DC) vaccine in children with relapsed and/or high-risk solid tumors using the N-of-1 approach in real-world scenario. A total of 160 evaluable events occurred in 48 patients during the 4-year follow-up. Overall survival of the cohort was 7.03 years. Disease control after vaccination was achieved in 53.8% patients. Comparative survival analysis showed the beneficial effect of DC vaccine beyond 2 years from initial diagnosis (HR = 0.53, P = .048) or in patients with disease control (HR = 0.16, P = .00053). A trend for synergistic effect with metronomic cyclophosphamide and/or vinblastine was indicated (HR = 0.60 P = .225). A strong synergistic effect was found for immune check-point inhibitors (ICIs) after priming with the DC vaccine (HR = 0.40, P = .0047). In conclusion, the personalized DC vaccine was an effective component in the multimodal individualized treatment. Personalized DC vaccine was effective in less burdened or more indolent diseases with a favorable safety profile and synergized with metronomic and/or immunomodulating agents.

11C-methionine in the diagnostics and management of glioblastoma patients with rapid early progression: nonrandomized, open label, prospective clinical trial (GlioMET).

BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common and aggressive primary brain cancer. The treatment of GBM consists of a combination of surgery and subsequent oncological therapy, i.e., radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or their combination. If postoperative oncological therapy involves irradiation, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is used for radiotherapy treatment planning. Unfortunately, in some cases, a very early worsening (progression) or return (recurrence) of the disease is observed several weeks after the surgery and is called rapid early progression (REP). Radiotherapy planning is currently based on MRI for target volumes definitions in many radiotherapy facilities. However, patients with REP may benefit from targeting radiotherapy with other imaging modalities. The purpose of the presented clinical trial is to evaluate the utility of 11C-methionine in optimizing radiotherapy for glioblastoma patients with REP. METHODS: This study is a nonrandomized, open-label, parallel-setting, prospective, monocentric clinical trial. The main aim of this study was to refine the diagnosis in patients with GBM with REP and to optimize subsequent radiotherapy planning. Glioblastoma patients who develop REP within approximately 6 weeks after surgery will undergo 11C-methionine positron emission tomography (PET/CT) examinations. Target volumes for radiotherapy are defined using both standard planning T1-weighted contrast-enhanced MRI and PET/CT. The primary outcome is progression-free survival defined using RANO criteria and compared to a historical cohort with REP treated without PET/CT optimization of radiotherapy. DISCUSSION: PET is one of the most modern methods of molecular imaging. 11C-Methionine is an example of a radiolabelled (carbon 11) amino acid commonly used in the diagnosis of brain tumors and in the evaluation of response to treatment. Optimized radiotherapy may also have the potential to cover those regions with a high risk of subsequent progression, which would not be identified using standard-of-care MRI for radiotherapy planning. This is one of the first study focused on radiotherapy optimization for subgroup of patinets with REP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05608395, registered on 8.11.2022 in clinicaltrials.gov; EudraCT Number: 2020-000640-64, registered on 26.5.2020 in clinicaltrialsregister.eu. Protocol ID: MOU-2020-01, version 3.2, date 18.09.2020.

Effect of Prophylactic Fibrinogen Concentrate In Scoliosis Surgery (EFISS): a study protocol of two-arm, randomised trial.

INTRODUCTION: Fibrinogen is one of the essential coagulation factors. Preoperative lower plasma fibrinogen level has been associated with higher blood loss. Scoliosis surgery presents a challenge for the anaesthetic team, one of the reasons being blood loss and transfusion management. Recently, the prophylactic fibrinogen administration has been a debated topic in various indications. It has been described for example, in urological or cardiovascular surgery, as well as in paediatrics. This pilot study is focused on verifying the feasibility of potential large randomised trial and verifying the safety of prophylactic fibrinogen administration in paediatric scoliosis surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A total of 32 paediatric patients indicated for scoliosis surgery will be recruited. Participants will be randomised into study groups in a 1:1 allocation ratio. Patients in the intervention group will receive prophylactic single dose of fibrinogen, in addition to standard of care. Patients in the control group will receive standard of care without study medication prior to skin incision. The primary aim is to assess the safety of prophylactic fibrinogen administration during scoliosis surgery in children, the incidence of any adverse events (AEs) and reactions will be monitored during participation in the study. The secondary objective is to investigate the additional safety information, feasibility and efficacy of a prophylactic fibrinogen administration. The incidence of AEs and reactions according to selected adverse events of special interest will be monitored. All collected data will be subjected to statistical analysis according to a separate statistical analysis plan. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial follows the applicable legislation and requirements for good clinical practice according to the International Conference on Harmonisation E6(R2). All essential trial documents were approved by the relevant ethics committee and national regulatory authority (State Institute for Drug Control) and their potential amendments will be submitted for approval. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05391412.

