Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Efficacy Outcomes from Immune Checkpoint Blockade in Patients with Cancer.

PURPOSE: No evidence exists as to whether type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) impairs clinical outcome from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in patients with solid tumors. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In a large cohort of ICI recipients treated at 21 institutions from June 2014 to June 2020, we studied whether patients on glucose-lowering medications (GLM) for T2DM had shorter overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). We used targeted transcriptomics in a subset of patients to explore differences in the tumor microenvironment (TME) of patients with or without diabetes. RESULTS: A total of 1,395 patients were included. Primary tumors included non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; 54.7%), melanoma (24.7%), renal cell (15.0%), and other carcinomas (5.6%). After multivariable analysis, patients on GLM (n = 226, 16.2%) displayed an increased risk of death [HR, 1.29; 95% confidence interval (CI),1.07-1.56] and disease progression/death (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03-1.43) independent of number of GLM received. We matched 92 metformin-exposed patients with 363 controls and 78 patients on other oral GLM or insulin with 299 control patients. Exposure to metformin, but not other GLM, was associated with an increased risk of death (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.16-2.03) and disease progression/death (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.04-1.72). Patients with T2DM with higher pretreatment glycemia had higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (P = 0.04), while exploratory tumoral transcriptomic profiling in a subset of patients (n = 22) revealed differential regulation of innate and adaptive immune pathways in patients with T2DM. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, patients on GLM experienced worse outcomes from immunotherapy, independent of baseline features. Prospective studies are warranted to clarify the relative impact of metformin over a preexisting diagnosis of T2DM in influencing poorer outcomes in this population.

Optimizing CDK4/6 inhibitors in advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer: A personalized approach.

Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) combined with endocrine therapy (ET) are now a backbone of treatment for hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced breast cancer. CDK4/6i plus ET is more effective than ET alone in this setting; however, the risk of grade 3-4 adverse events also increases. Approved agents in this class have similar efficacies, but important differences due to their structural and pharmacological properties. We review biomarkers and discuss determinants to inform a rational approach to therapy choice when selecting the most appropriate ET and CDK4/6i partners. We also identify subgroups that may benefit from specific ET-CDK4/6i combinations and discuss strategies to overcome resistance. This personalized approach aims to minimize treatment-related toxicities that may affect patient QoL and compliance, and ultimately therapy efficacy.

Rising incidence of late stage breast cancer after COVID-19 outbreak. Real-world data from the Italian COVID-DELAY study.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer (BC) patients' (pts) management was affected by a global reorganization after Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Our multicenter study aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19 on access to diagnosis, staging and treatment for BC pts compared to pre-pandemic. METHODS: Medical records of all consecutive newly diagnosed BC pts referred to 6 Italian Institutions between March and December 2020 were assessed. Monthly access rate and temporal intervals between date of symptoms onset, radiological, cytohistological diagnosis and treatment start were analyzed and compared with 2019. RESULTS: A reduction (25%) in newly diagnosed BC was observed compared to 2019 (666 vs 890). New BC pts in 2020 were less likely to be diagnosed with early stage BC (77% vs 83%, p < 0.01), had a worse performance status according to the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG PS) (19.8% had PS > 0 in 2020 vs 16.5% in 2019, p < 0.01) and fewer pts were asymptomatic at diagnosis in 2020 (54% vs 71%,p < 0.01). COVID-19 did not negatively impact in terms of access to diagnosis, staging and treatment. Time intervals between symptom onset and radiological diagnosis, symptom onset and cytohistological diagnosis, cytohistological diagnosis and treatment start were maintained or improved. However, less cases were discussed in multidisciplinary tumor meetings during 2020 (60% vs 73%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our data proved an alarming reduction of early stage BC associated with the COVID-19 crisis in 2020. Despite the upheaval generated by the pandemic, our study shed light on the effective performance delivered by Italian Oncology Departments to guarantee diagnostic-therapeutic pathways.

