Network meta-analysis of first-line systemic regimens for older patients with advanced NSCLC.

Various immunotherapy treatments have received approval for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), either as standalone or in conjunction with chemotherapy, contingent upon the extent of PD-L1 expression. These treatments are commonly utilized in clinical practice. However, a specific gap exists in direct comparisons of these regimens in elderly patients. The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to examine the effectiveness of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, either alone or in conjunction with chemotherapy, as the initial treatment for elderly patients diagnosed with advanced NSCLC. We extensively searched PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library to gather randomized clinical trials that utilized PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors as the first-line therapy for advanced NSCLC. By means of Bayesian NMA, we conducted an analysis on hazard ratios (HRs) related to overall survival (OS). A total of 5240 patients were included in the 21 trials. Across all studies, cemiplimab exhibited a noteworthy superiority to chemotherapy in terms of OS [HR = 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.3-0.77]. In the subgroup analysis, it was observed that patients with PD-L1 expression of 50% or higher experienced the greatest OS benefit from cemiplimab (HR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.3-0.77). Conversely, the cohort with unselected PD-L1 scores (>1 or any score) exhibited the greatest OS benefit when treated with pembrolizumab combined with chemotherapy, as indicated by a HR of 0.69 (95% CI: 0.52-0.9). Chemotherapy combined with pembrolizumab and cemiplimab monotherapy may represent the reference regimens for older patients with NSCLC with unselected and >50% PD-L1 expression, respectively.

Different Chemotherapy Regimens and Pathologic Complete Response in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: An Updated Network Meta-Analysis of Phase 3 Trials.

Background and Objectives: Currently, the standard treatment for non-metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) consists of a systemic neoadjuvant (or perioperative) anthracycline plus taxane-based chemotherapy, delivered either sequentially or concomitantly. We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the relative efficacy of different neoadjuvant treatments for TNBC in terms of pathologic complete response (pCR). Materials and Methods: The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched from database inception to 1 November 2023. Randomized clinical trials were used that enrolled adults with stage I-III TNBC and provided data on pCR defined as residual ypT0/TisN0M0. Between-group comparisons were estimated using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs). The primary outcome was the pCR rate. Results: 1129 citations were screened, and 12 randomized clinical trials were included. In Bayesian comparisons, all regimens, except anthracycline/taxanes plus gemcitabine or capecitabine, resulted in a higher pCR than the standard regimen in both direct and indirect comparisons. In particular, immunotherapy-based regimens resulted in more than double the pCR compared to historical regimens (RR = 2.3, 95% CI 1.9-2.9) and ranked as being the optimal regimen with a probability of 97%. Disease-free survival was better for immune checkpoint inhibitor-based chemotherapy (HR = 0.36, 95% 1.21-2.09) than for historical regimens. Conclusion: This meta-analysis confirmed that incorporating immunotherapy with neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy is the best option to guarantee remarkable pathologic downstaging and improve clinical outcomes.

Final analysis of the phase 3 randomized clinical trial comparing HD201 vs. referent trastuzumab in patients with ERBB2-positive breast cancer treated in the neoadjuvant setting.

BACKGROUND: The TROIKA trial established that HD201 and trastuzumab were equivalent in terms of primary endpoints (total pathological complete response) following neoadjuvant treatment. The objective of the present analysis was to compare survival outcomes and final safety. METHODS: In the TROIKA trial, patients with ERBB2-positive early breast cancer were randomized and treated with either HD201 or the referent trastuzumab. Eligible patients received 8 cycles of either HD201 or referent trastuzumab (loading dose, 8 mg/kg; maintenance dose, 6 mg/kg) every 3 weeks in combination with 8 cycles of chemotherapy (4 cycles of docetaxel, 75 mg/m2, followed by 4 cycles of epirubicin, 75 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide, 500 mg/m2) in the neoadjuvant setting. The patients then underwent surgery followed by 10 cycles of adjuvant HD201 or referent trastuzumab according to their initial randomization to complete one year of trastuzumab-directed therapy. Event-free and overall survival rates were calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. The hazard ratio for event-free survival was estimated by Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: The final analysis was performed after all patients completed the study at a median follow-up of 37.7 months (Q1-Q3, 37.3-38.1 months). A total of 502 randomized patients received either HD201 or the referent trastuzumab, and 474 (94.2%) were eligible for inclusion in the per-protocol set. In this population, the 3-year event-free survival rates were 85.6% (95% CI: 80.28-89.52) and 84.9% (95% CI: 79.54-88.88) in the HD201 and referent trastuzumab groups, respectively (log rank p = 0.938) (HR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.63-1.63; p = 0.945). The 3-year overall survival rates were comparable between the HD201 (95.6%; 95% CI: 91.90-97.59) and referent trastuzumab treatment groups (96.0%, 95% CI: 92.45-97.90) (log rank p = 0.606). During the posttreatment follow-up period, adverse events were reported for 64 (27.4%) and 72 (29.8%) patients in the HD201 and the reference trastuzumab groups, respectively. Serious adverse events were rare and none of which were related to the study treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This final analysis of the TROIKA trial further confirms the comparable efficacy and safety of HD201 and trastuzumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03013504.

