Pathogenic alterations in PIK3CA and KMT2C are frequent and independent prognostic factors in anal squamous cell carcinoma treated with salvage abdominoperineal resection.

The management of anal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC) has yet to experience the transformative impact of precision medicine. Conducting genomic analyses may uncover novel prognostic biomarkers and offer potential directions for the development of targeted therapies. To that end, we assessed the prognostic and theragnostic implications of pathogenic variants identified in 571 cancer-related genes from surgical samples collected from a homogeneous, multicentric French cohort of 158 ASCC patients who underwent abdominoperineal resection treatment. Alterations in PI3K/AKT/mTOR, chromatin remodeling, and Notch pathways were frequent in HPV-positive tumors, while HPV-negative tumors often harbored variants in cell cycle regulation and genome integrity maintenance genes (e.g., frequent TP53 and TERT promoter mutations). In patients with HPV-positive tumors, KMT2C and PIK3CA exon 9/20 pathogenic variants were associated with worse overall survival in multivariate analysis (Hazard ratio (HR)KMT2C = 2.54, 95%CI = [1.25,5.17], P value = .010; HRPIK3CA = 2.43, 95%CI = [1.3,4.56], P value = .006). Alterations with theragnostic value in another cancer type was detected in 43% of patients. These results suggest that PIK3CA and KMT2C pathogenic variants are independent prognostic factors in patients with ASCC with HPV-positive tumors treated by abdominoperineal resection. And, importantly, the high prevalence of alterations bearing potential theragnostic value strongly supports the use of genomic profiling to allow patient enrollment in precision medicine clinical trials.

Management of non-metastatic anal cancer in the elderly: ancillary study of the French multicenter prospective cohort FFCD-ANABASE.

BACKGROUND: Standard care for non-metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) is chemoradiotherapy, data about elderly patients are scarce. METHODS: All consecutive patients treated for non-metastatic SCCA from the French multicenter FFCD-ANABASE cohort were included. Two groups were defined according to age: elderly (≥75 years) and non-elderly (<75). RESULTS: Of 1015 patients, 202 (19.9%) were included in the elderly group; median follow-up was 35.5 months. Among the elderly, there were more women (p = 0.015); frailer patients (p < 0.001), fewer smokers (p < 0.001) and fewer HIV-infected (p < 0.001) than in the non-elderly group. Concomitant chemotherapy and inguinal irradiation were less frequent (p < 0.001 and p = 0.04). In the elderly group; 3-year overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS) and colostomy-free survival (CFS) were 82.9%, 72.4% and 78.0%, respectively; complete response rate at 4-6 months was 70.3%. There were no differences between groups for all outcomes and toxicity. In multivariate analyses for the elderly, PS ≥ 2 and locally-advanced tumors were significantly associated with poor OS (HR = 3.4 and HR = 2.80), RFS (HR = 2.4 and HR = 3.1) and CFS (HR = 3.8 and HR = 3.0); and treatment interruption with poor RFS (HR = 1.9). CONCLUSION: In the FFCD-ANABASE cohort, age did not influence tumor and tolerance outcomes of non-metastatic SCCA. Optimal curative treatment should be offered to elderly patients.

Adjuvant Nivolumab in Resected Esophageal or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer.

BACKGROUND: No adjuvant treatment has been established for patients who remain at high risk for recurrence after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery for esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer. METHODS: We conducted CheckMate 577, a global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial to evaluate a checkpoint inhibitor as adjuvant therapy in patients with esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer. Adults with resected (R0) stage II or III esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer who had received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and had residual pathological disease were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive nivolumab (at a dose of 240 mg every 2 weeks for 16 weeks, followed by nivolumab at a dose of 480 mg every 4 weeks) or matching placebo. The maximum duration of the trial intervention period was 1 year. The primary end point was disease-free survival. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 24.4 months. Among the 532 patients who received nivolumab, the median disease-free survival was 22.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.6 to 34.0), as compared with 11.0 months (95% CI, 8.3 to 14.3) among the 262 patients who received placebo (hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death, 0.69; 96.4% CI, 0.56 to 0.86; P<0.001). Disease-free survival favored nivolumab across multiple prespecified subgroups. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events that were considered by the investigators to be related to the active drug or placebo occurred in 71 of 532 patients (13%) in the nivolumab group and 15 of 260 patients (6%) in the placebo group. The trial regimen was discontinued because of adverse events related to the active drug or placebo in 9% of the patients in the nivolumab group and 3% of those in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with resected esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer who had received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, disease-free survival was significantly longer among those who received nivolumab adjuvant therapy than among those who received placebo. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; CheckMate 577 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02743494.).

Bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI after failure of platinum-etoposide first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced neuroendocrine carcinoma (PRODIGE 41-BEVANEC): a randomised, multicentre, non-comparative, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: There is no standard second-line treatment after platinum-etoposide chemotherapy for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab, and FOLFIRI alone, in this setting. METHODS: We did a randomised, non-comparative, open-label, phase 2 trial (PRODIGE 41-BEVANEC) at 26 hospitals in France. We included patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma or neuroendocrine carcinoma of unknown primary origin, documented progressive disease during or after first-line platinum-etoposide chemotherapy, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1; block size of three), without stratification, to receive FOLFIRI (irinotecan 180 mg/m2, calcium folinate 400 mg/m2 or levofolinate 200 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus then 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h) plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg or FOLFIRI alone, intravenously, every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was overall survival at 6 months after randomisation, evaluated in the modified intention-to-treat population (all enrolled and randomly assigned patients who received at least one cycle of FOLFIRI). This study is now complete and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02820857. FINDINGS: Between Sept 5, 2017, and Feb 8, 2022, 150 patients were assessed for eligibility and 133 were enrolled and randomly assigned: 65 to the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group and 68 to the FOLFIRI group. 126 patients (59 in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group and 67 in the FOLFIRI group) received at least one cycle of FOLFIRI and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population, 83 (66%) of whom were male and 43 (34%) were female, and the median age of the patients was 67 years (IQR 58-73). The primary tumour location was colorectal in 38 (30%) of 126 patients, pancreatic in 34 (27%), gastro-oesophageal in 22 (17%), and unknown in 23 (18%). After a median follow-up of 25·7 months (95% CI 22·0-38·2), 6-month overall survival was 53% (80% CI 43-61) in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group and 60% (51-68) in the FOLFIRI group. Grade 3-4 adverse events that occurred in at least 5% of patients were neutropenia (eight [14%] patients), diarrhoea (six [10%]), and asthenia (five [8%]) in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group, and neutropenia (seven [10%]) in the FOLFIRI group. One treatment-related death (ischaemic stroke) occurred in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of bevacizumab did not seem to increase the benefit of FOLFIRI with regard to overall survival. FOLFIRI could be considered as a standard second-line treatment in patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma. FUNDING: French Ministry of Health and Roche SAS.

Chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic adenosquamous carcinoma: A retrospective multicenter AGEO study.

Pancreatic adenosquamous carcinoma (PASC) account for <5% of pancreatic malignancies. The efficacy of modern chemotherapy regimens in patients with advanced PASC is unknown. Patients with advanced PASC from 2008 to 2021 were consecutively included in this retrospective multicenter study. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier method. Ninety-four PASC from 16 French centers were included (median age, 67.3 years; males, 56.4%; metastatic disease, 85.1%). The first-line treatment was chemotherapy for 79 patients (84.0%) (37 FOLFIRINOX (FX), 7 Gemcitabine-nab paclitaxel (GN) and 35 for all other regimen) or best supportive care (BSC) alone for 15 patients (16.0%). No significant difference was observed between FX and GN in terms of PFS (P = .67) or OS (P = .5). Modern regimens pooled together (FX and GN) as compared to all others chemotherapy regimens showed an improvement of overall response rate (39.5% and 9.7%, P = .002), PFS (median, 7.8 vs 4.7 months, P = .02) and OS (median, 12.7 vs 9.2 months, P = .35). This large study evaluating first-line treatment regimens in advanced PASC suggests that modern regimens as FX or GN may be preferable to all other chemotherapy regimens. These results deserve confirmation in prospective studies.

