Progress against lung cancer, Denmark, 2008-2022.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There has been marked progress against lung cancer in Denmark. To gain further insight into the different aspects of the improvement, we examined the stage-specific incidence rates, stage-specific survival and mortality rates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used information from the Danish Lung Cancer Registry on date of diagnosis and clinical stage to calculate age-standardised incidence rates and patient survival by sex, period and stage. Information about age-standardised lung cancer-specific mortality rates by sex and period was extracted from The Danish Health Data Authority. RESULTS: Firstly, the decrease in incidence rates was due to a reduction in the rates of advanced stages. Secondly, there was a gradual increase in survival across all stages, and thirdly, the mortality rates gradually decreased over time. INTERPRETATION: The improvements in survival and mortality from lung cancer were due to decreasing incidence rates of advanced cancer and improvement in survival at all stages of the disease.

Capecitabine monotherapy as first-line treatment in advanced HER2-normal breast cancer - a nationwide, retrospective study.

Background and purpose: Capecitabine can be used as first-line treatment for advanced breast cancer. However, real-world data on efficacy of capecitabine in this setting is sparse. The purpose of the study is to evaluate outcomes of patients with Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (HER2)-normal advanced breast cancer treated with capecitabine monotherapy as first-line treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study utilized the Danish Breast Cancer Group (DBCG) database and was conducted retrospectively across all Danish oncology departments. Inclusion criteria were female patients, with HER2-normal advanced breast cancer treated with capecitabine monotherapy as the first-line treatment from 2010 to 2020. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: A total of 494 patients were included. Median OS was 16.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.5-18.0), and median PFS was 6.0 months (95% CI: 5.3-6.7). Patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive disease had significantly longer OS (median: 22.8 vs. 10.5 months, p < 0.001) and PFS (median: 7.4 vs. 4.9 months, p = 0.003), when compared to ER-negative patients. Stratifying by age, patients under 45 years displayed a median PFS of 4.1 months, while those aged 45-70 years and over 70 years had median PFS of 5.7 and 7.2 months, respectively (p = 0.01). INTERPRETATION:  In this nationwide study, the efficacy of capecitabine as a first-line treatment for HER2-normal advanced breast cancer is consistent with other, mainly retrospective, studies. However, when assessed against contemporary and newer treatments, its effectiveness appears inferior to alternative chemotherapies or targeted therapies.

Tucatinib, Trastuzumab, and Capecitabine for HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer who have disease progression after therapy with multiple HER2-targeted agents have limited treatment options. Tucatinib is an investigational, oral, highly selective inhibitor of the HER2 tyrosine kinase. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer previously treated with trastuzumab, pertuzumab, and trastuzumab emtansine, who had or did not have brain metastases, to receive either tucatinib or placebo, in combination with trastuzumab and capecitabine. The primary end point was progression-free survival among the first 480 patients who underwent randomization. Secondary end points, assessed in the total population (612 patients), included overall survival, progression-free survival among patients with brain metastases, confirmed objective response rate, and safety. RESULTS: Progression-free survival at 1 year was 33.1% in the tucatinib-combination group and 12.3% in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42 to 0.71; P<0.001), and the median duration of progression-free survival was 7.8 months and 5.6 months, respectively. Overall survival at 2 years was 44.9% in the tucatinib-combination group and 26.6% in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio for death, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.88; P = 0.005), and the median overall survival was 21.9 months and 17.4 months, respectively. Among the patients with brain metastases, progression-free survival at 1 year was 24.9% in the tucatinib-combination group and 0% in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.69; P<0.001), and the median progression-free survival was 7.6 months and 5.4 months, respectively. Common adverse events in the tucatinib group included diarrhea, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, nausea, fatigue, and vomiting. Diarrhea and elevated aminotransferase levels of grade 3 or higher were more common in the tucatinib-combination group than in the placebo-combination group. CONCLUSIONS: In heavily pretreated patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, including those with brain metastases, adding tucatinib to trastuzumab and capecitabine resulted in better progression-free survival and overall survival outcomes than adding placebo; the risks of diarrhea and elevated aminotransferase levels were higher with tucatinib. (Funded by Seattle Genetics; HER2CLIMB ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02614794.).