The risk of second primary malignancies in colorectal cancer patients using calcium channel blockers.

Calcium channel blockers are among the most commonly used agents in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases. There are several known side-effects associated with their long-term use, whereas other potential adverse effects are yet to be proven. This study aims to evaluate the association between calcium channel blockers exposure and the incidence of second primary malignancy. We established a cohort of 1401 patients with colorectal cancer diagnosed in our institution between January 2003 and December 2016. Patients were followed-up until December 2020. The tumor characteristics and basic clinical data including medication information were obtained from the hospital information system database. Second malignancy was detected in 301 patients (21.5%), and occurred in 27.8% of patients who used calcium channel blockers compared to only 19.9% among non-users. Their use was associated with an increased incidence of bladder cancer in particular. Subanalysis of patients with second malignancy displayed a higher proportion of right-sided colon cancer compared to rectal carcinoma in non-users. Survival analysis revealed significantly better outcomes in early-stage colorectal cancer patients without a history of calcium channel blockers treatment or second primary malignancy.

Emergency medicine pharmacotherapy compromises accuracy of plasma creatinine determination by enzyme-based methods: real-world clinical evidence and implications for clinical practice.

Background: Assessment of kidney function in emergency settings is essential across all medical subspecialties. Daily assessment of patient creatinine results from emergency medical services showed that some deviated from expected values, implying drug-related interference. Methods: Real-time clinical evaluation of an enzyme method (Roche CREP2) in comparison with the Jaffé gen. 2 method (Roche CREJ2) was performed. During the period of December 2022 and January 2023, we analyzed 8,498 patient samples, where 5,524 were heavily medicated STAT patient specimens, 500 were pediatric specimens, and 2,474 were from a distant general population in a different region using the same methods. Results: In 109 out of 5,524 hospital specimens (1.97%, p < 0.001), the CREP2 value was apparently (25% or more) lower than CREJ2. Suspect interfering medication was found in a sample of 43 out of 46 reviewed patients where medication data were available. This phenomenon was not observed in the general population. Conclusion: In a polymedicated urgent care hospital population, a creatinine enzyme method produces unreliable results, apparently due to multiple drug-related interferences.

Use of Hypolipidemic Drugs and the Risk of Second Primary Malignancy in Colorectal Cancer Patients.

An increasing number of studies has brought evidence of the protective role of statin use against different types of cancer. However, data on their association with second primary malignancies (SPMs) are lacking. The purpose of this study was to determine the role of hypolipidemic treatment in the prevention of second primary cancer in colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors. We conducted a retrospective single-institution study of 1401 patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer from January 2003 to December 2016, with follow-up until December 2020. An SPM was detected in 301 patients (21%), and the incidence was significantly lower in patients with statin medication. However, stratification by cancer types revealed an increased incidence of bladder and gastric cancer in hypolipidemic users. A Kaplan-Meier analysis of early-stage CRC survivors with an SPM showed a significant survival benefit in patients without a history of hypolipidemic treatment. Despite the protective role of statins on overall second cancer incidence, these data indicate that CRC survivors treated with hypolipidemic drugs should be screened more cautiously for SPMs, especially for gastric and bladder cancer.