Influence of cirrhosis on outcomes of patients with advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma receiving chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Cirrhosis is a risk factor for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCC). However, its exact prevalence is uncertain and its impact on the management of advanced disease is not established. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients treated with systemic chemotherapy for advanced iCC in the 1st-line setting at 2 tertiary cancer referral centres. Cirrhosis was diagnosed based on at least one element prior to any treatment: pathological diagnosis, baseline platelets <150 × 109/L, portal hypertension and/or dysmorphic liver on imaging. RESULTS: In the cohort of patients (n = 287), 82 (28.6%) had cirrhosis (45 based on pathological diagnosis). Patients with cirrhosis experienced more grade 3/4 haematologic toxicity (44% vs 22%, respectively, P = 0.001), and more grade 3/4 non-haematologic toxicity (34% vs 14%, respectively, P = 0.001) than those without. The overall survival (OS) was significantly shorter in patients with cirrhosis: median 9.1 vs 13.1 months for those without (HR = 1.56 [95% CI: 1.19-2.05]); P = 0.002), confirmed on multivariable analysis (HR = 1.48 [95% CI: 1.04-2.60]; P = 0.028). CONCLUSION: Cirrhosis was relatively common in patients with advanced iCC and was associated with increased chemotherapy-induced toxicity and shorter OS. Formal assessment and consideration of cirrhosis in therapeutic management is recommended.

Should we screen for colorectal cancer in people aged 75 and over? A systematic review - collaborative work of the French geriatric oncology society (SOFOG) and the French federation of digestive oncology (FFCD).

BACKGROUND: We have done a systematic literature review about CRC Screening over 75 years old in order to update knowledge and make recommendations. METHODS: PUBMED database was searched in October 2021 for articles published on CRC screening in the elderly, and generated 249 articles. Further searches were made to find articles on the acceptability, efficacy, and harms of screening in this population, together with the state of international guidelines. RESULTS: Most benefit-risk data on CRC screening in the over 75 s derived from simulation studies. Most guidelines recommend stopping cancer screening at the age of 75. In private health systems, extension of screening up to 80-85 years is, based on the life expectancy and the history of screening. Screening remains effective in populations without comorbidity given their better life-expectancy. Serious adverse events of colonoscopy increase with age and can outweigh the benefit of screening. The great majority of reviews concluded that screening between 75 and 85 years must be decided case by case. CONCLUSION: The current literature does not allow Evidence-Based Medicine propositions for mass screening above 75 years old. As some subjects over 75 years may benefit from CRC screening, we discussed ways to introduce CRC screening in France in the 75-80 age group. IRB: An institutional review board composed of members of the 2 learned societies (SOFOG and FFCD) defined the issues of interest, followed the evolution of the work and reviewed and validated the report.

Effect of Adapted Physical Activity in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: The APACaP GERCOR Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: The impact of adapted physical activity (APA) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (aPDAC) is unknown. This study evaluated whether APA in addition to standard care improved HRQoL in patients who have aPDAC who are receiving first-line chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced/metastatic PDAC and an ECOG performance status of 0 to 2 were randomized (1:1) to receive standard care (standard arm) or standard care plus a home-based 16-week APA program (APA arm). The primary objective was the effect of the APA program on 3 dimensions of the EORTC QLQ-C30: global health status, physical function, and fatigue at week 16 (W16), with a one-sided type I error of 0.017 for each dimension. The primary HRQoL analysis was performed in patients with available baseline and W16 scores for the dimensions (ie, the modified intention-to-treat population 1 [mITT1]), and secondary longitudinal HRQoL analyses using the mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) and time until definitive deterioration (TUDD) methods were performed in the mITT1 population and in patients with baseline and at least one follow-up questionnaire (mITT2 population). A difference of ≥5 points was considered to be clinically relevant. RESULTS: Of 326 included patients, 313 were randomized to the standard (n=157) or APA (n=156) arms. In the mITT1 population (n=172), the mean differences in global health status, physical function, and fatigue at W16 adjusted from baseline were -0.98 (SD, 23.9; P=.39), -2.08 (SD, 21.3; P=.26), and 4.16 (SD, 29.2; P=.17), respectively, showing a non-statistically significant benefit with APA. In the mITT2 population (n=259), APA was associated with statistically significant and clinically relevant improvement in 5 and 8 dimensions of the HRQoL in the longitudinal MMRM and TUDD analyses, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: APA improved several dimensions of HRQoL in patients with aPDAC receiving first-line chemotherapy and standard care.