European Respiratory Society guideline on various aspects of quality in lung cancer care.

This European Respiratory Society guideline is dedicated to the provision of good quality recommendations in lung cancer care. All the clinical recommendations contained were based on a comprehensive systematic review and evidence syntheses based on eight PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes) questions. The evidence was appraised in compliance with the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. Evidence profiles and the GRADE Evidence to Decision frameworks were used to summarise results and to make the decision-making process transparent. A multidisciplinary Task Force panel of lung cancer experts formulated and consented the clinical recommendations following thorough discussions of the systematic review results. In particular, we have made recommendations relating to the following quality improvement measures deemed applicable to routine lung cancer care: 1) avoidance of delay in the diagnostic and therapeutic period, 2) integration of multidisciplinary teams and multidisciplinary consultations, 3) implementation of and adherence to lung cancer guidelines, 4) benefit of higher institutional/individual volume and advanced specialisation in lung cancer surgery and other procedures, 5) need for pathological confirmation of lesions in patients with pulmonary lesions and suspected lung cancer, and histological subtyping and molecular characterisation for actionable targets or response to treatment of confirmed lung cancers, 6) added value of early integration of palliative care teams or specialists, 7) advantage of integrating specific quality improvement measures, and 8) benefit of using patient decision tools. These recommendations should be reconsidered and updated, as appropriate, as new evidence becomes available.

Who are the vulnerable lung cancer patients at risk for not receiving first-line curative or palliative treatment?

BACKGROUND: To identify non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients in need of comprehensive support, we examined the association between patient and disease-related factors of vulnerability related to not receiving guideline-recommended treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We identified 14,597 non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with performance status <3 during 2013-2018 in the Danish Lung Cancer Registry. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to estimate Odds Ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for receiving guideline-recommended treatment according to stage, comorbidities, age, performance status, long distance to hospital, cohabitation status, education and alcohol abuse. RESULTS: 21% of stage I-IIIA NSCLC patients did not receive curative treatment while 10% with stage IIIB-IV did not receive any oncological therapy. Factors associated with reduced likelihood of receiving curative treatment included: advanced stage (OR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.42-0.49), somatic comorbidity (OR = 0.72; 95% CI = 0.63-0.83), age ≥ 80 years (OR = 0.59; 95% CI = 0.55-0.64), performance status = 2 (OR = 0.33; 95% CI = 0.28-0.39) and living alone (OR = 0.79; 95% CI = 0.69-0.90). Results were similar for stage IIIB-IV NSCLC patients, although a statistically significant association was also seen for long distances to the hospital (OR = 0.71; 95% CI = 0.58-0.86). CONCLUSIONS: Several factors are associated with not receiving guideline-recommended NSCLC treatment with age, performance status, comorbidity and stage being most predictive of no treatment receipt. Efforts should be made to develop support for vulnerable lung cancer patients to improve adherence to optimal first-line therapy.