Effect of dexamethasone in patients with ARDS and COVID-19 - prospective, multi-centre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial (REMED trial): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this study is to test the hypothesis that administration of dexamethasone 20 mg is superior to a 6 mg dose in adult patients with moderate or severe ARDS due to confirmed COVID-19. The secondary objective is to investigate the efficacy and safety of dexamethasone 20 mg versus dexamethasone 6 mg. The exploratory objective of this study is to assess long-term consequences on mortality and quality of life at 180 and 360 days. TRIAL DESIGN: REMED is a prospective, phase II, open-label, randomised controlled trial testing superiority of dexamethasone 20 mg vs 6 mg. The trial aims to be pragmatic, i.e. designed to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention in conditions that are close to real-life routine clinical practice. PARTICIPANTS: The study is multi-centre and will be conducted in the intensive care units (ICUs) of ten university hospitals in the Czech Republic. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Subjects will be eligible for the trial if they meet all of the following criteria: 1. Adult (≥18 years of age) at time of enrolment; 2. Present COVID-19 (infection confirmed by RT-PCR or antigen testing); 3. Intubation/mechanical ventilation or ongoing high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy; 4. Moderate or severe ARDS according to Berlin criteria: • Moderate - PaO2/FiO2 100-200 mmHg; • Severe - PaO2/FiO2 < 100 mmHg; 5. Admission to ICU in the last 24 hours. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Subjects will not be eligible for the trial if they meet any of the following criteria: 1. Known allergy/hypersensitivity to dexamethasone or excipients of the investigational medicinal product (e.g. parabens, benzyl alcohol); 2. Fulfilled criteria for ARDS for ≥14 days at enrolment; 3. Pregnancy or breastfeeding; 4. Unwillingness to comply with contraception measurements from enrolment until at least 1 week after the last dose of dexamethasone (sexual abstinence is considered an adequate contraception method); 5. End-of-life decision or patient is expected to die within next 24 hours; 6. Decision not to intubate or ceilings of care in place; 7. Immunosuppression and/or immunosuppressive drugs in medical history: a) Systemic immunosuppressive drugs or chemotherapy in the past 30 days; b) Systemic corticosteroid use before hospitalization; c) Any dose of dexamethasone during the present hospital stay for COVID-19 for ≥5 days before enrolment; d) Systemic corticosteroids during present hospital stay for conditions other than COVID-19 (e.g. septic shock); 8. Current haematological or generalized solid malignancy; 9. Any contraindication for corticosteroid administration, e.g. • intractable hyperglycaemia; • active gastrointestinal bleeding; • adrenal gland disorders; • presence of superinfection diagnosed with locally established clinical and laboratory criteria without adequate antimicrobial treatment; 10. Cardiac arrest before ICU admission; 11. Participation in another interventional trial in the last 30 days. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Dexamethasone solution for injection/infusion is the investigational medicinal product as well as the comparator. The trial will assess two doses, 20 mg (investigational) vs 6 mg (comparator). Patients in the intervention group will receive dexamethasone 20 mg intravenously once daily on day 1-5, followed by dexamethasone 10 mg intravenously once daily on day 6-10. Patients in the control group will receive dexamethasone 6 mg day 1-10. All authorized medicinal products containing dexamethasone in the form of solution for i.v. injection/infusion can be used. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary endpoint: Number of ventilator-free days (VFDs) at 28 days after randomisation, defined as being alive and free from mechanical ventilation. SECONDARY ENDPOINTS: a) Mortality from any cause at 60 days after randomisation; b) Dynamics of inflammatory marker (C-Reactive Protein, CRP) change from Day 1 to Day 14; c) WHO Clinical Progression Scale at Day 14; d) Adverse events related to corticosteroids (new infections, new thrombotic complications) until Day 28 or hospital discharge; e) Independence at 90 days after randomisation assessed by Barthel Index. The long-term outcomes of this study are to assess long-term consequences on mortality and quality of life at 180 and 360 days through telephone structured interviews using the Barthel Index. RANDOMISATION: Randomisation will be carried out within the electronic case report form (eCRF) by the stratified permuted block randomisation method. Allocation sequences will be prepared by a statistician independent of the study team. Allocation to the treatment arm of an individual patient will not be available to the investigators before completion of the whole randomisation process. The following stratification factors will be applied: • Age <65 and ≥ 65; • Charlson Comorbidity index (CCI) <3 and ≥3; • CRP <150 mg/L and ≥150 mg/L • Trial centre. Patients will be randomised in a 1 : 1 ratio into one of the two treatment arms. Randomisation through the eCRF will be available 24 hours every day. BLINDING (MASKING): This is an open-label trial in which the participants and the study staff will be aware of the allocated intervention. Blinded pre-planned statistical analysis will be performed. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The sample size is calculated to detect the difference of 3 VFDs at 28 days (primary efficacy endpoint) between the two treatment arms with a two-sided type I error of 0.05 and power of 80%. Based on data from a multi-centre randomised controlled trial in COVID-19 ARDS patients in Brazil and a multi-centre observational study from French and Belgian ICUs regarding moderate to severe ARDS related to COVID-19, investigators assumed a standard deviation of VFD at 28 days as 9. Using these assumptions, a total of 142 patients per treatment arm would be needed. After adjustment for a drop-out rate, 150 per treatment arm (300 patients per study) will be enrolled. TRIAL STATUS: This is protocol version 1.1, 15.01.2021. The trial is due to start on 2 February 2021 and recruitment is expected to be completed by December 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study protocol was registered on EudraCT No.:2020-005887-70, and on December 11, 2020 on ClinicalTrials.gov (Title: Effect of Two Different Doses of Dexamethasone in Patients With ARDS and COVID-19 (REMED)) Identifier: NCT04663555 with a last update posted on February 1, 2021. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol (version 1.1) is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the standard formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Penis as a primary site of an extraskeletal Ewing sarcoma: A case report.