Comparison of different second line treatments for metastatic pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: In metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC), first line treatment options usually include combination regimens of folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX or mFOLFIRINOX) or gemcitabine based regimens such as in combination with albumin-bound paclitaxel (GEM + nab-PTX). After progression, multiple regimens including NALIRI + 5-FU and folinic acid, FOLFIRINOX, 5-FU-based oxaliplatin doublets (OFF, FOLFOX, or XELOX), or 5-FU-based monotherapy (FL, capecitabine, or S-1) are considered appropriate by major guidelines. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the efficacy of different treatment strategies tested as second-line regimens for patients with mPDAC after first-line gemcitabine-based systemic treatment. METHODS: Randomized phase II and III clinical trials (RCTs) were included if they were published or presented in English. Trials of interest compared two active systemic treatments as second-line regimens until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. We performed a Bayesian NMA with published hazard ratios (HRs) and 95%confidence intervals (CIs) to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of different second-line therapies for mPDAC. The main outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS), secondary endpoints were grade 3-4 toxicities. We calculated the relative ranking of agents for each outcome as their surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). A higher SUCRA score meant a higher ranking for efficacy outcomes. RESULTS: A NMA of 9 treatments was performed for OS (n = 2521 patients enrolled). Compared with 5-FU + folinic acid both irinotecan or NALIRI + fluoropyrimidines had a trend to better OS (HR = 0.76, 95%CI 0.21-2.75 and HR = 0.74, 95%CI 0.31-1.85). Fluoropyrimidines + folinic acid + oxaliplatin were no better than the combination without oxaliplatin. The analysis of treatment ranking showed that the combination of NALIRI + 5-FU + folinic acid was most likely to yield the highest OS results (SUCRA = 0.7). Furthermore, the NMA results indicated that with the highest SUCRA score (SUCRA = 0.91), NALIRI + 5-FU + folinic acid may be the optimal choice for improved PFS amongst all regimens studied. CONCLUSIONS: According to the NMA results, NALIRI + 5-FU, and folinic acid may represent the best second-line treatment for improved survival outcomes in mPDAC. Further evidence from prospective trials is needed to determine the best treatment option for this group of patients.

Chemotherapy Duration for Various Indications in Colorectal Cancer: a Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) has evolved and become more personalized during the past several years. For example, depotentiation/reduced duration of systemic therapies has proven to be beneficial in both advanced and early stages of the disease. RECENT FINDINGS: In particular, recent randomized studies of stage III and high-risk stage II CRC showed that a shorter duration (3 months), when compared to the historical 6-month comparator, provides nearly similar overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). In the setting of advanced, inoperable CRC, a relatively short induction phase (six to eight cycles) followed by biological agents is the current standard of care in RAS wild-type (wt). versus RAS mutated cases. With regard to potentially operable stage IV disease (with the aim of converting liver metastases to operability), a relatively short number of cycles (four to six cycles) should be offered with re-staging and re-evaluation for surgery as soon as possible in most cases. For inoperable liver metastases, a relatively intensive triplet or doublet plus targeted therapy may attain conversion in some cases and may even result in cure. Rectal cancer treatment continues to be a complex disease in terms of treatment and oncological results. Recent data seem to showcase the benefits of more prolonged sequential strategies (total neoadjuvant therapy, all treatment delivered before surgery, to reduce the risk of distant metastases and local control). In recent years, different strategies regarding treatment intensity have been employed in CRC in adjuvant and metastatic setting. Introduction of triplets as first-line therapy for colon cancer and as induction phase for rectal cancer are now therapeutic options. Conversely in stage II disease or low-risk stage III resected CRC, a reduced chemotherapy length is a new standard of care.