Alarming Drop in Early Stage Colorectal Cancer Diagnoses After COVID-19 Outbreak: A Real-World Analysis from the Italian COVID-DELAY Study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has triggered the disruption of health care on a global scale. With Italy tangled up in the pandemic response, oncology care has been largely diverted and cancer screenings suspended. Our multicenter Italian study aimed to evaluate whether COVID-19 has impacted access to diagnosis, staging, and treatment for patients newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC), compared with pre-pandemic time. METHODS: All consecutive new CRC patients referred to 8 Italian oncology institutions between March and December 2020 were included. Access rate and temporal intervals between date of symptoms onset, radiological and cytohistological diagnosis, treatment start and first radiological evaluation were analyzed and compared with the same months of 2019. RESULTS: A reduction (29%) in newly diagnosed CRC cases was seen when compared with 2019 (360 vs 506). New CRC patients in 2020 were less likely to be diagnosed with early stage (stages I-II-III) CRC (63% vs 78%, P < .01). Gender and sidedness were similar regardless of the year. The percentage of tumors with any mutation among BRAF, NRAS, and KRAS genes were significantly different between the 2 years (61% in 2020 vs 50% in 2019, P = .04). Timing of access to cancer diagnosis, staging, and treatment for patients with CRC has not been negatively affected by the pandemic. Significantly shorter temporal intervals were observed between symptom onset and first oncological appointment (69 vs 79 days, P = .01) and between histological diagnosis and first oncological appointment (34 vs 42 days, P < .01) during 2020 compared with 2019. Fewer CRC cases were discussed in multidisciplinary meetings during 2020 (38% vs 50%, P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Our data highlight a significant drop in CRC diagnosis after COVID-19, especially for early stage disease. The study also reveals a remarkable setback in the multidisciplinary management of patients with CRC. Despite this, Italian oncologists were able to ensure diagnostic-therapeutic pathways proper operation after March 2020.

Clinical outcomes of NSCLC patients experiencing early immune-related adverse events to PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors leading to treatment discontinuation.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic relevance of early immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in patients affected by non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) upon immunotherapy is not fully understood. METHODS: The Leading to Treatment Discontinuation cohort included 24 patients experiencing severe irAEs after one of two administrations of single anti-PD-1/PD-L1 in any line setting for metastatic NSCLC between November 2015 and June 2019. The control cohort was composed of 526 patients treated with single anti-PD-1/PD-L1 in any line setting with no severe irAE reported. The primary end points were median progression-free survival, overall survival, objective response rate, risk of progression of disease and risk of death. The correlation of clinic pathological features with early severe irAEs represented the secondary end point. RESULTS: Median PFS was 9.3 and 8.4 months, median OS was 12.0 months and 14.2 months at a median follow-up of 18.1 and 22.6 months in the LTD cohort and in the control cohort, respectively. The ORR was 40% (95% CI 17.2-78.8) in the LTD cohort and 32.7% (95% CI 27.8-38.2) in the control cohort. The risk of disease progression was higher in the LTD cohort (HR 2.52 [95% 1.10-5.78], P = .0288). CONCLUSIONS: We found no survival benefit in LTD cohort compared to the control cohort. However, early and severe irAEs might underly an immune anti-tumor activation. We identified a significant association with first-line immune checkpoints inhibitors treatment and good PS. Further studies on risk prediction and management of serious and early irAEs in NSCLC patients are needed.

PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors during late stages of life: an ad-hoc analysis from a large multicenter cohort.