RATIONALE: The Ewing sarcoma family of malignant tumors is a group of tumors characterized by morphologically similar round-cell neoplasms and by the presence of a common chromosomal translocation; Ewing sarcoma family of tumors typically occur in children and young adults between 4 to 15 years of age. The primary tumor usually originates in the bone, extraskeletal localization is rare. PATIENT CONCERN: We present a case report concerning a 32-year-old male patient with a primary involvement of the penis. DIAGNOSIS: The histopathology from the first penile biopsy showed a small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma; however, that result was based on a sample obtained at a different facility than the Sarcoma Center, where the investigating pathologist did not have the adequate expertise. The patient then underwent a radical penectomy and a second reading of the histology was demanded after a radical penile amputation when Ewing sarcoma with R1 resection was confirmed. INTERVENTIONS: The patient was referred to the national Sarcoma Center, where - using a multidisciplinary approach - the treatment was started with curative intent. However, it was preceded by a non-standard initiation of the therapy due to the poor primary diagnosis. OUTCOMES: The non-standard therapy at the onset of the disease caused a poor prognosis of an otherwise curable diagnosis. Despite all that, the patient survived for a relatively long time. LESSONS: The treatment of sarcomas with atypical localizations should be conducted by an experienced multidisciplinary team in a center with experience in sarcoma treatment.

Second primary malignancies in colorectal cancer patients.

The prevalence of second primary malignancies (SPMs) in the western world is continually increasing with the risk of a new primary cancer in patients with previously diagnosed carcinoma at about 20%. The aim of this retrospective analysis is to identify SPMs in colorectal cancer patients in a single-institution cohort, describe the most frequent SPMs in colorectal cancer patients, and discover the time period to occurrence of second primary tumors. We identified 1174 patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer in the period 2003-2013, with follow-up till 31.12.2018, and median follow-up of 10.1 years, (median age 63 years, 724 men). A second primary neoplasm was diagnosed in 234 patients (19.9%). Older age patients, those with early-stage disease and those with no relapse have a higher risk of secondary cancer development. The median time from cancer diagnosis to development of CRC was 8.9 years for breast cancer and 3.4 years for prostate cancer. For the most common cancer diagnosis after primary CRC, the median time to development was 0-5.2 years, depending on the type of malignancy. Patients with a diagnosis of breast, prostate, or kidney cancer, or melanoma should be regularly screened for CRC. CRC patients should also be screened for additional CRC as well as cancers of the breast, prostate, kidney, and bladder. The screening of cancer patients for the most frequent malignancies along with systematic patient education in this field should be the standard of surveillance for colorectal cancer patients.

PET/CT-tailored treatment of locally advanced oesophago-gastric junction adenocarcinoma: a report on the feasibility of the multicenter GastroPET study.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative chemotherapy is a recommended treatment approach for localised oesophago-gastric junction adenocarcinoma, but not all patients respond to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Early identification of non-responders and treatment adaptation in the preoperative period could improve outcomes. GastroPET is a national, multicentre phase II trial evaluating a 18FDG-PET/CT-guided preoperative treatment strategy with the R0 resection rate as a primary endpoint. Here, we report on the accuracy of the methodology, the feasibility of the study design and patient safety data after enrolment of the first 63 patients. METHODS: Patients with locally advanced oesophago-gastric junction adenocarcinoma (Siewert I - III) stage Ib-IIIc underwent baseline 18FDG-PET/CT scanning and re-evaluation after 14 days of oxaliplatinum-5FU-(docetaxel) chemotherapy. Responders were defined by a ⩾ 35% decrease in tumour FDG standardised uptake value (SUV)average from baseline. Responders continued with the same chemotherapy for 2 to 3 months prior to surgery. PET-non-responders switched to preoperative chemoradiotherapy [weekly carboplatin and paclitaxel with concurrent radiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions)]. Here, we aim to confirm the feasibility of FDG-PET-based response assessment in a multicenter setting and to compare local versus central reading. In addition, we report on the feasibility of the study conduct and patient safety data. RESULTS: A total of 64 patients received baseline and sequential 14-day 18FDG-PET/CT scanning. And, 63 were allocated to the respective treatment arm according to PET-response [35 (56%) responders and 28 (44%) non-responders]. The concordance of local versus central reading of SUV changes was 100%. Until the date of this analysis, 47 patients (28 responders and 19 non-responders) completed surgery. Postoperative complications of grade ⩾ 3 (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, CTCAE Version 5.0) were reported in five responders (18%; 95% CI: 7.9-36%) and two non-responders (11%; 95% CI: 2.9-31%), with no statistical difference (p = 0.685). One patient in each arm died after surgery, leading to a postoperative in-hospital mortality rate of 4.3% (2/47 patients; 95% CI: 1.2-14%). CONCLUSION: Local and central FDG-SUV quantification and PET-response assessment showed high concordance. This confirms the accuracy of a PET-response-guided treatment algorithm for locally advanced oesophago-gastric junction cancer in a multicenter setting. Preoperative treatment adaptation revealed feasible and safe for patients.