Human papillomavirus infection and non-oropharyngeal head and neck cancers: an umbrella review of meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The causative and prognostic roles of human papillomavirus (HPV) in non-oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck are uncertain. This umbrella review assessed the strength and quality of evidence and graded the evidence derived from published meta-analyses on this subject. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched. Meta-analyses of observational studies and randomized trials were included. REVIEW METHODS: Evidence of association was graded according to the established criteria: strong, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or not significant. RESULTS: 15 meta-analyses were evaluated. The association with HPV was highly suggestive of oral (OR = 2.40, [1.87-3.07], P < 0.00001) and nasopharyngeal cancers (OR = 17.82 [11.20-28.35], P < 0.00001). Improved survival emerged only in hypopharyngeal carcinoma and was confirmed in studies in which only p16 + cancers were considered. CONCLUSION: HPV infection may increase the risk of oral cavity and nasopharyngeal cancer. However, the prognosis was not influenced, except in hypopharyngeal carcinoma.

Comparison of different treatments for HPV+ oropharyngeal carcinoma: a network meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment of human papillomavirus (HPV)-related head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is rapidly evolving. Despite either surgery or radiotherapy (RT), with or without chemotherapy (CT), being acceptable in intermediate and locally advanced diseases, there is uncertainty regarding the best treatment option for these patients. Therefore, we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the relative efficacy of different treatments for HPV+ oropharyngeal carcinoma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Randomized clinical trials that enrolled adults with non-metastatic HPV+ oropharynx cancer and provided data about overall survival (OS) and/or progression-free survival (PFS) and/or locoregional control and distant metastases (LRC and DM) were included. Fixed- or random-effects models were fit using a Bayesian approach to NMA. Between-group comparisons were estimated using hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). The primary outcome was OS. RESULTS: A total of 844 citations were screened; 11 randomized clinical trials were included (HPV+ stage III-IV cancer, mainly oropharynx carcinomas). Nine treatment arms were compared. Radiotherapy (altered or standard fractionation) + triweekly cisplatin (HR 3.8; 95% CrIs 0.29-65 and 0.3; 95% CrIs 0.03-2.51) was superior to RT in term of OS (P score = 0.42 and 0.16). Radiotherapy with low and high cisplatin doses appeared similar (HR 1.57; 95% CrIs 0.19-12.72). Altered fractionation or standard RT + 3-weekly cisplatin are the 2 highest-ranked options in terms of PFS (P score = 0.35 and 0.34). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis confirms the role of cisplatin added to RT as the best option for HPV+ oropharyngeal carcinoma. RT+ 3-weekly cisplatin is likely to be the best radical treatment in terms of OS and PFS.

Early onset metastatic colorectal cancer in patients receiving panitumumab-based upfront strategy: Overall and sex-specific outcomes in the Valentino trial.

Anti-EGFRs plus doublet chemotherapy is considered the optimal upfront option for RAS/BRAF wild-type left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Early-onset (EO) mCRC has an increasing incidence and its prognostic/predictive role and management is debatable. We performed a post hoc analysis of Valentino study, that randomized RAS wild-type mCRC patients to two panitumumab-based maintenance regimens after FOLFOX/panitumumab induction. We assessed the safety and efficacy outcomes in patients stratified for age (<50/≥50 years old). We assessed progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), response rate (ORR), rate of treatment-related and panitumumab-related adverse events (AEs) and quality of life (QoL). In 229 patients enrolled, 35 (15%) had EO mCRC, with a higher rate of female sex (P = .020) and lower rate of primary tumor resection (P = .001). Median PFS and OS were 10.9 vs 10.8 months (P = .593) and 28.1 vs 27.5 months (P = .865) in patients <50 and ≥50 years old, respectively, with no significant impact of maintenance arm. ORR and disease control rate were 74% vs 65% (P = .337) and 97% vs 81% (P = .013) in patients <50 or ≥50 years old. In younger patients, a trend for increased chemotherapy-related AEs (peculiarly anemia) was shown, while significantly decreased EGFR-related hypomagnesemia and increased skin rash were reported. No significant differences in treatment intensity or QoL were observed. In patients with EO mCRC and RAS wild-type status, we found no differences in terms of survival outcomes based on age when selecting maintenance strategies. Management of treatment-related AEs should consider the differential toxicity profile of age and sex.