Gemcitabine + Nab-paclitaxel or Gemcitabine alone after FOLFIRINOX failure in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a real-world AGEO study.

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine (Gem) alone or with Nab-paclitaxel (Gem-Nab) is used as second-line treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPA) after FOLFIRINOX (FFX) failure; however, no comparative data exist. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of adding Nab-paclitaxel to Gem for mPA after FFX failure. METHODS: In this retrospective real-world multicenter study, from 2011 to 2019, patients with mPA receiving Gem-Nab (Gem 1000 mg/m² + Nab 125 mg/m², 3 out of 4 weeks) or Gem alone were included after progression on FFX. RESULTS: A total of 427 patients were included. Patients receiving Gem-Nab had more metastatic sites, peritoneal disease and less PS 2 (24% vs. 35%). After median follow-up of 22 months, Gem-Nab was associated with better disease control rate (DCR) (56% vs. 32%; P < 0.001), progression-free survival (PFS) (3.5 vs. 2.3 months; 95% CI: 0.43-0.65) and overall survival (OS) (7.1 vs. 4.7 months; 95% CI: 0.53-0.86). After multivariate analysis, Gem-Nab and PS 0/1 were associated with better OS and PFS. Grade 3/4 toxicity was more frequent with Gem-Nab (44% vs. 29%). CONCLUSION: In this study, Gem-Nab was associated with better DCR, PFS and OS compared with Gem alone in patients with mPA after FFX failure, at the cost of higher toxicity.

Prognostic factors of BRAF V600E colorectal cancer with liver metastases: a retrospective multicentric study.

BACKGROUND: BRAF V600E-mutant colorectal cancers (CRCs) are associated with shorter survival than BRAF wild-type tumors. Therapeutic decision-making for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) harboring this mutation remains difficult due to the scarce literature. The aim was to study a large cohort of BRAF V600E-mutant CRLM patients in order to see if surgery extend overall survival among others prognostic factors. METHODS: BRAF V600E-mutant CRCs diagnosed with liver-only metastases, resected or not, were retrospectively identified between April 2008 and December 2017, in 25 French centers. Clinical, molecular, pathological characteristics and treatment features were collected. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from CRLM diagnosis to death from any cause. Cox proportional hazard models were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Among the 105 patients included, 79 (75%) received chemotherapy, 18 (17%) underwent upfront CRLM surgery, and 8 (8%) received exclusive best supportive care. CRLM surgery was performed in 49 (46.7%) patients. CRLM were mainly synchronous (90%) with bilobar presentation (61%). The median OS was 34 months (range, 28.9-67.3 months) for resected patients and 10.6 (6.7-12.5) months for unresected patients (P < 0.0001). In multivariate analysis, primary tumor surgery (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.349; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.164-0.744, P = 0.0064) and CRLM resection (HR = 0.169; 95% CI 0.082-0.348, P < 0.0001) were associated with significantly better OS. CONCLUSIONS: In the era of systemic cytotoxic chemotherapies, liver surgery seems to extend OS in BRAF V600E-mutant CRCs with liver only metastases historical cohort.

Panel gene profiling of small bowel adenocarcinoma: Results from the NADEGE prospective cohort.