Everolimus-related unilateral abdominal lymphedema in a renal cancer patient: A case report.

RATIONALE: Unilateral manifestation of lymphedema during everolimus therapy has been described only rarely, mostly in transplant recipients. PATIENT CONCERNS: We report the first case of a patient who developed unilateral abdominal lymphedema, during a short period of everolimus treatment for renal cancer. DIAGNOSIS: The abdominal asymmetry occurred only on the right side of the abdomen, neither ultrasound nor CT scan detected ascites but showed enlargement of the abdominal wall. The Naranjo Adverse Drug Reaction Probability scale was evaluated, in this case, a score of 6 indicated a probable adverse reaction to everolimus. INTERVENTIONS: Discontinuation of everolimus therapy led to immediate alleviation and reduction of the lymphedema, with worsening once again after initiating retreatment with everolimus at a reduced dose. OUTCOMES: The patient's lymphedema recovered after discontinuation of everolimus. LESSONS: This rare case demonstrates the importance of the selection of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors using caution, especially for patients with a high risk of developing lymphedema.

Effects of Early and Systematic Integration of Specialist Palliative Care in Patients with Advanced Cancer: Randomized Controlled Trial PALINT.

Background: A broad consensus on the optimal structure, intensity, and timing of early specialist palliative care (SPC) intervention is lacking. Objective: To evaluate the benefit of an early and systematic palliative intervention alongside standard oncology care compared with standard oncology care alone in patients with advanced solid tumors. Design: PALINT, a single-center RCT, conducted at the Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute, the largest comprehensive cancer center in the Czech Republic (CR). Setting/Subjects/Measurements: Patients with newly diagnosed advanced cancer within six weeks from the start of the palliative systemic therapy were randomly assigned to the integration of SPC (intervention; a consultation with a PC physician every six to eight weeks) or to the standard oncology care (control). The primary endpoint was the quality of life (QOL) assessed by EORTC QLQ C30 and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) at three and six months. Results: From 2015 to 2017, a total of 126 patients were randomly assigned to intervention (60) or to control (66) arm. At baseline, at three and six months, the global QOL scores (mean, 95% CI) in the intervention and control arm were 58.6 (53.9-63.3), 61.9 (56.4-67.4) and 66.7 (60.2-73.2) versus 54.2 (49.4-58.9), 59.0 (53.7-64.3), and 62.8 (56.7-68.9), respectively. The prevalence of anxiety (HADS-A; value >7) was 36.7%, 27.5%, and 18.9% versus 34.8%, 23.5%, and 16.3% and the prevalence of depression (HADS-D; value >7) was 28.3%, 25.4%, and 29.7% versus 28.8%, 29.4%, and 27.9%, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two arms. The overall survival was similar in both arms (347 vs. 310 days; p = 0.203). Conclusions: A model of early integration of SPC consisting of a consultation with a PC physician alone every six to eight weeks did not increase the QOL of patients with advanced cancer compared with routine oncology care in a center with widely available supportive services. These negative results underline the importance of the multidisciplinary patient centered approach in the early SPC.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of olaparib in patients with advanced solid tumours and mild or moderate hepatic impairment.