Is the oncotype DX test useful in elderly breast cancer patients: a subgroup analysis of real-life Italian PONDx study.

INTRODUCTION: The 21-gene Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score® test, (Genomic Health, Redwood City CA) has not been formally evaluated in an older cohort with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer (BC) in term of physicians' treatment decisions. We determine the utility of Recurrence Score® (RS) result on adjuvant therapy prescription in elderly patients with resected early BC. MATERIAL AND METHODS: PONDx was a multicenter, prospective, observational study, and which investigated the real-life use of the Oncotype DX® test by physicians treating early BC patients in clinical practice. RESULTS: Data from the elderly extracted from 1724 BC patients who underwent Oncotype DX testing were available from 27 reference centers located in 6 regions of Italy (Lombardia, Lazio, Emilia Romagna, Campania, Abruzzo, and Marche). A total of 230 patients (13% of the total population) aged > 70 years were analyzed. The study primarily evaluated the impact of the Oncotype DX test on adjuvant treatment decisions. Physicians chosen chemotherapy plus endocrine therapy in 36% of elderly patients and 46% of those 50-70 years before the Oncotype DX test. After knowing the RS data, these rates fell to 23 and 33% (38 and 28% relative reduction, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: 21-gene test may be helpful even in a relatively low-risk group as elderly patients and may avoid the toxicity of adjuvant chemotherapy in a significant amount. If the Oncotype DX test is currently adopted on a large scale among the elderly and may impact the general prognosis of elderly BC patients, it is challenging and still unproven.

Third dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine: A systematic review of 30 published studies.

We analyzed published studies on the efficacy and safety of the third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine in various general population settings. We conducted systematic searches of PubMed and EMBASE for series published in the English language through November 15, 2021, using the search terms "third" or "booster" or "three" and "dose" and "COVID-19" or "SARS-CoV-2." All articles were selected according to the MOOSE guidelines. The seroconversion risk after third doses was descriptively expressed as a pooled rate ratio ([seroconversion rate after the third dose]/[seroconversion rate after the second dose]). The search returned 30 studies that included a total of 2 734 437 vaccinated subjects. In more than 2 700 000 Israeli patients extracted from the general population, the reduction in the risk of infection ranged from 88% to 92%. Conversion rates for IgG anti-spike ranged from 95% to 100%. In cancer or immunocompromised patients, mean IgG seroconversion was 39.4% before and 66.6% after third doses. A third dose seems necessary to protect against all COVID-19 infection, severe disease, and death risk.

Evaluating the impact of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting on daily functioning in patients receiving dexamethasone-sparing antiemetic regimens with NEPA (netupitant/palonosetron) in the cisplatin setting: results from a randomized phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The non-inferiority of dexamethasone (DEX) on day 1, with or without low-dose DEX on days 2 and 3, combined with oral NEPA (netupitant/palonosetron), compared with the guideline-consistent use of DEX was demonstrated in cisplatin. Here, we complete the analysis by assessing the impact of emesis on daily lives of patients receiving DEX-sparing regimens using the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE). METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve patients undergoing cisplatin (≥70 mg/m2), were given NEPA and DEX (12 mg) on day 1 and randomized to receive either 1) no further DEX (DEX1), 2) oral DEX (4 mg daily) on days 2-3 (DEX3), or 3) DEX (4 mg twice daily) on days 2-4 (DEX4; control). Patients completed the FLIE questionnaire on day 6 of cycle 1. Endpoints included the FLIE nausea domain, vomiting domain, and overall combined domain scores, as well as the proportion of patients with no impact on daily life (NIDL; overall score > 108). This was a protocol-planned analysis. RESULTS: In the DEX1 group, no significant differences were observed in the FLIE nausea score (48.9 [±1.8; SE] vs. 53.7 [±1.5]), vomiting score (56.6 [±1.4] vs. 58.7 [±0.8]) and overall score (105.6 [±2.8] vs.112.4 [±1.9]) versus DEX4 control; similar results were observed in the DEX3 group for nausea score (49.6 [±1.7]), vomiting score (58.2 [±1]) and overall score (107.8 [±2.4]) versus control. There were no significant between-group differences in the proportion of patients reporting NIDL. CONCLUSION: Reducing DEX, when administered with NEPA, does not seem to adversely impact the daily functioning in patients undergoing cisplatin. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04201769 . Registration date: 17/12/2019 - Retrospectively registered.