Educational differences in healthcare use among survivors after breast, prostate, lung, and colon cancer - a SEQUEL cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Many cancer survivors experience late effects after cancer. Comorbidity, health literacy, late effects, and help-seeking behavior may affect healthcare use and may differ among socioeconomic groups. We examined healthcare use among cancer survivors, compared with cancer-free individuals, and investigated educational differences in healthcare use among cancer survivors. METHODS: A Danish cohort of 127,472 breast, prostate, lung, and colon cancer survivors from the national cancer databases, and 637,258 age- and sex-matched cancer-free individuals was established. Date of entry was 12 months after diagnosis/index date (for cancer-free individuals). Follow-up ended at death, emigration, new primary cancer, December 31st, 2018, or up to 10 years. Information about education and healthcare use, defined as the number of consultations with general practitioner (GP), private practicing specialists (PPS), hospital, and acute healthcare contacts 1-9 years after diagnosis/index date, was extracted from national registers. We used Poisson regression models to compare healthcare use between cancer survivors and cancer-free individuals, and to investigate the association between education and healthcare use among cancer survivors. RESULTS: Cancer survivors had more GP, hospital, and acute healthcare contacts than cancer-free individuals, while the use of PPS were alike. One-to-four-year survivors with short compared to long education had more GP consultations (breast, rate ratios (RR) = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.25-1.30; prostate, RR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.10-1.18; lung, RR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.13-1.23; and colon cancer, RR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.13-1.22) and acute contacts (breast, RR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.26-1.45; prostate, RR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.15-1.38; lung, RR = 1.24, 95% CI = 1.16-1.33; and colon cancer, RR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.14-1.60), even after adjusting for comorbidity. One-to-four-year survivors with short compared to long education had less consultations with PPS, while no association was observed for hospital contacts. CONCLUSION: Cancer survivors used more healthcare than cancer-free individuals. Cancer survivors with short education had more GP and acute healthcare contacts than survivors with long education. To optimize healthcare use after cancer, we need to better understand survivors' healthcare-seeking behaviors and their specific needs, especially among survivors with short education.

An International Consensus on Actions to Improve Lung Cancer Survival: A Modified Delphi Method Among Clinical Experts in the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership.

BACKGROUND: Research from the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) demonstrates that international variation in lung cancer survival persists, particularly within early stage disease. There is a lack of international consensus on the critical contributing components to variation in lung cancer outcomes and the steps needed to optimise lung cancer services. These are needed to improve the quality of options for and equitable access to treatment, and ultimately improve survival. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 9 key informants from ICBP countries. An international clinical network representing 6 ICBP countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, England, Ireland, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, Scotland & Wales) was established to share local clinical insights and examples of best practice. Using a modified Delphi consensus model, network members suggested and rated recommendations to optimise the management of lung cancer. Calls to Action were developed via Delphi voting as the most crucial recommendations, with Good Practice Points included to support their implementation. RESULTS: Five Calls to Action and thirteen Good Practice Points applicable to high income, comparable countries were developed and achieved 100% consensus. Calls to Action include (1) Implement cost-effective, clinically efficacious, and equitable lung cancer screening initiatives; (2) Ensure diagnosis of lung cancer within 30 days of referral; (3) Develop Thoracic Centres of Excellence; (4) Undertake an international audit of lung cancer care; and (5) Recognise improvements in lung cancer care and outcomes as a priority in cancer policy. CONCLUSION: The recommendations presented are the voice of an expert international lung cancer clinical network, and signpost key considerations for policymakers in countries within the ICBP but also in other comparable high-income countries. These define a roadmap to help align and focus efforts in improving outcomes and management of lung cancer patients globally.

Forecasting lung cancer incidence, mortality, and prevalence to year 2030.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer incidence and prevalence is increasing worldwide and there is a focus on prevention, early detection, and development of new treatments which will impact the epidemiological patterns of lung cancer. The clinical characteristics and the trends in incidence, mortality, and prevalence of lung cancer in Denmark from 2006 through 2015 are described and a model for predicting the future epidemiological profile of lung cancer through 2030 is introduced. METHODS: The study population comprised all cases of lung cancer, registered in the Danish Cancer Registry, who were alive on January 1, 2006 or had a first-time ever diagnosis of lung cancer during 2006 through 2015. Information on morphology, stage of the disease, comorbidity and survival was obtained from other Danish health registers. Based on NORDCAN data and estimated patient mortality rates as well as prevalence proportions for the period 2006 through 2015, future case numbers of annual incidence, deaths, and resulting prevalence were projected. RESULTS: A total of 44.291 patients were included in the study. A shift towards more patients diagnosed with lower stages and with adenocarcinoma was observed. The incidence increased and the patient mortality rate decreased significantly, with a doubling of the prevalence during the observation period. We project that the numbers of prevalent cases of lung cancer in Denmark most likely will increase from about 10,000 at the end of 2015 to about 23,000 at the end of 2030. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support that lung cancer is being diagnosed at an earlier stage, that incidence will stop increasing, that mortality will decrease further, and that the prevalence will continue to increase substantially. Projections of cancer incidence, mortality, and prevalence are important for planning health services and should be updated at regular intervals.

