Reasons for non-feasibility of therapeutic drug monitoring of oral targeted therapies in oncology - an analysis of the closed cohorts of a multicentre prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) - performing dose adjustments based on measured drug levels and established pharmacokinetic (PK) targets - could optimise treatment with drugs that show large interpatient variability in exposure. We evaluated the feasibility of TDM for multiple oral targeted therapies. Here we report on drugs for which routine TDM is not feasible. METHODS: We evaluated drug cohorts from the Dutch Pharmacology Oncology Group - TDM study. Based on PK levels taken at pre-specified time points, PK-guided interventions were performed. Feasibility of TDM was evaluated, and based on the success and practicability of TDM, cohorts could be closed. RESULTS: For 10 out of 24 cohorts TDM was not feasible and inclusion was closed. A high incidence of adverse events resulted in closing the cabozantinib, dabrafenib/trametinib, everolimus, regorafenib and vismodegib cohort. The enzalutamide and erlotinib cohorts were closed because almost all PK levels were above target. Other, non-pharmacological reasons led to closing the palbociclib, olaparib and tamoxifen cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Although TDM could help personalising treatment for many drugs, the above-mentioned reasons can influence its feasibility, usefulness and clinical applicability. Therefore, routine TDM is not advised for cabozantinib, dabrafenib/trametinib, enzalutamide, erlotinib, everolimus, regorafenib and vismodegib. Nonetheless, TDM remains valuable for individual clinical decisions.

Antibodies against Platelet Glycoproteins in Clinically Suspected VITT Patients.

Vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) is a rare but severe complication following COVID-19 vaccination, marked by thrombocytopenia and thrombosis. Analogous to heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), VITT shares similarities in anti-platelet factor 4 (PF4) IgG-mediated platelet activation via the FcγRIIa. To investigate the involvement of platelet-antibodies in VITT, we analyzed the presence of platelet-antibodies directed against glycoproteins (GP)IIb/IIIa, GPV and GPIb/IX in the serum of 232 clinically suspected VITT patients determined based on (suspicion of) occurrence of thrombocytopenia and/or thrombosis in relation to COVID-19 vaccination. We found that 19% of clinically suspected VITT patients tested positive for anti-platelet GPs: 39%, 32% and 86% patients tested positive for GPIIb/IIIa, GPV and GPIb/IX, respectively. No HIT-like VITT patients (with thrombocytopenia and thrombosis) tested positive for platelet-antibodies. Therefore, it seems unlikely that platelet-antibodies play a role in HIT-like anti-PF4-mediated VITT. Platelet-antibodies were predominantly associated with the occurrence of thrombocytopenia. We found no association between the type of vaccination (adenoviral vector vaccine versus mRNA vaccine) or different vaccines (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, Ad26.COV2.S, mRNA-1273, BTN162b2) and the development of platelet-antibodies. It is essential to conduct more research on the pathophysiology of VITT, to improve diagnostic approaches and identify preventive and therapeutic strategies.

Assessing the clinical benefit of systemic anti-cancer treatments in the Netherlands: The impact of different thresholds for effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: In the Netherlands, the clinical benefit of systemic anti-cancer treatments (SACTs) is assessed by the Committee for the Evaluation of Oncological Agents (cieBOM). For non-curative SACTs, the assessment is based on the hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival and/or overall survival (OS), and the difference in median survival. We evaluated the impact of different thresholds for effectiveness by reassessing the clinical benefit of SACTs. METHODS: We reassessed SACTs that were initially assessed by cieBOM between 2015 and 2017. Four scenarios were formulated: replacing an "OR" approach (initial assessment) by an "AND" approach (used in all scenarios), changing the HR threshold from < 0.70 (initial assessment) to < 0.60, changing the threshold for the difference in median survival from > 12 weeks (initial assessment) to > 16 weeks, and including thresholds for OS rates. The outcomes of these scenarios were compared to the outcomes of the initial assessment. RESULTS: Reassessments were conducted for 41 treatments. Replacing the "OR" approach by an "AND" approach substantially decreased the number of positive assessments (from 33 to 22), predominantly affecting immunotherapies. This number further decreased (to 21 and 19, respectively) in case more restrictive thresholds for the HR and difference in median survival were used. Including thresholds for OS rates slightly mitigated the impact of applying an "AND" approach. CONCLUSIONS: The scenario-specific thresholds had a substantial impact; the number of negative assessments more than doubled. Since this was not limited to treatments with marginal survival benefits, understanding the potential challenges that may arise from applying more restrictive thresholds is essential.