BACKGROUND: The favourable safety profile and the increasing confidence with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) might have boosted their prescription in frail patients with short life expectancies, who usually are not treated with standard chemotherapy. METHODS: The present analysis aims to describe clinicians' attitudes towards ICIs administration during late stages of life within a multicenter cohort of advanced cancer patients treated with single agent PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors in Italy. RESULTS: Overall, 1149 patients with advanced cancer who received single agent PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors were screened. The final study population consisted of 567 deceased patients. 166 patients (29.3%) had received ICIs within 30 days of death; among them there was a significantly higher proportion of patients with ECOG-PS ≥ 2 (28.3% vs 11.5%, p < 0.0001) and with a higher burden of disease (69.3% vs 59.4%, p = 0.0266). In total, 35 patients (6.2%) started ICIs within 30 days of death; among them there was a higher proportion of patients with ECOG-PS ≥ 2 (45.7% vs 14.5%, p < 0.0001) and with a higher burden of disease (82.9% vs 60.9%, p = 0.0266). Primary tumors were significantly different across subgroups (p = 0.0172), with a higher prevalence of NSCLC patients (80% vs 60.9%) among those who started ICIs within 30 days of death. Lastly, 123 patients (21.7%) started ICIs within 3 months of death. Similarly, within this subgroup there was a higher proportion of patients with ECOG-PS ≥ 2 (29.3% vs 12.8%, p < 0.0001), with a higher burden of disease (74.0% vs 59.0%, p = 0.0025) and with NSCLC (74.0% vs 58.8%, p = 0.0236). CONCLUSION: Our results confirmed a trend toward an increasing ICIs prescription in frail patients, during the late stages of life. Caution should be exercised when evaluating an ICI treatment for patients with a poor PS and a high burden of disease.

The Gustave Roussy Immune (GRIm)-Score Variation Is an Early-on-Treatment Biomarker of Outcome in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Patients Treated with First-Line Pembrolizumab.

BACKGROUND: The Gustave Roussy Immune (GRIm)-Score takes into account neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), serum albumin concentration and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and its prognostic value has been investigated in patients treated with immune check-point inhibitors (ICIs). To further assess the prognostic and predictive value of baseline GRIm-Score (GRImT0) in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) patients, we separately investigated two cohorts of patients treated with first-line pembrolizumab or chemotherapy. We also investigated whether GRIm-Score at 45 days since treatment initiation (GRImT1) and GRIm-Score difference between the two timepoints may better predict clinical outcomes (GRImΔ = GRImT0 - GRImT1). METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 222 aNSCLC patients: 135 treated with pembrolizumab and 87 treated with chemotherapy as the first-line regimen. NLR, serum albumin and LDH concentrations were assessed at T0 and at T1. According to the GRIm-Score, patients were assigned 1 point if they had NLR > 6, LDH > upper limit normal or albumin < 3.5 g/dL. Patients with a GRIm-Score < 2 were considered as having a low Score. RESULTS: In both cohorts, no difference in terms of overall survival (OS) between patients with low and high GRImT0 was found. Otherwise, median OS and progression free survival (PFS) of the low GRImT1 group were significantly longer than those of the high GRImT1 group in pembrolizumab-treated patients, but not in the CHT cohort (pembrolizumab cohort: low vs. high; median OS not reached vs. 9.2 months, p = 0.004; median PFS 10.8 vs. 2.3 months, p = 0.002). Patients receiving pembrolizumab with stable/positive GRImΔ had better OS (median OS not reached vs. 12.0 months, p < 0.001), PFS (median PFS 20.6 vs. 2.6 months, p < 0.001) and objective response rate (58.2% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.003) compared to patients with negative GRImΔ. CONCLUSION: Our data shown that GRImT1 and GRImΔ are more reliable peripheral blood biomarkers of outcome compared to GRImT0 in aNSCLC patients treated with pembrolizumab and might represent useful biomarkers to drive clinical decisions in this setting.

Effect of concomitant medications with immune-modulatory properties on the outcomes of patients with advanced cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: development and validation of a novel prognostic index.