Metronomic treatment of vinorelbine with oral capecitabine is tolerable in the randomized Phase 2 study XeNa including patients with HER2 non-amplified metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Metronomic treatment is hypothesized to be less toxic and more effective as compared to standard maximal tolerable dosing treatment in metastatic cancer disease. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We tested the metronomic treatment principle with vinorelbine in a randomized phase 2 setting combined with standard capecitabine treatment in the XeNa trial with Clinical Trials.gov identifier number: NCT0141771. 120 patients with disseminated HER2 non-amplified breast cancer were included. Randomization was between Arm A: vinorelbine 60 mg/m2 day 1 + day 8 in the first cycle followed by 80 mg/m2 day 1 + day 8 in the following cycles or Arm B: vinorelbine 50 mg three times a week. Capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 twice a day for days 1-14 was administered in both arms. RESULTS: The treatment was generally well-tolerated. The response rate (RR) was 24% (arm A) versus 29% (arm B) (p = .67). The clinical benefit rate (CBR) 46.8% (arm A) versus 51.7% (arm B) (p = .72). We found a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 7.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.9-10.3) in arm A and 6.3 months (95% CI 4.1-8.5) in arm B (p = .25) whereas median overall survival (OS) was 23.3 months (95% CI 20.2-26.4) in arm A and 22.3 months (95% CI 14.3-30.3) in arm B (p = .76). CONCLUSIONS: We confirmed that the combination of vinorelbine and capecitabine was well tolerated. Metronomic treatment can be used with acceptable adverse events (AEs), but we did not find significant difference in the effect compared to the standard treatment.

Veliparib with carboplatin and paclitaxel in BRCA-mutated advanced breast cancer (BROCADE3): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: BRCA1 or BRCA2-mutated breast cancers are sensitive to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors and platinum agents owing to deficiency in homologous recombination repair of DNA damage. In this trial, we compared veliparib versus placebo in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel, and continued as monotherapy if carboplatin and paclitaxel were discontinued before progression, in patients with HER2-negative advanced breast cancer and a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. METHODS: BROCADE3 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done at 147 hospitals in 36 countries. Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) had deleterious germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation-associated, histologically or cytologically confirmed advanced HER2-negative breast cancer, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and had received up to two previous lines of chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) by interactive response technology by means of permuted blocks within strata (block size of 3 or 6) to carboplatin (area under the concentration curve 6 mg/mL per min intravenously) on day 1 and paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 intravenously) on days 1, 8, and 15 of 21-day cycles combined with either veliparib (120 mg orally twice daily, on days -2 to 5) or matching placebo. If patients discontinued carboplatin and paclitaxel before progression, they could continue veliparib or placebo at an intensified dose (300 mg twice daily continuously, escalating to 400 mg twice daily if tolerated) until disease progression. Patients in the control group could receive open-label veliparib monotherapy after disease progression. Randomisation was stratified by previous platinum use, history of CNS metastases, and oestrogen and progesterone receptor status. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat, which included all randomly assigned patients with a centrally confirmed BRCA mutation, and safety analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of velilparib or placebo. This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02163694. FINDINGS: Between July 30, 2014, and Jan 17, 2018, 2202 patients were screened, of whom 513 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned. In the intention-to-treat population (n=509), 337 patients were assigned to receive veliparib plus carboplatin-paclitaxel (veliparib group) and 172 were assigned to receive placebo plus carboplatin-paclitaxel (control group). Median follow-up at data cutoff (April 5, 2019) was 35·7 months (IQR 24·9-43·6) in the veliparib group and 35·5 months (23·1-45·9) in the control group. Median progression-free survival was 14·5 months (95% CI 12·5-17·7) in the veliparib group versus 12·6 months (10·6-14·4) in the control group (hazard ratio 0·71 [95% CI 0·57-0·88], p=0·0016). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (272 [81%] of 336 patients in the veliparib group vs 143 [84%] of 171 patients in the control group), anaemia (142 [42%] vs 68 [40%]), and thrombocytopenia (134 [40%] vs 48 [28%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 115 (34%) patients in the veliparib group versus 49 (29%) patients in the control group. There were no study drug-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: The addition of veliparib to a highly active platinum doublet, with continuation as monotherapy if the doublet were discontinued, resulted in significant and durable improvement in progression-free survival in patients with germline BRCA mutation-associated advanced breast cancer. These data indicate the utility of combining platinum and PARP inhibitors in this patient population. FUNDING: AbbVie.