AIMS: Olaparib, a potent oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, is partially hepatically cleared. We investigated the pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of olaparib in patients with mild or moderate hepatic impairment to provide dosing recommendations. METHODS: This Phase I open-label study assessed the PK, safety and tolerability of single doses of olaparib 300-mg tablets in patients with advanced solid tumours. Patients had normal hepatic function (NHF), or mild (MiHI; Child-Pugh class A) or moderate (MoHI; Child-Pugh class B) hepatic impairment. Blood was collected for PK assessments for 96 hours. Patients could continue taking olaparib 300 mg twice daily for long-term safety assessment. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients received ≥1 dose of olaparib and 30 were included in the PK assessment. Patients with MiHI had an area under the curve geometric least-squares mean (GLSmean) ratio of 1.15 (90% confidence interval 0.72, 1.83) and a GLSmean maximum plasma concentration ratio of 1.13 (0.82, 1.56) vs those with NHF. In patients with MoHI, GLSmean ratio for area under the curve was 1.08 (0.66, 1.74) and for maximum plasma concentration was 0.87 (0.63, 1.22) vs those with NHF. For patients with mild or moderate hepatic impairment, no new safety signals were detected. CONCLUSION: Patients with MiHI or MoHI had no clinically significant changes in exposure to olaparib compared with patients with NHF. The safety profile of olaparib did not differ from a clinically relevant extent between cohorts. No olaparib tablet or capsule dose reductions are required for patients with MiHI or MoHI.

The Impact of Diabetes Mellitus on the Second Primary Malignancies in Colorectal Cancer Patients.

INTRODUCTION: All colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors have an increased risk of developing second primary malignancies (SPMs). The association between diabetes mellitus (DM) and the risk of cancer is well known. However, the role of DM and its therapy in the development of SPMs in CRC patients is not well described. METHODS: In this single-institutional retrospective analysis we identified 1,174 colorectal carcinoma patients, median follow-up 10.1 years, (median age 63 years, 724 men). All patients over 18 years with histologically confirmed CRC who were admitted in the period 1.1. 2003- 31.12.2013 and followed-up till 31.12. 2018 at the Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute (MMCI) were screened for eligibility. The exclusion criteria were CRC diagnosed at autopsy, lost to follow-up and high risk of development of SPMs due to hereditary cancer syndrome. Tumours are considered multiple primary malignancies if arising in different sites and/or are of a different histology or morphology group. Comparisons of the basic characteristics between the patients with SPM and the patients without SPM were performed as well as comparison of the occurrence of SPMs by the site of diagnosis between the DM and non-DM cohorts and survival analyses. RESULTS: A SPM was diagnosed in 234 (20%) patients, DM in 183 (15%) patients. DM was diagnosed in 22.6% of those with SPM vs. in 13.8% of those without SPM (p=0.001). The most common types of SPMs in DM patients were other CRC, kidney, lung, bladder and nonmelanoma skin cancer, but only carcinoma of the liver and bile duct tracts was significantly more common than in the group without DM. Although breast cancer was the second most common in the group with DM, its incidence was lower than in the group without DM, as well as prostate cancer. A significantly higher incidence of SPMs was found in older CRC patients (≥ 65 years) and in those with lower stage colon cancer and DM. No significant difference in DM treatment between those with and without a SPM was observed including analysis of type of insulin. CONCLUSION: CRC patients with diabetes mellitus, especially those with older age, and early stages of colon cancer, should be screened for second primary malignancies more often than the standard population. Patients without DM have longer survival. According to the occurrence of the most common second malignancies, a clinical examination, blood count, and ultrasound of the abdomen is appropriate, together with standard breast and colorectal cancer screening, and lung cancer screening under certain conditions, and should be recommended in CRC survivors especially in patients with intercurrent DM, however the necessary frequency of screening remains unclear.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Sunitinib in Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors and Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in Adults-A Review.

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib is an inhibitor of multiple receptor tyrosine kinases and is a standard-of-care treatment for advanced and metastatic renal cell carcinoma and a second-line treatment in locally advanced inoperable and metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors. A fixed dose of the drug, however, does not produce a uniform therapeutic outcome in all patients, and many face adverse effects and/or toxicity. One of the possible causes of the interindividual variability in the efficacy and toxicity response is the highly variable systemic exposure to sunitinib and its active metabolite. This review aims to summarize all available clinical evidence of the treatment of adult patients using sunitinib in approved indications, addressing the necessity to introduce proper and robust therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of sunitinib and its major metabolite, N-desethylsunitinib. METHODS: The authors performed a systematic search of the available scientific literature using the PubMed online database. The search terms were "sunitinib" AND "therapeutic drug monitoring" OR "TDM" OR "plasma levels" OR "concentration" OR "exposure." The search yielded 520 journal articles. In total, 447 publications were excluded because they lacked sufficient relevance to the reviewed topic. The remaining 73 articles were, together with currently valid guidelines, thoroughly reviewed. RESULTS: There is sufficient evidence confirming the concentration-efficacy and concentration-toxicity relationship in the indications of gastrointestinal stromal tumors and metastatic renal clear-cell carcinoma. For optimal therapeutic response, total (sunitinib + N-desethylsunitinib) trough levels of 50-100 ng/mL serve as a reasonable target therapeutic range. To avoid toxicity, the total trough levels should not exceed 100 ng/mL. CONCLUSIONS: According to the current evidence presented in this review, a TDM-guided dose modification of sunitinib in selected groups of patients could provide a better treatment outcome while simultaneously preventing sunitinib toxicity.