Local treatment in metastatic GIST patients: A multicentre analysis from the Dutch GIST Registry.

BACKGROUND: The added value of local treatment in selected metastatic GIST patients is unclear. This study aims to provide insight into the usefulness of local treatment in metastatic GIST by use of a survey study and retrospective analyses in a clinical database. METHODS: A survey study was conducted among clinical specialists to select most relevant characteristics of metastatic GIST patients considered for local treatment, defined as elective surgery or ablation. Patients were selected from the Dutch GIST Registry. A multivariate Cox-regression model for overall survival since time of diagnosis of metastatic disease was estimated with local treatment as a time-dependent variable. An additional model was estimated to assess prognostic factors since local treatment. RESULTS: The survey's response rate was 14/16. Performance status, response to TKIs, location of active disease, number of lesions, mutation status, and time between primary diagnosis and metastases, were regarded the 6 most important characteristics. Of 457 included patients, 123 underwent local treatment, which was associated with better survival after diagnosis of metastases (HR = 0.558, 95%CI = 0.336-0.928). Progressive disease during systemic treatment (HR = 3.885, 95%CI = 1.195-12.627) and disease confined to the liver (HR = 0.269, 95%CI = 0.082-0.880) were associated with worse and better survival after local treatment, respectively. CONCLUSION: Local treatment is associated with better survival in selected patients with metastatic GIST. Locally treated patients with response to TKIs and disease confined to the liver have good clinical outcome. These results might be considered for tailoring treatment, but should be interpreted with care because only specific patients are provided with local treatment in this retrospective study.

Improved Efficacy of First-Line Imatinib in Advanced Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST): The Dutch GIST Registry Data.

BACKGROUND: Patients with unresectable and metastasized gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) experienced a remarkable improvement of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) after the introduction of imatinib. Our hypothesis is that the outcomes of treatment with imatinib are even better nowadays compared with the registration trials that were performed two decades ago. To study this, we used real-life data from a contemporary registry. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective study was performed by exploring clinical data from a prospective real-life clinical database, the Dutch GIST Registry (DGR). Patients with advanced GIST treated with first-line imatinib were included and PFS (primary outcome) and OS (secondary outcome) were analyzed. Results of our study were compared with published results of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 62005 trial, which marked the first era of imatinib in the treatment of GIST. RESULTS: Overall, 420 of the 435 patients treated with imatinib in the DGR had recorded response evaluation and were included in the analysis. During a median follow-up of 35.0 months (range 2.0-136.0), progression of GIST was eventually observed in 217 patients (51.2%). The DGR cohort showed a longer median PFS (33.0 months, 95% confidence interval [CI] 28.4-37.6) compared with the EORTC 62005 trial (an estimated PFS of 19.5 months). Additionally, the median OS of 68.0 months (95% CI 56.1-80.0) was longer than the exposed median OS (46.8 months) published in the long-term follow-up results of the EORTC 62005 trial (median follow-up duration 10.9 years). CONCLUSION: This study provides an update on outcomes of imatinib in the treatment of advanced GIST patients and demonstrates improved clinical outcomes since the first randomized studies of imatinib 2 decades ago. Furthermore, these results represent outcomes in real-world clinical practice and can serve as a reference when evaluating effectiveness of imatinib in patients with advanced GIST.

[How long are medical oncology patients in The Netherlands willing to travel for their cancer care?] / Hoe lang zijn patiënten bereid te reizen voor medisch-oncologische zorg?

BACKGROUND: The number of people with cancer will increase in the Netherlands. Further concentration and network care is pursued. The aim of this study was to explore how long medical oncology patients are willing to travel for their cancer care. METHOD: A flashmob study into patients' willingness to travel for cancer care was conducted in 65 Dutch hospitals. Patients completed a questionnaire about willingness to travel and any experienced issues with traveling. RESULTS: A total of 4337 medical oncology patients completed the questionnaire. Of the patients, 20% were willing to travel more than 1 hour (one-way) for their current treatment, and more willing to travel for treatment in a hospital more experienced in their specific type of cancer (44% more than 1 hour). Willingness to travel longer was higher among patientsagedv40 years or younger, those with higher education, with better physical functioning and with a rare cancer. Willingness to travel longer was lowest among patients aged 75 or older. Approximately 30% of all patients experienced issues with traveling, especially those with comorbidities or with decreased physical functioning. CONCLUSION: In this flashmob study, 15% of patients were willing to travel up to 30 minutes (one-way) and 44% more than 1 hour for treatment and follow-up in a hospital more experienced in their specific type of cancer. Patients aged 75 years or older were less willing to travel longer. Thirty percent of patients experienced issues with travelling. It is important to take this into account in the future organization of cancer care.