PIK3CA alterations and benefit with neratinib: analysis from the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III ExteNET trial.

BACKGROUND: Neratinib is an irreversible pan-HER tyrosine kinase inhibitor that inhibits PI3K/Akt and MAPK signaling pathways after HER2 receptor activation. The ExteNET study showed that neratinib significantly improved 5-year invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) in women who completed trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy for early breast cancer (EBC). We assessed the prognostic and predictive significance of PIK3CA alterations in patients in ExteNET. METHODS: Participants were women aged ≥ 18 years (≥ 20 years in Japan) with stage 1-3c (modified to stage 2-3c in February 2010) operable breast cancer, who had completed (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy plus trastuzumab ≤ 2 years before randomization, with no evidence of disease recurrence or metastatic disease at study entry. Patients were randomized to oral neratinib 240 mg/day or placebo for 1 year. Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded primary tumor specimens underwent polymerase chain reaction (PCR) PIK3CA testing for two hotspot mutations in exon 9, one hot-spot mutation in exon 20, and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis for PIK3CA amplification. The primary endpoint (iDFS) was tested with log-rank test and hazard ratios (HRs) estimated using Cox proportional-hazards models. RESULTS: Among the intent-to-treat population (n = 2840), tumor specimens were available for PCR testing (991 patients) and PIK3CA FISH (702 patients). Overall, 262 samples were PIK3CA altered: 201 were mutated (77%), 52 (20%) were amplified, and 9 (3%) were mutated and amplified. iDFS was non-significantly worse in placebo-treated patients with altered vs wild-type PIK3CA (HR 1.34; 95% CI 0.72-2.50; P = 0.357). Neratinib's effect over placebo was significant in patients with PIK3CA-altered tumors (HR 0.41; 95% CI 0.17-0.90, P = 0.028) but not PIK3CA wild-type tumors (HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.36-1.41; P = 0.34). The interaction test was non-significant (P = 0.309). CONCLUSIONS: Although there was a greater absolute risk reduction associated with neratinib treatment of patients with PIK3CA-altered tumors in ExteNET, current data do not support PIK3CA alteration as a predictive biomarker of response to neratinib in HER2-positive EBC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT00878709 . Trial registered April 9, 2009.

Ribociclib as First-Line Therapy for HR-Positive, Advanced Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The inhibition of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) could potentially overcome or delay resistance to endocrine therapy in advanced breast cancer that is positive for hormone receptor (HR) and negative for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). METHODS: In this randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of the selective CDK4/6 inhibitor ribociclib combined with letrozole for first-line treatment in 668 postmenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative recurrent or metastatic breast cancer who had not received previous systemic therapy for advanced disease. We randomly assigned the patients to receive either ribociclib (600 mg per day on a 3-weeks-on, 1-week-off schedule) plus letrozole (2.5 mg per day) or placebo plus letrozole. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, overall response rate, and safety. A preplanned interim analysis was performed on January 29, 2016, after 243 patients had disease progression or died. Prespecified criteria for superiority required a hazard ratio of 0.56 or less with P<1.29×10-5. RESULTS: The duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer in the ribociclib group than in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.72; P=3.29×10-6 for superiority). The median duration of follow-up was 15.3 months. After 18 months, the progression-free survival rate was 63.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 54.6 to 70.3) in the ribociclib group and 42.2% (95% CI, 34.8 to 49.5) in the placebo group. In patients with measurable disease at baseline, the overall response rate was 52.7% and 37.1%, respectively (P<0.001). Common grade 3 or 4 adverse events that were reported in more than 10% of the patients in either group were neutropenia (59.3% in the ribociclib group vs. 0.9% in the placebo group) and leukopenia (21.0% vs. 0.6%); the rates of discontinuation because of adverse events were 7.5% and 2.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients receiving initial systemic treatment for HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer, the duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer among those receiving ribociclib plus letrozole than among those receiving placebo plus letrozole, with a higher rate of myelosuppression in the ribociclib group. (Funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01958021 .).