BACKGROUND: Concomitant medications are known to impact on clinical outcomes of patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We aimed weighing the role of different concomitant baseline medications to create a drug-based prognostic score. METHODS: We evaluated concomitant baseline medications at immunotherapy initiation for their impact on objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in a single-institution cohort of patients with advanced cancer treated with ICIs (training cohort, N = 217), and a drug-based prognostic score with the drugs resulting significantly impacting the OS was computed. Secondly, we externally validated the score in a large multicenter external cohort (n = 1012). RESULTS: In the training cohort (n = 217), the median age was 69 years (range: 32-89), and the primary tumours were non-small-cell lung cancer (70%), melanoma (14.7%), renal cell carcinoma (9.2%) and others (6%). Among baseline medications, corticosteroids (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.60-3.30), systemic antibiotics (HR = 2.07; 95% CI: 1.31-3.25) and proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) (HR = 1.57; 95% CI: 1.13-2.18) were significantly associated with OS. The prognostic score was calculated using these three drug classes, defining good, intermediate and poor prognosis patients. Within the training cohort, OS (p < 0.0001), PFS (p < 0.0001) and ORR (p = 0.0297) were significantly distinguished by the score stratification. The prognostic value of the score was also demonstrated in terms of OS (p < 0.0001), PFS (p < 0.0001) and ORR (p = 0.0006) within the external cohort. CONCLUSION: Cumulative exposure to corticosteroids, antibiotics and PPIs (three likely microbiota-modulating drugs) leads to progressively worse outcomes after ICI therapy. We propose a simple score that can help stratifying patients in routine practice and clinical trials of ICIs.

Integrated analysis of concomitant medications and oncological outcomes from PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Concomitant medications, such as steroids, proton pump inhibitors (PPI) and antibiotics, might affect clinical outcomes with immune checkpoint inhibitors. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter observational retrospective study aimed at evaluating the impact of concomitant medications on clinical outcomes, by weighing their associations with baseline clinical characteristics (including performance status, burden of disease and body mass index) and the underlying causes for their prescription. This analysis included consecutive stage IV patients with cancer, who underwent treatment with single agent antiprogrammed death-1/programmed death ligand-1 (PD-1/PD-L1) with standard doses and schedules at the medical oncology departments of 20 Italian institutions. Each medication taken at the immunotherapy initiation was screened and collected into key categories as follows: corticosteroids, antibiotics, gastric acid suppressants (including proton pump inhibitors - PPIs), statins and other lipid-lowering agents, aspirin, anticoagulants, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), ACE inhibitors/Angiotensin II receptor blockers, calcium antagonists, ß-blockers, metformin and other oral antidiabetics, opioids. RESULTS: From June 2014 to March 2020, 1012 patients were included in the analysis. Primary tumors were: non-small cell lung cancer (52.2%), melanoma (26%), renal cell carcinoma (18.3%) and others (3.6%). Baseline statins (HR 1.60 (95% CI 1.14 to 2.25), p=0.0064), aspirin (HR 1.47 (95% CI 1.04 to 2.08, p=0.0267) and ß-blockers (HR 1.76 (95% CI 1.16 to 2.69), p=0.0080) were confirmed to be independently related to an increased objective response rate. Patients receiving cancer-related steroids (HR 1.72 (95% CI 1.43 to 2.07), p<0.0001), prophylactic systemic antibiotics (HR 1.85 (95% CI 1.23 to 2.78), p=0.0030), prophylactic gastric acid suppressants (HR 1.29 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.53), p=0.0021), PPIs (HR 1.26 (95% CI 1.07 to 1.48), p=0.0050), anticoagulants (HR 1.43 (95% CI: 1.16 to 1.77), p=0.0007) and opioids (HR 1.71 (95% CI 1.28 to 2.28), p=0.0002) were confirmed to have a significantly higher risk of disease progression. Patients receiving cancer-related steroids (HR 2.16 (95% CI 1.76 to 2.65), p<0.0001), prophylactic systemic antibiotics (HR 1.93 (95% CI 1.25 to 2.98), p=0.0030), prophylactic gastric acid suppressants (HR 1.29 (95% CI 1.06 to 1.57), p=0.0091), PPI (HR 1.26 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.52), p=0.0172), anticoagulants (HR 1.45 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.84), p=0.0024) and opioids (HR 1.53 (95% CI 1.11 to 2.11), p=0.0098) were confirmed to have a significantly higher risk of death. CONCLUSION: We confirmed the association between baseline steroids administered for cancer-related indication, systemic antibiotics, PPIs and worse clinical outcomes with PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors, which can be assumed to have immune-modulating detrimental effects.