Small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) is a rare tumour. Large genomic analyses with prognostic assessments are lacking. The NADEGE cohort has enrolled 347 patients with all stage SBA from 2009 to 2012. Next-generation sequencing investigates the presence of 740 hotspot somatic mutations in a panel of 46 genes involved in carcinogenesis. The mismatch repair (MMR) status was assessed by immunochemistry. We have collected 196 tumour samples and 125 had conclusive results for mutation analysis. The number of mutations was 0 in 9.6% of tumours, only 1 in 32.0%, 2 in 26.4% and ≥3 in 32.0%. Overall, at least one genomic alteration was observed in 90.4% of tumour. The most frequent genomic alteration was in KRAS (44.0%), TP53 (38.4%), PIK3CA (20.0%), APC (18.4%), SMAD4 (14.4%) and ERBB2 (7.2%) genes. KRAS mutations were more frequent in synchronous metastatic tumours than in localised tumours (72.7% vs 38.2%, P = .003). There was no significant difference in the mutation rates according to primary location for the most frequently altered gene. ATM, FGFR3 and FGFR1 gene alterations were associated with Lynch syndrome and IDH1 mutations with Crohn disease. dMMR tumours were associated with younger age, localised tumours, less KRAS but more SMARCB1 mutations. No genomic alteration was associated with overall survival. There is a trend for better survival in patient with dMMR tumours. In conclusion, there is a different genomic alteration profile in SBA according to predisposing diseases. No association between genomic alterations and prognoses was observed except for a trend of better prognoses associated with dMMR.

Significant decrease in interval colorectal cancer incidence after implementing immunochemical testing in a multiple-round guaiac-based screening programme.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We aimed to evaluate the effects of switching to faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) on the cumulative 2-year incidence rate of interval cancers, interval cancer rate and test sensitivity within a mature population-based colorectal cancer screening programme consisting of six rounds of biennial guaiac faecal occult blood testing (gFOBT). METHODS: The FIT results were compared with those of gFOBT used in each of the previous two rounds. For the three rounds analysed, 279,041 tests were performed by 156,186 individuals. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine interval cancer risk factors (Poisson regression) and to compare the sensitivity of FIT to gFOBT. RESULTS: There were 612 cases of screen-detected cancers and 209 cases of interval cancers. The sex- and age-adjusted cumulative 2-year incidence rates of interval cancers were 55.7 (95% CI, 45.3-68.5), 42.4 (95% CI, 32.6-55.2) and 15.8 (95% CI, 10.9-22.8) per 100,000 person-years after the last two rounds of gFOBT and FIT, respectively. The FIT/gFOBT incidence rate ratio was 0.38 [95% CI, 0.27-0.54] (P < 0.001). Sex- and age-adjusted sensitivity was significantly higher with FIT than with gFOBT (OR = 6.70 [95% CI, 4.48-10.01], P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This population-based study revealed a dramatic decrease in the cumulative incidence rates of interval cancers after switching from gFOBT to FIT. These data provide an additional incentive for countries still using gFOBT to switch to FIT.

Reappraisal of the characteristics, management, and prognosis of intramucosal colorectal cancers and their comparison with T1 carcinomas.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The recent description of "invasive" forms of intramucosal carcinoma (IMC) has rekindled interest in studying the characteristics, management, and prognosis of IMCs and comparing them with T1 colorectal cancers (CRCs). METHODS: This population-based study included 282 cases of IMC and 207 cases of T1 CRC diagnosed by colonoscopy after a positive fecal blood test through a screening program. RESULTS: IMC presented mainly in the form of pedunculated polyps (68.4%) located in the distal colon (69.9%) ≥20 mm in size (60.6%). IMCs were resected endoscopically in 227 (80.5%) patients and surgically resected in 55 (19.5%) patients. Surgical patients had more right-sided, more sessile, and larger lesions. There was no sign of lymphovascular invasion. Compared with T1 CRCs, IMCs demonstrated lower rates of sessile polyps (31.6% vs 49.8%, P < .0001), primary and ultimate surgical treatment (19.5% vs 39.1% and 19.9% vs 78.7%, P < .0001, respectively), lymph node metastasis in surgical patients (0% vs 9.5%, P = .041), cancer recurrence and cancer-related mortality (0% vs 5.6% and 0% vs 2.5%, respectively), and bleeding after endoscopic resection (1.8% vs 8.7%, P = .001). By multivariate analysis of the pooled cohort (IMC + T1 CRC, n = 489), the factors significantly associated with first-line surgery were shown to be polyp characteristics and the gastroenterologist who performed the colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: IMCs account for a quarter of all screening-detected CRCs. They have an excellent prognosis regardless of whether endoscopic or surgical treatment is performed. IMCs differ significantly from T1 carcinomas in terms of management and prognosis.

Does neoadjuvant FOLFOX chemotherapy improve the prognosis of high-risk Stage II and III colon cancers? Three years' follow-up results of the PRODIGE 22 phase II randomized multicentre trial.