Dutch Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor (GIST) Registry Data Comparing Sunitinib with Imatinib Dose Escalation in Second-Line Advanced Non-KIT Exon 9 Mutated GIST Patients.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis of patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) has improved greatly after the introduction of imatinib. However, primary or secondary resistance to imatinib occurs in the majority of patients. Sunitinib is the standard second line treatment in exon-9 mutated GIST. OBJECTIVE: We compared the clinical outcomes of sunitinib with imatinib dose escalation in patients with progressive advanced non-KIT exon 9 mutated GIST after failure of first line imatinib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was performed, retrieving data from a real-life database (Dutch GIST Registry) including patients with GIST treated with sunitinib or imatinib dose escalation after failure on first line imatinib 400 mg daily. Primary outcome measures were progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: In total, 110 patients were included, 72 (65.5%) patients were treated with sunitinib (group A) and 38 (34.5%) received an imatinib dose escalation (group B). Important prognostic features at baseline, such as tumor size, stage at diagnosis, mitotic count and localization were equally distributed in both groups. No significant difference (p = 0.88) between median PFS in group A [8.7 months (95% CI 5.6-11.3)] and group B [5.6 months, (95% CI 2.6-8.7)] was observed. Moreover, the OS was similar between group A and group B; 63.2 months and 63.4 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study represents a proper sample size cohort containing detailed data on mutational status of patients with advanced GIST. We illustrated that imatinib dose escalation could serve as a good alternative for sunitinib as second-line treatment in patients with a non-KIT exon 9 mutation.

[Concept of lateral lymph nodes in rectal cancer and controversy over lateral lymph node dissection].

Lateral lymph node (LLN) metastasis in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is associated with patient prognosis. However, the role of lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) remains controversial. The concept of LLN and the exact definition of LLND have been inconsistently reported in the literatures. The treatment strategy for LARC has differed between the East and the West. The Japanese doctors advocates total mesorectal excision (TME) with LLND for LARC, but less neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (NARC). European and Americans prefer NARC plus TME, and do not recommend LLND. So far, only the Japanese Statute of Colorectal Cancer has a clear definition of the concept of LLN and LLND. The use of TME plus LLND for LARC is not supported by high level evidences. In today's high-speed development of minimally invasive surgery, the proper selection of standardized surgical methods for LARC requires the joint efforts of scholars from the East and the West to conduct multicenter high-grade clinical trials to select the best treatment option for patients with LARC.

Lipid nanoparticle formulations for optimal RNA-based topical delivery to murine airways.

INTRODUCTION: Lipid nanoparticles (LNP) have been successfully used as a platform technology for delivering nucleic acids to the liver. To broaden the application of LNPs in targeting non-hepatic tissues, we developed LNP-based RNA therapies (siRNA or mRNA) for the respiratory tract. Such optimized LNP systems could offer an early treatment strategy for viral respiratory tract infections such as COVID-19. METHODS: We generated a small library of six LNP formulations with varying helper lipid compositions and characterized their hydrodynamic diameter, size distribution and cargo entrapment properties. Next, we screened these LNP formulations for particle uptake and evaluated their potential for transfecting mRNA encoding green fluorescence protein (GFP) or SARS-CoV2 nucleocapsid-GFP fusion reporter gene in a human airway epithelial cell line in vitro. Following LNP-siGFP delivery, GFP protein knockdown efficiency was assessed by flow cytometry to determine %GFP+ cells and median fluorescence intensity (MFI) for GFP. Finally, lead LNP candidates were validated in Friend leukemia virus B (FVB) male mice via intranasal delivery of an mRNA encoding luciferase, using in vivo bioluminescence imaging. RESULTS: Dynamic light scattering revealed that all LNP formulations contained particles with an average diameter of <100 nm and a polydispersity index of <0.2. Human airway epithelial cell lines in culture internalized LNPs with differential GFP transfection efficiencies (73-97%). The lead formulation LNP6 entrapping GFP or Nuc-GFP mRNA demonstrated the highest transfection efficiency (97%). Administration of LNP-GFP siRNA resulted in a significant reduction of GFP protein expression. For in vivo studies, intranasal delivery of LNPs containing helper lipids (DSPC, DOPC, ESM or DOPS) with luciferase mRNA showed significant increase in luminescence expression in nasal cavity and lungs by at least 10 times above baseline control. CONCLUSION: LNP formulations enable the delivery of RNA payloads into human airway epithelial cells, and in the murine respiratory system; they can be delivered to nasal mucosa and lower respiratory tract via intranasal delivery. The composition of helper lipids in LNPs crucially modulates transfection efficiencies in airway epithelia, highlighting their importance in effective delivery of therapeutic products for airways diseases.