Assessment of Immune Response Following Dendritic Cell-Based Immunotherapy in Pediatric Patients With Relapsing Sarcoma.

Monocyte-derived dendritic cell (DC)-based vaccines loaded with tumor self-antigens represent a novel approach in anticancer therapy. We evaluated DC-based anticancer immunotherapy (ITx) in an academic Phase I/II clinical trial for children, adolescent, and young adults with progressive, recurrent, or primarily metastatic high-risk tumors. The primary endpoint was safety of intradermal administration of manufactured DCs. Here, we focused on relapsing high-risk sarcoma subgroup representing a major diagnosis in DC clinical trial. As a part of peripheral blood immunomonitoring, we evaluated quantitative association between basic cell-based immune parameters. Furthermore, we describe the pattern of these parameters and their time-dependent variations during the DC vaccination in the peripheral blood immunograms. The peripheral blood immunograms revealed distinct patterns in particular patients in the study group. As a functional testing, we evaluated immune response of patient T-cells to the tumor antigens presented by DCs in the autoMLR proliferation assay. This analysis was performed with T-cells obtained prior to DC ITx initiation and with T-cells collected after the fifth dose of DCs, demonstrating that the anticancer DC-based vaccine stimulates a preexisting immune response against self-tumor antigens. Finally, we present clinical and immunological findings in a Ewing's sarcoma patient with an interesting clinical course. Prior to DC therapy, we observed prevailing CD8+ T-cell stimulation and low immunosuppressive monocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells (M-MDSC) and regulatory T-cells (Tregs). This patient was subsequently treated with 19 doses of DCs and experienced substantial regression of metastatic lesions after second disease relapse and was further rechallenged with DCs. In this patient, functional ex vivo testing of autologous T-cell activation by manufactured DC medicinal product during the course of DC ITx revealed that personalized anticancer DC-based vaccine stimulates a preexisting immune response against self-tumor antigens and that the T-cell reactivity persisted for the period without DC treatment and was further boosted by DC rechallenge. Trial Registration Number: EudraCT 2014-003388-39.

Dendritic Cell-Based Immunotherapy in Advanced Sarcoma and Neuroblastoma Pediatric Patients: Anti-cancer Treatment Preceding Monocyte Harvest Impairs the Immunostimulatory and Antigen-Presenting Behavior of DCs and Manufacturing Process Outcome.

Despite efforts to develop novel treatment strategies, refractory and relapsing sarcoma, and high-risk neuroblastoma continue to have poor prognoses and limited overall survival. Monocyte-derived dendritic cell (DC)-based anti-cancer immunotherapy represents a promising treatment modality in these neoplasias. A DC-based anti-cancer vaccine was evaluated for safety in an academic phase-I/II clinical trial for children, adolescents, and young adults with progressive, recurrent, or primarily metastatic high-risk tumors, mainly sarcomas and neuroblastomas. The DC vaccine was loaded with self-tumor antigens obtained from patient tumor tissue. DC vaccine quality was assessed in terms of DC yield, viability, immunophenotype, production of IL-12 and IL-10, and stimulation of allogenic donor T-cells and autologous T-cells in allo-MLR and auto-MLR, respectively. Here, we show that the outcome of the manufacture of DC-based vaccine is highly variable in terms of both DC yield and DC immunostimulatory properties. In 30% of cases, manufacturing resulted in a product that failed to meet medicinal product specifications and therefore was not released for administration to a patient. Focusing on the isolation of monocytes and the pharmacotherapy preceding monocyte harvest, we show that isolation of monocytes by elutriation is not superior to adherence on plastic in terms of DC yield, viability, or immunostimulatory capacity. Trial patients having undergone monocyte-interfering pharmacotherapy prior to monocyte harvest was associated with an impaired DC-based immunotherapy product outcome. Certain combinations of anti-cancer treatment resulted in a similar pattern of inadequate DC parameters, namely, a combination of temozolomide with irinotecan was associated with DCs showing poor maturation and decreased immunostimulatory features, and a combination of pazopanib, topotecan, and MTD-based cyclophosphamide was associated with poor monocyte differentiation and decreased DC immunostimulatory parameters. Searching for a surrogate marker predicting an adverse outcome of DC manufacture in the peripheral blood complete blood count prior to monocyte harvest, we observed an association between an increased number of immature granulocytes in peripheral blood and decreased potency of the DC-based product as quantified by allo-MLR. We conclude that the DC-manufacturing yield and the immunostimulatory quality of anti-cancer DC-based vaccines generated from the monocytes of patients were not influenced by the monocyte isolation modality but were detrimentally affected by the specific combination of anti-cancer agents used prior to monocyte harvest.