Clinical relevance of 1p and 19q deletion for patients with WHO grade 2 and 3 gliomas.

PURPOSE: To assess the frequency of chromosomes 1p and 19q deletions in gliomas and to correlate 1p deletion with prognosis in patients with grade 2 and grade 3 gliomas independently of histologic subtype. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 208 patients with WHO grade 2 and 3 gliomas who had 1p/19q molecular studies performed between 2000 and 2004. DNA was extracted from tumor tissue and germline material and evaluated by PCR using microsatellite markers for each chromosome. RESULTS: There were 113 men and 95 women with a median age at diagnosis of 40. Thirty-eight patients had a low-grade astrocytoma (A2), 58 low-grade oligodendroglioma (O2), 31 low-grade oligoastrocytoma (OA2), 21 anaplastic astrocytoma (A3), 37 anaplastic oligodendroglioma (O3), and 23 had an anaplastic oligoastrocytoma (OA3). Chromosome 1p analysis was performed in all patients and showed deletions in 105 patients (76% of O2, 42% of OA2, 21% of A2, 89% of O3, 17% of AO3, and 14% of A3). Chromosome 19q studies were performed in 118 patients and showed deletions in 46 (56% of O2, 45% of OA2, 27% of A2, 76% of O3, 11% of OA3 and 0% of A3). On multivariate analyses, chromosome 1p was a prognostic factor for prolonged PFS (HR = 1.75, P = 0.03) and OS (HR = 3.59, P = 0.02) in grade 2 gliomas but not for grade 3 (HR = 0.81, P = 0.7 for PFS; HR = 1.31, P = 0.7 for OS). CONCLUSION: Chromosome 1p deletion is a significant positive prognostic marker in diffuse, grade 2 gliomas regardless of histologic subtype.

Survival following adjuvant PCV or temozolomide for anaplastic astrocytoma.

We compared survival in patients with anaplastic astrocytoma (AA) treated with adjuvant procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine (PCV) with survival in patients treated with temozolomide. A retrospective analysis was made of patients with newly diagnosed AA treated with adjuvant postradiotherapy chemotherapy. Outcome analysis included progression-free survival and overall survival. The following prognostic factors were taken into account: patient age, extent of resection, performance status, presence of contrast enhancement in presurgical imaging, and type of adjuvant treatment. Among 109 AA patients, 49 were treated with PCV and 60 with temozolomide. The treatment groups were well matched for pretreatment characteristics, except for the presence of contrast enhancement. Age, extent of surgery, performance status, and presence of contrast enhancement were statistically significant prognostic factors according to the Cox model analysis of survival. Type of adjuvant chemotherapy was not a significant factor, either for progression-free survival or for overall survival. Hematological toxicity, nonhematological toxicity grades 3-4, and premature discontinuation due to toxicity were observed in 9%, 3% to 5%, and 37%, respectively, of cases in the PCV group versus 4% to 5%, 0, and 0, respectively, in the temozolomide group. Although the present study was not randomized, it was well designed, and it reports on two homogeneous and consecutive series of patients, for whom histology was verified to obtain survival data only for patients with AA following the recent WHO 2000 classification. Even if no survival advantage has been demonstrated for temozolomide versus PCV, we conclude that temozolomide should be preferred because of its greater tolerability.

Response to chemotherapy of a radiation-induced glioblastoma multiforme.