Natural History and Hepatocellular Carcinoma Risk in Untreated Chronic Hepatitis B Patients With Indeterminate Phase.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Many patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) may not conform to any of the defined phases and hence are classified as indeterminate. We aimed to characterize the baseline prevalence of indeterminate patients and their natural history, phase transition, and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) risk. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of 3366 adult untreated noncirrhotic CHB patients seen at 5 US clinics and 7 Taiwanese townships who had at least 1 year of serial laboratory data before enrollment with a mean follow-up period of 12.5 years. Patients' clinical phases were determined at baseline and through serial data during follow-up evaluation, based on the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases 2018 guidance. RESULTS: At baseline, 1303 (38.7%) patients were in the indeterminate phase. By up to year 10 of follow-up evaluation, 686 patients (52.7%) remained indeterminate, while 283 patients (21.7%) became immune active. Compared with patients who remained inactive, patients who remained indeterminate had a higher 10-year cumulative HCC incidence (4.6% vs 0.5%; P < .0001) and adjusted hazard ratio for HCC of 14.1 (P = .03). Among patients who remained indeterminate, age 45 years and older (adjusted hazard ratio, 18.4; P = .005) was associated independently with HCC development. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly 40% of patients had indeterminate CHB phase. Of these, half remained indeterminate and one-fifth transitioned to the immune active phase. HCC risk in persistently indeterminate CHB was 14 times higher than inactive CHB. Among persistently indeterminate CHB patients, age 45 years and older was associated with an 18 times higher risk for HCC development. Further studies are needed to evaluate the potential benefit of antiviral therapy for indeterminate patients, especially in the older subgroup.

Progression Rates by Age, Sex, Treatment, and Disease Activity by AASLD and EASL Criteria: Data for Precision Medicine.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Antiviral treatment criteria are based on disease progression risk, and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance recommendations for patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) without cirrhosis is based on an annual incidence threshold of 0.2%. However, accurate and precise disease progression estimate data are limited. Thus, we aimed to determine rates of cirrhosis and HCC development stratified by age, sex, treatment status, and disease activity based on the 2018 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and 2017 European Association for the Study of the Liver guidelines. METHODS: We analyzed 18,338 patients (8914 treated, 9424 untreated) from 6 centers from the United States and 27 centers from Asia-Pacific countries. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate annual progression rates to cirrhosis or HCC in person-years. RESULTS: The cohort was 63% male, with a mean age of 46.19 years, with baseline cirrhosis of 14.3% and median follow up of 9.60 years. By American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases criteria, depending on age, sex, and disease activity, annual incidence rates ranged from 0.07% to 3.94% for cirrhosis, from 0.04% to 2.19% for HCC in patients without cirrhosis, and from 0.40% to 8.83% for HCC in patients with cirrhosis. Several subgroups of patients without cirrhosis including males younger than 40 years of age and females younger than 50 years of age had annual HCC risk near or exceeding 0.2%. Similar results were found using European Association for the Study of the Liver criteria. CONCLUSION: There is great variability in CHB disease progression rates even among "lower-risk" populations. Future CHB modeling studies, public health planning, and HCC surveillance recommendation should be based on more precise disease progression rates based on sex, age, and disease activity, plus treatment status.

Treatment of chronic or relapsing COVID-19 in immunodeficiency.