AIM: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy has proven valuable in locally advanced resectable colon cancer (CC) but its effect on oncological outcomes is uncertain. The aim of the present paper was to report 3-year oncological outcomes, representing the secondary endpoints of the PRODIGE 22 trial. METHOD: PRODIGE 22 was a randomized multicentre phase II trial in high-risk T3, T4 and/or N2 CC patients on CT scan. Patients were randomized between 6 months of adjuvant FOLFOX (upfront surgery) or perioperative FOLFOX (four cycles before surgery and eight cycles after; FOLFOX perioperative). In wild-type RAS patients, a third arm testing perioperative FOLFOX-cetuximab was added. The primary endpoint was the tumour regression grade. Secondary endpoints were 3-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), recurrence-free survival (RFS) and time to recurrence (TTR). RESULTS: Overall, 120 patients were enrolled. At interim analysis, the FOLFOX-cetuximab arm was stopped for futility. The remaining 104 patients represented our intention-to-treat population. In the perioperative group, 96% received the scheduled four neoadjuvant cycles and all but one had adjuvant FOLFOX for eight cycles. In the control arm, 38 (73%) patients received adjuvant FOLFOX. The median follow-up was 54.3 months. Three-year OS was 90.4% in both arms [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.85], 3-year DFS, RFS and TTR were, respectively, 76.8% and 69.2% (HR=0.94), 73% and 69.2% (HR = 0.86) and 82% and 72% (HR = 0.67) in the perioperative and control arms, respectively. Forest plots did not show any subgroup with significant difference for survival outcomes. No benefit from adding cetuximab was observed. CONCLUSION: Perioperative FOLFOX has no detrimental effect on long-term oncological outcomes and may be an option for some patients with locally advanced CC.

Multidisciplinary team meetings: are all patients presented and does it impact quality of care and survival - a registry-based study.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) are part of the standard cancer care process in many European countries. In France, they are a mandatory condition in the authorization system for cancer care administration, with the goal to ensure that all new patients diagnosed with cancer are presented in MDTMs. AIM: Identify the factors associated with non-presentation or unknown presentation in MDTMs, and study the impact of presentation in MDTMs on quality of care and survival in patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: 3999 CRC patients diagnosed between 2005 and 2014 in the area covered by the "Calvados Registry of Digestive Tumours" were included. Multivariate multinomial logistic regression was used to assess the factors associated with presentation in MDTMs. Univariate analyses were performed to study the impact of MDTMs on quality of care. Multivariate Cox model and the Log-Rank test were used to assess the impact of MDTMs on survival. RESULTS: Non-presentation or unknown presentation in MDTMs were associated with higher age at diagnosis, dying within 3 months after diagnosis, unknown metastatic status, non-metastatic cancer and colon cancer. Non-presentation was associated with a diagnosis after 2010. Unknown presentation was associated with a diagnosis before 2007 and a longer travel time to the reference care centres. Presentation in MDTMs was associated with more chemotherapy administration for patients with metastatic cancer and more adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer. After excluding poor prognosis patients, lower survival was significantly associated with higher age at diagnosis, unknown metastatic status or metastatic cancer, presence of comorbidities, rectal cancer and non-presentation in MDTMs (HR = 1.5 [1.1-2.0], p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Elderly and poor prognosis patients were less presented in MDTMs. Geriatric assessments before presentation in MDTMs were shown to improve care plan establishment. The 100% objective is not coherent if MDTMs are only to discuss diagnosis and curative cares. They could also be a place to discuss therapeutic limitations. MDTMs were associated with better treatment and longer survival. We must ensure that there is no inequity in presentation in MDTMs that could lead to a loss of chance for patients.

Fluropyrimidine single agent or doublet chemotherapy as second line treatment in advanced biliary tract cancer.