BACKGROUND: Radiation-induced glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is particularly resistant to treatment and therapeutic options are limited. We report a patient with a radiation-induced GBM who had a complete response to carmustine and survived for 44 months. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Case report of a 38-year-old man with a radiation-induced GBM that responded to carmustine. RESULTS: Our patient developed a left occipital GBM 35 years after a left cerebellar astrocytoma was treated with surgery and radiation therapy (4500 rad). The GBM was treated with subtotal resection followed by four cycles of carmustine; a complete response was achieved. He relapsed 34 months after diagnosis and with further surgery survived 44 months from his diagnosis of GBM. CONCLUSION: GBMs may be a late complication of radiation treatment for pediatric brain tumors. If further radiotherapy is not a therapeutic option, chemotherapy may result in prolonged survival.

A multicenter retrospective study of chemotherapy for recurrent intracranial ependymal tumors in adults by the Gruppo Italiano Cooperativo di Neuro-Oncologia.

BACKGROUND: No data on the role of chemotherapy in recurrent ependymal tumors are available in adults. The aim of the current study was to investigate outcomes after salvage chemotherapy in this setting. METHODS: A retrospective review was made of the charts of 28 adults (> or = 18 years) with progressive or recurrent ependymal tumors after surgery and radiotherapy, who received chemotherapy between 1993 and 2003 in 3 institutions of the Gruppo Italiano Cooperativo di Neuro-Oncologia network. RESULTS: Thirteen patients (46.3%) received cisplatin-based chemotherapy (Group A) and 15 (53.7%) received regimens without cisplatin (Group B). Platinum-based chemotherapy yielded 2 complete responses (CR) (15.4%) and 2 (15.4%) partial responses (PR), whereas 7 patients (53.8%) remained stable (SD). After regimens without cisplatin, there were no CR, 2 PR (13.3%), and 11 SD (73.3%). The overall median time to progression was 9.9 months (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 7.5-21.7 months), 9.9 months (5.2-not reached) for Group A and 10.9 months (95% CI, 7.17-23.9 months) for Group B. The overall median survival (OS) was 40.7 months (95% CI, 16-not reached), 31 months (21-not reached) for Group A and 40.7 months (13.4-not reached) for Group B. CONCLUSIONS: Cisplatin-based chemotherapy achieved a higher response rate, but did not prolong disease progression-free survival or OS. More active regimens for the salvage treatment of ependymal tumors have yet to be found.

Second-line chemotherapy with irinotecan plus carmustine in glioblastoma recurrent or progressive after first-line temozolomide chemotherapy: a phase II study of the Gruppo Italiano Cooperativo di Neuro-Oncologia (GICNO).

PURPOSE: Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), the most frequent brain tumor in adults, is not considered chemosensitive. Nevertheless, there is widespread use of first-line chemotherapy, often with temozolomide, as a therapeutic option in patients with progressive disease after surgery and radiotherapy. However, at the time of second recurrence and/or progression, active and noncross-resistant chemotherapy regimens are required. The aim of the present multicenter phase II trial, therefore, was to ascertain the efficacy of second-line carmustine (BCNU) and irinotecan chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with histologically confirmed GBM, recurring or progressing after surgery, standard radiotherapy and a first-line temozolomide-based chemotherapy, were considered eligible. The primary end-point was progression-free survival at 6 months (PFS-6), and secondary end-points included response rate, toxicity, and survival. All patients were on enzyme-inducing antiepileptic prophylaxis. Chemotherapy consisted of BCNU (100 mg/m2 on day 1) plus irinotecan (175 mg/m2/weekly for 4 weeks), every 6 weeks, for a maximum of eight cycles. In the absence of grade 2 toxicity, the irinotecan dose was increased to 200 mg/m2. RESULTS: A total of 42 patients (median age, 53.4 years; median Karnofsky performance status, 80; range, 60 to 90) were included in the study. PFS-6 was 30.3% (95% CI, 18.5% to 49.7%). Median time to progression was 17 weeks (95% CI, 11.9 to 23.9). Nine partial responses (21.4%; 95% CI, 9% to 34%) were obtained. Toxicity was manageable. CONCLUSION: The BCNU plus irinotecan regimen seems active and non-cross-resistant in patients with GBM with recurrence after temozolomide-based chemotherapy.