BACKGROUND: Patients with some types of immunodeficiency can experience chronic or relapsing infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). This leads to morbidity and mortality, infection control challenges, and the risk of evolution of novel viral variants. The optimal treatment for chronic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is unknown. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to characterize a cohort of patients with chronic or relapsing COVID-19 disease and record treatment response. METHODS: We conducted a UK physician survey to collect data on underlying diagnosis and demographics, clinical features, and treatment response of immunodeficient patients with chronic (lasting ≥21 days) or relapsing (≥2 episodes) of COVID-19. RESULTS: We identified 31 patients (median age 49 years). Their underlying immunodeficiency was most commonly characterized by antibody deficiency with absent or profoundly reduced peripheral B-cell levels; prior anti-CD20 therapy, and X-linked agammaglobulinemia. Their clinical features of COVID-19 were similar to those of the general population, but their median duration of symptomatic disease was 64 days (maximum 300 days) and individual patients experienced up to 5 episodes of illness. Remdesivir monotherapy (including when given for prolonged courses of ≤20 days) was associated with sustained viral clearance in 7 of 23 clinical episodes (30.4%), whereas the combination of remdesivir with convalescent plasma or anti-SARS-CoV-2 mAbs resulted in viral clearance in 13 of 14 episodes (92.8%). Patients receiving no therapy did not clear SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 can present as a chronic or relapsing disease in patients with antibody deficiency. Remdesivir monotherapy is frequently associated with treatment failure, but the combination of remdesivir with antibody-based therapeutics holds promise.

Early response evaluation using 18F-FDG-PET/CT does not influence management of patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) treated with palliative intent.

AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of 18F-FDG-PET/CT on treatment decision making in metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) patients. METHODS: This study retrospectively evaluated 18F-FDG-PET/CT scans to monitor response of metastatic GIST patients treated with palliative intent. Data from the Dutch GIST Registry was used. Early scans (<10 weeks after start of treatment) and late scans (>10 weeks after start of treatment) were scored on the impact in change of treatment. RESULTS: Sixty-one PET/CT scans were performed for treatment evaluation in 39 patients with metastatic GIST of which 36 were early scans and 25 were late scans. Early PET/CT scans led to a change in management in 5.6% of patients and late PET/CT scans led to a change in management in 56% of patients. Change in management was more often seen after scans with lack of metabolic response (48% vs. 11% in scans with metabolic response, p=0.002). Neither metabolic response nor change in treatment were more often seen in patients with KIT mutations compared to patients with non-KIT mutations (metabolic response 65% KIT vs. 46% non-KIT, p=0.33, and change in management 28% KIT vs. 21% non-KIT, p=0.74). CONCLUSION: 18F-FDG-PET/CT is not recommended for early response evaluation in an unselected patient population with metastatic GIST, since it does not influence treatment decisions. 18F-FDG-PET/CT, however, can be useful for late response assessment, especially in case of indeterminate CT results.

Outcomes of ICU patients with and without perceptions of excessive care: a comparison between cancer and non-cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Whether Intensive Care Unit (ICU) clinicians display unconscious bias towards cancer patients is unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of critically ill patients with and without perceptions of excessive care (PECs) by ICU clinicians in patients with and without cancer. METHODS: This study is a sub-analysis of the large multicentre DISPROPRICUS study. Clinicians of 56 ICUs in Europe and the United States completed a daily questionnaire about the appropriateness of care during a 28-day period. We compared the cumulative incidence of patients with concordant PECs, treatment limitation decisions (TLDs) and death between patients with uncontrolled and controlled cancer, and patients without cancer. RESULTS: Of the 1641 patients, 117 (7.1%) had uncontrolled cancer and 270 (16.4%) had controlled cancer. The cumulative incidence of concordant PECs in patients with uncontrolled and controlled cancer versus patients without cancer was 20.5%, 8.1%, and 9.1% (p < 0.001 and p = 0.62, respectively). In patients with concordant PECs, we found no evidence for a difference in time from admission until death (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.60-1.72 and HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.49-1.54) and TLDs (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.33-1.99 and HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.27-1.81) across subgroups. In patients without concordant PECs, we found differences between the time from admission until death (HR 2.23, 95% CI 1.58-3.15 and 1.66, 95% CI 1.28-2.15), without a corresponding increase in time until TLDs (NA, p = 0.3 and 0.7) across subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The absence of a difference in time from admission until TLDs and death in patients with concordant PECs makes bias by ICU clinicians towards cancer patients unlikely. However, the differences between the time from admission until death, without a corresponding increase in time until TLDs, suggest prognostic unawareness, uncertainty or optimism in ICU clinicians who did not provide PECs, more specifically in patients with uncontrolled cancer. This study highlights the need to improve intra- and interdisciplinary ethical reflection and subsequent decision-making at the ICU.

Perceptions of involvement in advance care planning and emotional functioning in patients with advanced cancer.

