Impact of teratoma on survival probabilities of patients with metastatic non-seminomatous germ cell cancer: Results from the IGCCCG Update Consortium.

AIMS: To resolve the ongoing controversy surrounding the impact of teratoma (TER) in the primary among patients with metastatic testicular non-seminomatous germ-cell tumours (NSGCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using the International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group (IGCCCG) Update Consortium database, we compared the survival probabilities of patients with metastatic testicular GCT with TER (TER) or without TER (NTER) in their primaries corrected for known prognostic factors. Progression-free survival (5y-PFS) and overall survival at 5 years (5y-OS) were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Among 6792 patients with metastatic testicular NSGCT, 3224 (47%) had TER in their primary, and 3568 (53%) did not. In the IGCCCG good prognosis group, the 5y-PFS was 87.8% in TER versus 92.0% in NTER patients (p = 0.0001), the respective 5y-OS were 94.5% versus 96.5% (p = 0.0032). The corresponding figures in the intermediate prognosis group were 5y-PFS 76.9% versus 81.6% (p = 0.0432) in TER and NTER and 5y-OS 90.4% versus 90.9% (p = 0.8514), respectively. In the poor prognosis group, there was no difference, neither in 5y-PFS [54.3% in TER patients versus 55.4% (p = 0.7472) in NTER], nor in 5y-OS [69.4% versus 67.7% (p = 0.3841)]. NSGCT patients with TER had more residual masses (65.3% versus 51.7%, p < 0.0001), and therefore received post-chemotherapy surgery more frequently than NTER patients (46.8% versus 32.0%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Teratoma in the primary tumour of patients with metastatic NSGCT negatively impacts on survival in the good and intermediate, but not in the poor IGCCCG prognostic groups.

Prognostic and predictive value of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the EORTC 1325/KEYNOTE-054 phase III trial of pembrolizumab versus placebo in resected high-risk stage III melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Pain is common in patients with cancer. The World Health Organisation recommends paracetamol or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for mild pain and combined with other agents for moderate/severe pain. This study estimated associations of NSAIDs with recurrence-free survival (RFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in high-risk patients with resected melanoma in the EORTC 1325/KEYNOTE-054 phase III clinical trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with AJCC7 stage IIIA, IIIB or IIIC resected melanoma were randomized to receive 200 mg of adjuvant pembrolizumab (N = 514) or placebo (N = 505) 3-weekly for one year or until recurrence. As previously reported, pembrolizumab prolonged RFS and DMFS. NSAID use was defined as administration between 7 days pre-randomization and starting treatment. Multivariable Cox and Fine and Gray models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for associations of NSAIDs with RFS, DMFS and irAEs. RESULTS: Of 1019 patients randomized, 59 and 44 patients in the pembrolizumab and placebo arms, respectively, used NSAIDs. NSAIDs were not associated with RFS (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.58-1.43) or DMFS in the pembrolizumab (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.65-1.66) or placebo arms (for RFS, HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.48-1.20; for DMFS, HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.49-1.31). NSAIDs were associated with the incidence of irAEs in the placebo arm (HR 3.06, 95% CI 1.45-6.45) but not in the pembrolizumab arm (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.58-1.53). CONCLUSION: NSAIDs were not associated with efficacy outcomes nor the risk of irAEs in patients with resected high-risk stage III melanoma receiving adjuvant pembrolizumab.

Challenges in the diagnosis of marginal zone lymphoma with symptoms of small intestinal disease: a case report and scoping review of the literature.