Active Surveillance for Localized Prostate Cancer: Nationwide Observational Study.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to investigate nationwide survival outcomes in men with localized prostate cancer managed on active surveillance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 936 men with localized prostate cancer were initiated on active surveillance in Denmark in 2002 to 2012. Kaplan-Meier estimated curative treatment-free, hormonal therapy-free, castration resistant prostate cancer-free and cause specific survival was calculated. RESULTS: Prostate cancer was classified as very low risk in 223 men, low risk in 436, intermediate risk in 259 (87% were at favorable intermediate risk) and high risk in 18. Median followup was 7.5 years (IQR 6.1-9.1). Kaplan-Meier estimated 10-year curative treatment-free survival was 62.8% (95% CI 59.1-66.3), 10-year hormonal therapy-free survival was 92.2% (95% CI 89.2-94.4), 10-year castration resistant prostate cancer-free survival was 97.2% (95% CI 95.3-98.4) and 10-year cause specific survival was 99.6% (95% CI 98.6-99.9). Compared to men with low risk prostate cancer, those with intermediate risk prostate cancer had higher curative treatment-free survival (69% vs 56%, p = 0.008), lower hormonal therapy-free survival (88% vs 95%, p = 0.005) and similar castration resistant prostate cancer-free survival (95% vs 99%, p = 0.17). CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide cohort 10-year cause specific survival was similar to that in prospective active surveillance cohorts. Our study supports the use of active surveillance in men with localized prostate cancer, including men with favorable intermediate risk characteristics.

Two open-label, single arm, non-randomized phase II studies of irinotecan for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer in patients with increased copy number of the topoisomerase I gene.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options in metastatic breast cancer are limited. New therapies preferable with predictive biomarkers are needed. The aim of these trials was to investigate if gene copy number of the topoisomerase 1 gene was predictive of response to the topoisomerase inhibitor irinotecan. METHODS: Two open-label, single-arm phase II studies including HER2 positive and negative patients were conducted. Patients were eligible for inclusion if the primary tumor or a metastatic lesion had increased expression of the topoisomerase 1 gene defined as a TOP1 gene copy number of ≥4 or a TOP1/CEN20 ratio of ≥2. Patients were treated with irinotecan +/- trastuzumab weekly for 4 weeks following 2 weeks break, until progression or unacceptable toxicities. Evaluation scans were performed every 6 weeks. Primary endpoint was clinical benefit rate defined as the fraction of patients with stable disease for ≥4 months. RESULTS: The pre-planned number of 18 patients in each trial was not reached, thus no formal statistical analysis could be performed. Nine patients with HER2 negative disease and three patients with HER2 positive disease were included. Three patients obtained a partial remission and two patients had SD. CONCLUSIONS: The trials did not include the planned number of patients. No association between gene copy number of the topoisomerase 1 gene and response to irinotecan could be proved, however a clinical benefit was found in 5/12 patients and in 2/3 patients with HER2 positive disease. This could call for further investigation of the drug in the metastatic setting, especially in HER2 positive BC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Eudract registration numbers 2012-002348-26 and 2012-002347-23 . Registration date August 20th 2012.