PURPOSE: Advance Care Planning (ACP) is positively associated with the quality of care, but its impact on emotional functioning is ambiguous. This study investigated the association between perceptions of ACP involvement and emotional functioning in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: This study analyzed baseline data of 1,001 patients of the eQuiPe study, a prospective, longitudinal, multicenter, observational study on quality of care and quality of life in patients with advanced cancer in the Netherlands. Patients with metastatic solid cancer were asked to participate between November 2017 and January 2020. Patients' perceptions of ACP involvement were measured by three self-administered statements. Emotional functioning was measured by the EORTC-QLQ-C30. A linear multivariable regression analysis was performed while taking gender, age, migrant background, education, marital status, and symptom burden into account. RESULTS: The majority of patients (87%) reported that they were as much involved as they wanted to be in decisions about their future medical treatment and care. Most patients felt that their relatives (81%) and physicians (75%) were familiar with their preferences for future medical treatment and care. A positive association was found between patients' perceptions of ACP involvement and their emotional functioning (b=0.162, p<0.001, 95%CI[0.095;0.229]) while controlling for relevant confounders. CONCLUSIONS: Perceptions of involvement in ACP are positively associated with emotional functioning in patients with advanced cancer. Future studies are needed to further investigate the effect of ACP on emotional functioning. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR6584 Date of registration: 30 June 2017 IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Patients' emotional functioning might improve from routine discussions regarding goals of future care. Therefore, integration of ACP into palliative might be promising.

Clinicopathological features and treatment outcome of oesophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST): A large, retrospective multicenter European study.

BACKGROUND: Oesophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) account for ≤1% of all GISTs. Consequently, evidence to guide clinical decision-making is limited. METHODS: Clinicopathological features and outcomes in patients with primary oesophageal GIST from seven European countries were collected retrospectively. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were identified, and median follow up was 55.0 months. At diagnosis, 59.0% had localized disease, 25.3% locally advanced and 13.3% synchronous metastasis. A biopsy (Fine Needle aspiration n = 29, histological biopsy n = 31) was performed in 60 (72.3%) patients. The mitotic count was low (<5 mitoses/50 High Power Fields (HPF)) in 24 patients and high (≥5 mitoses/50 HPF) in 27 patients. Fifty-one (61.4%) patients underwent surgical or endoscopic resection. The most common reasons to not perform an immediate resection (n = 31) were; unresectable or metastasized GIST, performance status/comorbidity, patient refusal or ongoing neo-adjuvant therapy. The type of resections were enucleation (n = 11), segmental resection (n = 6) and oesophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction (n = 33), with median tumour size of 3.3 cm, 4.5 cm and 7.7 cm, respectively. In patients treated with enucleation 18.2% developed recurrent disease. The recurrence rate in patients treated with segmental resection was 16.7% and in patients undergoing oesophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction 36.4%. Larger tumours (≥4.0 cm) and high (>5/5hpf) mitotic count were associated with worse disease free survival. CONCLUSION: Based on the current study, enucleation can be recommended for oesophageal GIST smaller than 4 cm, while oesophagectomy should be preserved for larger tumours. Patients with larger tumours (>4 cm) and/or high mitotic count should be treated with adjuvant therapy.