The Pharmacoeconomic Analysis of Cetuximab and Panitumumab in the 1st Line Treatment of mCRC in Real Clinical Practice in the Czech Republic.

BACKGROUND: The anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) drugs cetuximab and panitumumab are currently reimbursed when administered during the first and subsequent lines of treatment of patients in the Czech Republic with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Because cetuximab and panitumumab do not show significant differences in efficacy, their choice may be dependent on cost. This retrospective study analyzed the costs of first-line treatment with cetuximab and panitumumab of patients with mCRC and wild type KRAS, as well as evaluated the correlations between costs and effectiveness, as determined by progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This analysis included 51 patients with mCRC and confirmed wild type KRAS treated at the comprehensive cancer centre in the Czech Republic between November 2011 and April 2018. Of these 51 patients, 22 were treated with cetuximab and 29 with panitumumab. Direct medical costs (medications, clinical examinations and procedures, and hospitalization) were evaluated from the initiation of treatment with anti-EGFR drug to disease progression and death. Mean follow-up was 21 months in the cetuximab group and 19 months in the panitumumab group. RESULTS: Reimbursement for anti-EGFR drugs until disease progression accounted for 71% (mean, 964,288 CZK per patient) of total costs in the cetuximab group and 77% (mean, 1,003,229 CZK per patient) of total costs in the panitumumab group, with median PFS in these two groups being 10.7 months and 8.1 months, respectively. Reimbursement of expensive center drugs from the start of anti-EGFR treatment to patient death accounted for 55% of total costs in the cetuximab group (mean, 1,752,702 CZK per patient) and 63% of total costs in the panitumumab group (mean, 1,596,919 CZK per patient), with median OS in these two groups being 20.2 months and 19.8 months, respectively. No significant between-group differences in clinical effectiveness and costs of treatment were observed (p > 0.05 each). CONCLUSION: Reimbursement for biological agents is the most expensive item in the first-line treatment of mCRC patients with wild type KRAS, both to disease progression and death. The clinical effectiveness and costs of cetuximab and panitumumab did not differ significantly. Supported by CZECRIN (identification code LM2015090); CZECRIN_4 PACIENTY (No. CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_013/0001826). The authors declare they have no potential conflicts of interest concerning drugs, products, or services used in the study. The Editorial Board declares that the manuscript met the ICMJE recommendation for biomedical papers. Submitted: 30. 4. 2019 Accepted: 17. 6. 2019.

Bevacizumab treatment in metastatic colorectal carcinoma - an economic perspective.

Targeted therapy is a significant benefit in the treatment of cancer patients. Bevacizumab improves overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The clinical effectiveness of bevacizumab is similar to its efficacy in randomised controlled trials. However, the costs of bevacizumab treatment as well as other agents of targeted treatment are discussed between the health care payers, the regulatory authorities and the members of professional societies. Biomarkers of bevacizumab treatment helpful in the selection of eligible groups of patients are still missing. This review focuses on current bevacizumab therapy of mCRC from the pharmacoeconomic perspective. The cost per a 14-day bevacizumab treatment cycle is approximately 31,000 CZK in the Czech Republic. External published pharmacoeconomics analyses have no clear conclusions. Their results are usually expressed as the cost per QALY gained in comparison with a comparator. They differ according to the economic situation of the particular countries. The pharmacoeconomic results have to be confirmed in the real clinical practice, and then the decision should be reassessed by using the uniform methodology, e.g. the Health Technology Assessment (HTA).