Background: Marginal zone lymphoma can be accompanied by symptoms of small intestinal disease including abdominal pain and malabsorption. However, the best diagnostic approach for suspected marginal zone lymphoma is unknown and intestinal biopsies are frequently negative. We describe the case of a patient with symptoms of small bowel involvement where marginal zone lymphoma could only be detected upon peripheral lymph node resection. To assess the clinical variability of intestinal marginal zone lymphoma as a rare clinical entity, a scoping review with systematic literature research was performed. Methods: A 57-year-old man presented with a 10-year history of postprandial abdominal pain, systemic inflammation and recent weight loss. Endoscopies and a surgical small bowel specimen revealed non-specific findings. Flow cytometry from the bone marrow was highly suspicious for marginal zone lymphoma. A 2-18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (2-18F-FDG-PET/CT) showed hypermetabolic lymph nodes on both sides of the diaphragm. Cervical lymph node dissection finally confirmed marginal zone lymphoma. Immunochemotherapy yielded lasting oncological remission and resolved symptoms. We searched PubMed, Embase and Ovid MEDLINE® for additional case reports limited to the last 25 years. Five primary search terms combined using "AND" were used freely and as controlled vocabulary. Additional studies were identified by reviewing the reference lists of included articles. Results: Our review revealed 52 cases of marginal zone lymphoma with small intestinal manifestation. Patients presented with abdominal pain, bowel obstruction, weight loss or gastrointestinal bleeding. Diagnosis was mainly established by surgery (73%). The most frequent endoscopic findings were mucosal erosions and ulcerations. A 2-18F-FDG-PET/CT was positive in 9/15 patients. Treatment included rituximab, chemotherapy, surgery and/or radiation resulting in clinical remission in 82% of cases. Conclusions: Diagnostic workup for suspected small intestinal marginal zone lymphoma is challenging, necessitating a multidisciplinary approach. Endoscopy, imaging including 2-18F-FDG-PET/CT and small bowel resection or dissection of hypermetabolic lymph nodes can be useful. If marginal zone lymphoma is suspected vigorous diagnostic efforts are justified since remission can be achieved in most patients. Our review highlights the variable clinical presentation of this underdiagnosed disease and adds systematic data to the literature.

Metastatic Potential of Small Testicular Germ Cell Tumors: Implications for Surveillance of Small Testicular Masses.

Incidental detection of urogenital tumors has increased in recent decades owing to the greater use of ultrasonography and cross-sectional imaging. For patients with low-risk prostate cancer or small renal masses, active surveillance represents a valid treatment option. Similarly, for men with small testicular masses <10 mm, active surveillance has been discussed as an alternative to surgery, although little is known regarding the behavior of small testicular germ cell tumors (GCTs). In the Swiss Austrian German Testicular Cancer Cohort Study we identified 849 patients (546 seminoma, 303 nonseminoma) treated with radical inguinal orchiectomy for GCT with a median tumor diameter of 35 mm. A tumor diameter <10 mm was observed in 25 patients (13 seminoma, 12 nonseminoma). Of these, five patients (20%) presented with primary metastatic disease, all of whom had elevated tumor markers and nonseminomatous GCTs. Two patients (8%) with initially localized disease (1 seminoma, 1 nonseminoma) and without elevated tumor markers experienced relapse at 4 mo (nonseminoma) and 14 mo (seminoma) after orchiectomy, despite the fact that the latter had received adjuvant chemotherapy. These findings highlight the metastatic potential of small testicular GCTs and raise the question of whether active surveillance for small testicular masses is safe. Patient summary: This study on testicular cancer assesses the metastatic potential of small testicular germ cell tumors. Men with small testicular masses should be counseled about the malignant potential of small testicular germ cell tumors.

Swiss germ-cell cancer consensus recommendations.

Approximately 420 men are diagnosed with germ-cell cancer (GCC) in Switzerland each year. Recent international guidelines outline management issues, but many aspects remain controversial in an area of highly individualised treatments. Even more than in other tumour types, in GCC the challenge is to choose exactly the correct treatment for an individual patient. Overtreatment in patients likely to be cured must be avoided to reduce long-term toxicities. On the other hand, treatment intensification is required in patients presenting with adverse prognostic factors. Therefore, referral to expert centres or consultations with an expert for a second opinion is strongly recommended. In 2020, Swiss experts discussed their strategies in a consensus meeting during the virtual Swiss Oncology and Haematology Congress (SOHC) in order to harmonise their concepts and to suggest optimal strategies for the management of GCC patients in Switzerland. Votes on controversial issues were obtained and are presented in this review wherever applicable.