Early antiviral treatment in outpatients with COVID-19 (FLARE): a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this trial is to assess whether early antiviral therapy in outpatients with COVID-19 with either favipiravir plus lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir alone, or favipiravir alone, is associated with a decrease in viral load of SARS-CoV-2 compared with placebo. TRIAL DESIGN: FLARE is a phase IIA randomised, double-blind, 2x2 factorial placebo-controlled, interventional trial. PARTICIPANTS: This trial is being conducted in the United Kingdom, with Royal Free Hospital, London as the lead site. Participants are non-hospitalised adults with highly suspected COVID-19 within the first 5 days of symptom onset, or who have tested positive with SARS-CoV-2 causing COVID-19 within the first 7 days of symptom onset, or who are asymptomatic but tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 for the first time within the last 48 hours. Inclusion criteria are as follows: 1. Any adult with the following: Symptoms compatible with COVID-19 disease (Fever >37.8°C on at least one occasion AND either cough and/ or anosmia) within the first 5 days of symptom onset (date/time of enrolment must be within the first 5 days of symptom onset) OR ANY symptoms compatible with COVID-19 disease (may include, but are not limited to fever, cough, shortness of breath, malaise, myalgia, headache, coryza) and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 within the first 7 days of symptom onset) (date/time of enrolment must be within the first 7 days of symptom onset) OR no symptoms but tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 within the last 48 hours (date/time of test must be within 48 hours of enrolment) 2. Male or female aged 18 years to 70 years old inclusive at screening 3. Willing and able to take daily saliva samples 4. Able to provide full informed consent and willing to comply with trial-related procedures Exclusion criteria are as follows: 1. Known hypersensitivity to any of the active ingredients or excipients in favipiravir and matched placebo, and in lopinavir/ritonavir and matched placebo (See Appendix 2) 2. Chronic liver disease at screening (known cirrhosis of any aetiology, chronic hepatitis (e.g. autoimmune, viral, steatohepatitis), cholangitis or any known elevation of liver aminotransferases with AST or ALT > 3 X ULN)* 3. Chronic kidney disease (stage 3 or beyond) at screening: eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73m2 * 4. HIV infection, if untreated, detectable viral load or on protease inhibitor therapy 5. Any clinical condition which the investigator considers would make the participant unsuitable for the trial 6. Concomitant medications known to interact with favipiravir and matched placebo, and with lopinavir/ritonavir and matched placebo, and carry risk of toxicity for the participant 7. Current severe illness requiring hospitalisation 8. Pregnancy and/ or breastfeeding 9. Eligible female participants of childbearing potential and male participants with a partner of childbearing potential not willing to use highly effective contraceptive measures during the trial and within the time point specified following last trial treatment dose. 10. Participants enrolled in any other interventional drug or vaccine trial (co-enrolment in observational studies is acceptable) 11. Participants who have received the COVID-19 vaccine *Considering the importance of early treatment of COVID-19 to impact viral load, the absence of known chronic liver/ kidney disease will be confirmed verbally by the participant during pre-screening and Screening/Baseline visit. Safety blood samples will be collected at Screening/Baseline visit (Day 1) and test results will be examined as soon as they become available and within 24 hours. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Participants will be randomised 1:1:1:1 using a concealed online minimisation process into one of the following four arms: Arm 1: Favipiravir + Lopinavir/ritonavir Oral favipiravir at 1800mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 400mg four (4) times daily from Day 2 to Day 7 PLUS lopinavir/ritonavir at 400mg/100mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 200mg/50mg four (4) times daily from Day 2 to Day 7. Arm 2: Favipiravir + Lopinavir/ritonavir placebo Oral favipiravir at 1800mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 400mg four (4) times daily from Day 2 to Day 7 PLUS lopinavir/ritonavir matched placebo at 400mg/100mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 200mg/50mg four (4) times daily from Day 2 to Day 7. Arm 3: Favipiravir placebo + Lopinavir/ritonavir Oral favipiravir matched placebo at 1800mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 400mg four (4) times daily from Day 2 to Day 7 PLUS lopinavir/ritonavir at 400mg/100mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 200mg/50mg four (4) times daily from Day 2 to Day 7. Arm 4: Favipiravir placebo + Lopinavir/ritonavir placebo Oral favipiravir matched placebo at 1800mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 400mg four (4) times daily from Day 2 to Day 7 PLUS lopinavir/ritonavir matched placebo at 400mg/100mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 200mg/50mg four (4) times daily from Day 2 to Day 7. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is upper respiratory tract viral load at Day 5. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Percentage of participants with undetectable upper respiratory tract viral load after 5 days of therapy Proportion of participants with undetectable stool viral load after 7 days of therapy Rate of decrease in upper respiratory tract viral load during 7 days of therapy Duration of fever following commencement of trial medications Proportion of participants with hepatotoxicity after 7 days of therapy Proportion of participants with other medication-related toxicity after 7 days of therapy and 14 days post-randomisation Proportion of participants admitted to hospital with COVID-19 related illness Proportion of participants admitted to ICU with COVID-19 related illness Proportion of participants who have died with COVID-19 related illness Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis of favipiravir Exploratory: Proportion of participants with deleterious or resistance-conferring mutations in SARS-CoV-2 RANDOMISATION: Participants will be randomised 1:1:1:1 using a concealed online minimisation process, with the following factors: trial site, age (≤ 55 vs > 55 years old), gender, obesity (BMI <30 vs ≥30), symptomatic or asymptomatic, current smoking status (Yes = current smoker, No = ex-smoker, never smoker), ethnicity (Caucasian, other) and presence or absence of comorbidity (defined as diabetes, hypertension, ischaemic heart disease (including previous myocardial infarction), other heart disease (arrhythmia and valvular heart disease), asthma, COPD, other chronic respiratory disease). BLINDING (MASKING): Participants and investigators will both be blinded to treatment allocation (double-blind). NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): 240 participants, 60 in each arm. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 4.0 dated 7th January 2021. Date of first enrolment: October 2020. Recruitment is ongoing, with anticipated finish date of 31st March 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The FLARE trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, trial identifying number NCT04499677 , date of registration 4th August 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Eight years of experience with vismodegib for advanced and multiple basal cell carcinoma patients in the Netherlands: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Vismodegib has been used for the treatment of locally advanced basal cell carcinoma (laBCC) and metastatic BCC (mBCC) since 2011. Most efficacy and safety data are provided by clinical trials. This study evaluates the effectiveness of vismodegib for the treatment of laBCC, mBCC and basal cell nevus syndrome (BCNS) patients, and the tumour characteristics associated with a higher probability of achieving a complete response in the Netherlands. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study that included all patients ≥18 years with histologically proven basal cell carcinoma that received ≥1 dose of vismodegib between July 2011 and September 2019 in the Netherlands. RESULTS: In total, 48 laBCC, 11 mBCC and 19 BCNS patients were included. Median progression-free survival was 10.3 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 7.5-22.6) for laBCC, 11.7 (95% CI, 5.2-17.5) for mBCC and 19.1 (95% CI, 7.4-20.2) for BCNS. Larger laBCCs were associated with a lower probability of complete response (hazard ratio (HR) 0.77 per increase in cm, p = 0.02). Of all BCNS patients, 63% received ≥2 treatment sequences with vismodegib; all achieved partial responses. CONCLUSIONS: Half of the aBCC patients progress within 1 year after the start of vismodegib treatment. More research is needed to investigate other treatment strategies after vismodegib progression and to evaluate long-term effects of repetitive vismodegib treatment.