Current clinical management of gastrointestinal stromal tumors.

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) are defined as c-KIT-positive mesenchymal neoplasias located in the gastrointestinal tract and abdomen, most of which present an activating KIT mutation, a fundamental step in the development of disease. However, recent studies reported a small subgroup of KIT-negative GIST, in which platelet-derived growth factor receptor A, protein kinase C-tau, and FLJ10261 expression was detected. Imatinib (Gleevec, Novartis) is an orally administered competitive inhibitor of the tyrosine kinase domain of receptors such as KIT, ABL, and BCR-ABL fusion proteins, and the platelet-derived growth factor receptor. Phase I-III clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of imatinib in the treatment of metastatic GIST. However, the optimal dose and role of imatinib in an adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting have yet to be defined. Therefore, further studies investigating the mechanism of resistance to imatinib in patients with GIST are warranted.

Homeostatic chemokines drive migration of malignant B cells in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphomas.

This study investigated the role of several chemokines and their receptors on malignant B lymphocytes recovered from 13 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), 9 with hairy cell leukemia (HCL), 5 with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), 5 with marginal zone B-cell lymphoma (MZL), 6 with small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL), and 5 with follicular cell lymphoma (FCL). Flow cytometry analysis demonstrated that CXCR4 and CXCR5 were expressed on all malignant and normal B cells. Considering CC receptors, CCR1 was expressed in 70% of patients with CLL and 40% of those with HCL but was lacking in patients with MCL, MZL, SLL, and normal B cells. CCR2 showed a heterogeneous pattern of expression. CCR3 was found in almost all patients with CLL and in the majority of those with HCL, whereas it was usually lacking in patients with MZL and SLL and in healthy subjects. CCR5 was expressed in patients with HCL and MCL. Migration assays showed that different chemokines, mainly CXCL12 and CXCL13, are able to trigger migration of malignant B lymphocytes. Some of these chemokines induce calcium mobilization. These data indicate that different patterns of chemokine receptor expression identify different malignant B-cell subsets and that these receptors are functional and might play a role in malignant B-cell circulation.

Upregulation of CXCR1 by proliferating cells in patients with lymphoproliferative disease of granular lymphocytes.

The expression and the functional activities of different chemokine receptors (CC motif: CCR1, CCR2, CCR3, CCR5, CCR6; CXC motif: CXCR1, CXCR2, CXCR3, CXCR4, CXCR5) were investigated in 12 patients with lymphoproliferative disease of granular lymphocytes (LDGL). Six patients were characterized by the proliferation of CD3+ve GL and six patients by the expansion of CD3-ve GL. The interleukin 8 (IL-8/CXCL8) receptor CXCR1 was expressed in 12/12 patients, the CXCR4 in 6/12 patients (four CD3+ve and two CD3-ve) and the CXCR3 in 3/12 patients (one CD3+ve and two CD3-ve). CXCR1 was expressed only by proliferating GL. Other CC and CXC receptors were not expressed on proliferating GL (< 2%). In functional assays, purified GL from the patients displayed significant migration in response to specific chemokines, indicating that CXCR1, CXCR3 and CXCR4 were functionally active in these patients. In addition, a significant reduction of IL-8/CXCL8-mediated cell migration was reported in the presence of anti-CXCR1 monoclonal antibody. Our results indicate that expanding cells from patients with LDGL express specific CXCR. These data may help to define functional properties of proliferating GL in patients with LDGL and contribute toward the understanding of the complex clinical features of this disease. In particular, as CXCR1 was expressed in all of the patients studied, we speculate that abnormal expression of this receptor on proliferating GL might play a role in the pathogenesis of neutropenia, which represents a common feature in LDGL patients.