Geographical variations in the use of cancer treatments are associated with survival of lung cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer outcomes in England are inferior to comparable countries. Patient or disease characteristics, healthcare-seeking behaviour, diagnostic pathways, and oncology service provision may contribute. We aimed to quantify associations between geographic variations in treatment and survival of patients in England. METHODS: We retrieved detailed cancer registration data to analyse the variation in survival of 176,225 lung cancer patients, diagnosed 2010-2014. We used Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression to investigate survival in the two-year period following diagnosis. RESULTS: Survival improved over the period studied. The use of active treatment varied between geographical areas, with inter-quintile ranges of 9%-17% for surgical resection, 4%-13% for radical radiotherapy, and 22%-35% for chemotherapy. At 2 years, there were 188 potentially avoidable deaths annually for surgical resection, and 373 for radical radiotherapy, if all treated proportions were the same as in the highest quintiles. At the 6 month time-point, 318 deaths per year could be postponed if chemotherapy use for all patients was as in the highest quintile. The results were robust to statistical adjustments for age, sex, socio-economic status, performance status and co-morbidity. CONCLUSION: The extent of use of different treatment modalities varies between geographical areas in England. These variations are not attributable to measurable patient and tumour characteristics, and more likely reflect differences in clinical management between local multi-disciplinary teams. The data suggest improvement over time, but there is potential for further survival gains if the use of active treatments in all areas could be increased towards the highest current regional rates.

Ribociclib with letrozole vs letrozole alone in elderly patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer in the randomized MONALEESA-2 trial.

PURPOSE: Determine the efficacy and safety of first-line ribociclib plus letrozole in elderly patients with HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer. METHODS: 668 postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer and no prior systemic therapy for advanced disease were enrolled in the Phase III MONALEESA-2 trial (NCT01958021); 295 patients were aged ≥ 65 years. Patients were randomized to ribociclib (600 mg/day; 3-weeks-on/1-week-off) plus letrozole (2.5 mg/day) or placebo plus letrozole until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, or treatment discontinuation. The primary endpoint was PFS, which was evaluated in elderly (≥ 65 years) and younger (< 65 years) patients. Secondary endpoints included response rates and safety. RESULTS: Ribociclib plus letrozole significantly improved PFS vs placebo plus letrozole in elderly (hazard ratio: 0.608; 95% CI 0.394-0.937) and younger patients (hazard ratio: 0.523; 95% CI 0.378-0.723). Overall response rates were numerically higher in the ribociclib vs placebo arm, regardless of age. Ribociclib plus letrozole was well tolerated in elderly patients, with the safety profile similar to the overall study population. Nausea, vomiting, alopecia, and diarrhea were > 10% more frequent in the ribociclib plus letrozole vs placebo plus letrozole arm in both subgroups; most events were grade 1/2. In elderly patients, grade 1/2 anemia and fatigue were > 10% more frequent in the ribociclib plus letrozole vs placebo plus letrozole arm and discontinuation rates were similar in both arms. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of ribociclib to letrozole is a valid therapeutic option for elderly patients with HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer in the first-line setting.

Ribociclib plus letrozole versus letrozole alone in patients with de novo HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer in the randomized MONALEESA-2 trial.

PURPOSE: Determine the efficacy and safety of first-line ribociclib plus letrozole in patients with de novo advanced breast cancer. METHODS: Postmenopausal women with HR+ , HER2- advanced breast cancer and no prior systemic therapy for advanced disease were enrolled in the Phase III MONALEESA-2 trial (NCT01958021). Patients were randomized to ribociclib (600 mg/day; 3 weeks-on/1 week-off) plus letrozole (2.5 mg/day; continuous) or placebo plus letrozole until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, or treatment discontinuation. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival; predefined subgroup analysis evaluated progression-free survival in patients with de novo advanced breast cancer. Secondary endpoints included safety and overall response rate. RESULTS: Six hundred and sixty-eight patients were enrolled, of whom 227 patients (34%; ribociclib plus letrozole vs placebo plus letrozole arm: n = 114 vs. n = 113) presented with de novo advanced breast cancer. Median progression-free survival was not reached in the ribociclib plus letrozole arm versus 16.4 months in the placebo plus letrozole arm in patients with de novo advanced breast cancer (hazard ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.75). The most common Grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia and leukopenia; incidence rates were similar to those observed in the full MONALEESA-2 population. Ribociclib dose interruptions and reductions in patients with de novo disease occurred at similar frequencies to the overall study population. CONCLUSIONS: Ribociclib plus letrozole improved progression-free survival vs placebo plus letrozole and was well tolerated in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- de novo advanced breast cancer.