Fluoropyrimidine (FP) plus platinum chemotherapy has been recently established as a second-line (L2) preferred option in advanced biliary tract cancer (aBTC) (ABC-06 phase III trial). However, the overall survival (OS) benefit was limited and comparison with FP monotherapy was not available. Our aim was to assess the OS of patients treated with a FP monotherapy compared to a doublet with irinotecan or platinum in L2. We performed a retrospective analysis of two large multicenter prospective cohorts: a French cohort (28 centers) and an Italian cohort (9 centers). All consecutive patients with aBTC receiving FP-based L2 after gemcitabine plus cisplatin/gemcitabine plus oxaliplatin L1 between 2003 and 2016 were included. A subgroup analysis according to performance status (PS) and an exploratory analysis according to platinum sensitivity in L1 were planned. In the French cohort (n = 351), no significant OS difference was observed between the FP monotherapy and doublet groups (median OS: 5.6 vs 6.8 months, P = .65). Stratification on Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS showed similar results in PS 0-1 and 2. Median OS was not different between FP monotherapy, platinum- and irinotecan-based doublets (5.6 vs 7.1 vs 6.7 months, P = .68). Similar findings were observed in the Italian cohort (n = 174) and in the sensitivity analysis in pooled cohorts (n = 525). No L2 regimen seemed superior over others in the platinum resistant/refractory or sensitive subgroups. Our results suggest that FP monotherapy is as active as FP doublets in aBTC in L2, regardless of the patient PS and country, and could be a therapeutic option in this setting.

FOLFIRINOX De-Escalation in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Multicenter Real-Life Study.

BACKGROUND: Our study describes the feasibility and efficacy of a first-line FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil [5FU], folinic acid, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) induction chemotherapy (CT) followed by de-escalation as a maintenance strategy for advanced pancreatic cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study was conducted from January 2011 to December 2018. FOLFIRINOX de-escalation was defined as stopping oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan after at least four cycles of FOLFIRINOX, without evidence of disease progression. Maintenance schedules were fluoropyrimidine monotherapy (intravenous or oral [capecitabine]), FOLFOX (5FU, oxaliplatin), or FOLFIRI (5FU, irinotecan). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were first progression-free survival (PFS1), second progression-free survival (PFS2), and toxicity. RESULTS: Among 321 patients treated with FOLFIRINOX, 147 (45.8%) were included. Median OS was 16.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.7-20.3) and median PFS1 was 9.4 months (95% CI, 8.5-10.4). The preferred maintenance regimen was FOLFIRI in 66 (45%) patients versus 5FU monotherapy in 52 (35%) and FOLFOX in 25 (17%) patients. Among 118 patients who received maintenance CT with FOLFIRI or 5FU, there was no difference in PFS1 (median, 9.0 vs. 10.1 months, respectively; p = .33) or OS (median, 16.6 vs. 18.7 months; p = .86) between the two maintenance regimens. Reintroduction of FOLFIRINOX was performed in 20.2% of patients, with a median PFS2 of 2.8 months (95% CI, 2.0-22.3). The rates of grade 3-4 toxicity were significantly higher with FOLFIRI maintenance CT than with 5FU (41% vs. 22%; p = .03), especially for neuropathy (73% vs. 9%). CONCLUSION: 5FU monotherapy maintenance appeared to be as effective as FOLFIRI, in a FOLFIRINOX de-escalation strategy, which is largely used in France. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: FOLFIRINOX de-escalation and maintenance is a feasible strategy in advanced pancreatic cancer that decreases chemotherapy toxicity to improve both survival and quality of life. Survivals in patients with maintenance therapy are clinically meaningful. Fluoropyrimidine monotherapy maintenance seems to be as efficient as FOLFIRI and should be a reference arm in future pancreatic cancer maintenance trials.

Withholding the Introduction of Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor: Impact on Outcomes in RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Tumors: A Multicenter AGEO Study (the WAIT or ACT Study).