Effects of Cirrhosis and Diagnosis Scenario in Metabolic-Associated Fatty Liver Disease-Related Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) is a major cause of liver-related complications, including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). While MAFLD-related HCC is known to occur in the absence of cirrhosis, our understanding of MAFLD-related HCC in this setting is limited. Here, we characterize MAFLD-related HCC and the impact of cirrhosis and screening on survival. This was a multicenter, retrospective, cohort study of MAFLD-related HCC. MAFLD was defined based on the presence of race-adjusted overweight, diabetes, or both hypertension and dyslipidemia in the absence of excess alcohol use or other underlying cause of liver disease. The primary outcome of interest was overall survival, and the primary dependent variables were cirrhosis status and prior HCC screening. We used Kaplan-Meier methods to estimate overall survival and Cox proportional hazards models and random forest machine learning to determine factors associated with prognosis. This study included 1,382 patients from 11 centers in the United States and East/Southeast Asia. Cirrhosis was present in 62% of patients, but under half of these patients had undergone imaging within 12 months of HCC diagnosis. Patients with cirrhosis were more likely to have early stage disease but less often received curative therapy. After adjustment, cirrhosis was not associated with prognosis, but the presence of cancer-related symptoms at diagnosis was associated with poorer prognosis. Conclusion: Cirrhosis was not associated with overall survival in this cohort of MAFLD-related HCC, while diagnosis in the presence of symptoms was associated with poorer prognosis. The HCC surveillance rate in patients with MAFLD-related HCC was disappointingly low in a multicenter cohort.

Association Between Fatty Liver and Cirrhosis, Hepatocellular Carcinoma, and Hepatitis B Surface Antigen Seroclearance in Chronic Hepatitis B.

BACKGROUND: Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) and fatty liver (FL) are common, natural history data on concurrent FL and CHB (FL-CHB) are limited. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of FL on cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) seroclearance incidence in CHB patients. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study of 6786 adult CHB patients, we used propensity score matching (PSM) to balance the FL-CHB and non-FL CHB groups. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to compare cumulative cirrhosis, HCC, and HBsAg seroclearance rates between subgroups. RESULTS: Before PSM, compared to non-FL CHB, FL-CHB patients had lower 10-year cumulative rates of cirrhosis, HCC, and a higher HBsAg seroclearance rate. Similar results were found in the matched FL-CHB and non-FL CHB patients, as well as in the antiviral-treated PSM cohort. Cox proportional hazards model indicated FL to remain significantly and strongly associated with lower risk of cirrhosis and HCC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.19 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .12-.33], P < .001 and HR, 0.21 [95% CI, .09-.51], P = .001, respectively) in antiviral-treated patients but not in untreated patients. CONCLUSIONS: FL was significantly associated with lower cirrhosis and HCC risk and higher HBsAg seroclearance. Further studies are needed to confirm our funding and investigate the mechanisms underlying the impact of FL on CHB.