Predicting efficacy of epirubicin by a multigene assay in advanced breast cancer within a Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG) cohort: a retrospective-prospective blinded study.

PURPOSE: Anthracyclines remain a cornerstone in the treatment of primary and advanced breast cancer (BC). This study has evaluated the predictive value of a multigene mRNA-based drug response predictor (DRP) in the treatment of advanced BC with epirubicin. The DRP is a mathematical method combining in vitro sensitivity and gene expression with clinical genetic information from > 3000 clinical tumor samples. METHODS: From a DBCG cohort, 140 consecutive patients were treated with epirubicin between May 1997 and November 2016. After patient informed consent, mRNA was isolated from archival formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded primary breast tumor tissue and analyzed using Affymetrix arrays. Using time to progression (TTP) as primary endpoint, the efficacy of epirubicin was analyzed according to DRP combined with clinicopathological data collected retrospectively from patients' medical records. Statistical analysis was done using Cox proportional hazards model stratified by treatment line. RESULTS: Median TTP was 9.3 months. The DRP was significantly associated to TTP (P = 0.03). The hazard ratio for DRP scores differing by 50 percentage points was 0.55 (95% CI -0.93, one-sided). A 75% DRP was associated with a median TTP of 13 months compared to 7 months following a 25% DRP. Multivariate analysis showed that DRP was independent of age and number of metastases. CONCLUSION: The current study prospectively validates the predictive capability of DRP regarding epirubicin previously shown retrospectively allowing the patients predicted to be poor responders to choose more effective alternatives. Randomized prospective studies are needed to demonstrate if such an approach will lead to increased overall survival.

ERS statement on harmonised standards for lung cancer registration and lung cancer services in Europe.

The European Respiratory Society (ERS) task force for harmonised standards for lung cancer registration and lung cancer services in Europe recognised the need to create a single dataset for use in pan-European data collection and a manual of standards for European lung cancer services.The multidisciplinary task force considered evidence from two different sources, reviewing existing national and international datasets alongside the results of a survey of clinical data collection on lung cancer in 35 European countries. A similar process was followed for the manual of lung cancer services, with the task force using existing guidelines and national or international recommendations for lung cancer services to develop a manual of standards for services in Europe.The task force developed essential and minimum datasets for lung cancer registration to enable all countries to collect the same essential data and some to collect data with greater detail. The task force also developed a manual specifying standards for lung cancer services in Europe.Despite the wide variation in the sociopolitical landscape across Europe, the ERS is determined to encourage the delivery of high-quality lung cancer care. Both the manual of lung cancer services and the minimum dataset for lung cancer registration will support this aspiration.

Achieving Thoracic Oncology data collection in Europe: a precursor study in 35 Countries.

BACKGROUND: A minority of European countries have participated in international comparisons with high level data on lung cancer. However, the nature and extent of data collection across the continent is simply unknown, and without accurate data collection it is not possible to compare practice and set benchmarks to which lung cancer services can aspire. METHODS: Using an established network of lung cancer specialists in 37 European countries, a survey was distributed in December 2014. The results relate to current practice in each country at the time, early 2015. The results were compiled and then verified with co-authors over the following months. RESULTS: Thirty-five completed surveys were received which describe a range of current practice for lung cancer data collection. Thirty countries have data collection at the national level, but this is not so in Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Italy, Spain and Switzerland. Data collection varied from paper records with no survival analysis, to well-established electronic databases with links to census data and survival analyses. CONCLUSION: Using a network of committed clinicians, we have gathered validated comparative data reporting an observed difference in data collection mechanisms across Europe. We have identified the need to develop a well-designed dataset, whilst acknowledging what is feasible within each country, and aspiring to collect high quality data for clinical research.