BACKGROUND: Patients with RAS wild-type (WT) nonresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) may receive either bevacizumab or an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) combined with first-line, 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy. Without the RAS status information, the oncologist can either start chemotherapy with bevacizumab or wait for the introduction of the anti-EGFR. Our objective was to compare both strategies in a routine practice setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective, propensity score-weighted study included patients with a RAS WT nonresectable mCRC, treated between 2013 and 2016 by a 5-FU-based chemotherapy, with either delayed anti-EGFR or immediate anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Primary criterion was overall survival (OS). Secondary criteria were progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: A total of 262 patients (129 in the anti-VEGF group and 133 in the anti-EGFR group) were included. Patients receiving an anti-VEGF were more often men (68% vs. 56%), with more metastatic sites (>2 sites: 15% vs. 9%). The median delay to obtain the RAS status was 19 days (interquartile range: 13-26). Median OS was not significantly different in the two groups (29 vs. 30.5 months, p = .299), even after weighting on the propensity score (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-1.08, p = .2024). The delayed introduction of anti-EGFR was associated with better median PFS (13.8 vs. 11.0 months, p = .0244), even after weighting on the propensity score (HR = 0.74, 95% CI, 0.61-0.90, p = .0024). ORR was significantly higher in the anti-EGFR group (66.7% vs. 45.6%, p = .0007). CONCLUSION: Delayed introduction of anti-EGFR had no deleterious effect on OS, PFS, and ORR, compared with doublet chemotherapy with anti-VEGF. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: For RAS/RAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, patients may receive 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy plus either bevacizumab or an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). In daily practice, the time to obtain the RAS status might be long enough to consider two options: to start the chemotherapy with bevacizumab, or to start without a targeted therapy and to add the anti-EGFR at reception of the RAS status. This study found no deleterious effect of the delayed introduction of an anti-EGFR on survival, compared with the introduction of an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor from cycle 1. It is possible to wait one or two cycles to introduce the anti-EGFR while waiting for RAS status.

Downstaging with Radioembolization or Chemotherapy for Initially Unresectable Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the outcomes of patients resected for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) with upfront surgery or after downstaging treatment. METHODS: All consecutive patients with ICC between January 1997 and November 2017 were included in a single-center database and retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups: upfront resection or resection after downstaging using either chemotherapy alone or selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) combined with chemotherapy. Survival rates of patients who underwent upfront surgery for ICC were compared with those of patients who underwent surgery after downstaging therapy. RESULTS: A total of 169 patients resected for ICC were included: 137 underwent upfront surgery and 32 received downstaging treatment because their tumor was initially unresectable (13 received chemotherapy, 19 received SIRT). Median OS was not different between the two groups: 32.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 23.9-40.7] with primary surgery versus 45.9 months (95% CI 32.3-59.4) with downstaging treatment (p = 0.54, log-rank test). In a multivariable Cox regression model, downstaging treatment was not associated with a better or worse prognosis; however, delivery of SIRT as a downstaging treatment was associated with a significant benefit in multivariable analysis (hazard ratio 0.34, 95% CI 0.14-0.84; p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Overall survival of patients resected after downstaging treatment was not different compared with the OS of patients resected upfront. Patients should therefore again be discussed with the surgeon following medical treatment. SIRT may be an efficient neoadjuvant therapy in patients with resectable ICC, in order to improve surgical results.

Chemotherapy in Resected Neuroendocrine Carcinomas of the Digestive Tract: A National Study from the French Group of Endocrine Tumours.

BACKGROUND: Neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs) of the digestive tract are rare and aggressive tumours. In localised disease the treatment is surgery. Based on expert consensus, international guidelines recommend the administration of adjuvant chemotherapy combining etoposide and platinum derivatives, justified by the high risk of metastatic relapse. However, no clinical study has proven the benefit of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the effect of neoadjuvant +/- adjuvant and adjuvant therapy in this indication. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational French study to evaluate overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), prognostic factors for survival, and chemotherapy toxicity. RESULTS: Seventy-three patients had surgical resection of a localised digestive NEC between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2016. The majority of patients presented colorectal (35%) tumours and the median Ki-67 value was 70%. Forty-three patients received chemotherapy, either perioperative (neoadjuvant +/- adjuvant) or adjuvant. The median OS and DFS for the whole population was 24 and 9 months, respectively. The median OS and DFS for patients receiving chemotherapy was 62 and 13 months, respectively. Positive postoperative node status and Ki-67 ≥80% had a negative prognostic impact on OS and DFS. Administration of chemotherapy had a positive prognostic impact on OS and DFS. Sixteen grade 3/4 toxicities were reported without toxic death. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a positive effect on survival of chemotherapy in resected digestive NECs, but further studies are needed to confirm these results.