Impact of electrochemotherapy in metastatic cutaneous melanoma: a contemporary systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Electrochemotherapy (ECT) harnesses electric pulses to enhance cytotoxic drug delivery into tumors and has entered the armamentarium to treat superficially metastatic melanoma. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess treatment patterns and patient outcomes. METHODS: PubMed, Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were queried for publication from inception to September 2020. Primary outcome measures were overall and complete response rate (ORR and CRR); secondary outcomes included local control rate (LCR) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies met the selection criteria for a total of 1161 individuals (mean age 71 years) and 5308 tumors (weighted mean size 14 mm). The majority of patients (n = 1124) underwent bleomycin-ECT. Aggregate ORR was 77.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 71.0 - 83.2%) and CRR 48% (95% CI 42 - 54%), with no significant difference between the route of bleomycin administration (ORR, 69.2 vs. 81.9% following intravenous or intratumoral bleomycin, p = .37) and tumor size (p = .69). When reported (n = 8 studies), 1- and 2-year LCR ranged from 54 to 89% and 72 to 74%, respectively, and 1-year OS (n = 3 studies) from 67 to 89%. CONCLUSIONS: ECT with either intratumoral or intravenous bleomycin confers a high therapeutic response in cutaneous metastatic melanoma. Moderate evidence supports its low toxicity and durability of local control.HighlightsElectrochemotherapy (ECT) is associated with a 77% overall response rate (ORR).Intravenous and intratumoral bleomycin are equally effective.There are no relevant toxicity concerns.One-year local tumor control rate ranges from 54 to 89%.Current literature has significant variation in reporting.

Preferred neoadjuvant therapy for gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Currently, the standard treatment for gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma, including distal esophagus, consists of perioperative chemotherapy (CT) according to FLOT schedule (5FU/leucovorin/oxaliplatin and docetaxel), or of concomitant chemoradiotherapy (CTRT) based on CROSS regimen. However, due to the relatively lack of direct comparisons between perioperative CT and neoadjuvant CTRT, the effectiveness of these new combinations is unknown. Therefore, we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the efficacy of different neoadjuvant treatments for gastric and GEJ adenocarcinoma in terms of overall and disease-free survival (OS and DFS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane from database inception until February 1st 2022 for randomized clinical trials that enrolled adults with gastric and GEJ carcinomas and provided data about OS and/or DFS. Between-group comparisons were estimated using hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs). Surface under the cumulative rank (SUCRA) curve plots were produced. The primary outcome was OS, secondary endpoint DFS. RESULTS: A total of 1247 citations were screened; 14 randomized clinical trials were included. In Bayesian comparisons, FLOT-based CT ranked as one of the better regimens with a probability of 41%, both with induction CT followed by CTRT (P = 0.45). For DFS analysis, the FLOT regimen was the preferred option (P = 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, this NMA adds further evidence to the optimization of treatment strategies for gastric and GEJ adenocarcinomas and confirms that incorporation of perioperative triplet-based CT improved both OS and DFS compared to surgery alone and other preoperative strategies.

Dexamethasone-Sparing Regimens with Oral Netupitant and Palonosetron for the Prevention of Emesis Caused by High-Dose Cisplatin: A Randomized Noninferiority Study.

BACKGROUND: To reduce the overall exposure to dexamethasone (DEX) in patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy, we evaluated the noninferiority of DEX on day 1, with or without low-dose DEX on days 2 and 3, combined with an oral fixed-dose combination of netupitant and palonosetron (NEPA), compared with the guideline-consistent use of 4-day DEX. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this open-label, multicenter study, chemotherapy-naïve patients undergoing high-dose cisplatin (≥70 mg/m2 ), were given NEPA and DEX (12 mg) on day 1 and randomized (1:1:1 ratio) to receive either (a) no further DEX (DEX1), (b) oral DEX (4 mg daily) on days 2-3 (DEX3), or (c) DEX (4 mg twice daily) on days 2-4 (DEX4). The primary efficacy endpoint was complete response (CR: no emesis and no rescue medication) during the 5-day overall phase. The noninferiority margin was set at -15% difference (DEX1 or DEX3 minus DEX4). Secondary efficacy endpoints included complete protection (CP: CR and none or mild nausea). RESULTS: Two-hundred twenty-eight patients, 76 in each arm, were assessable. Noninferiority was met for both DEX-sparing regimens and the reference arm, with overall phase CR rates of 76.3% in each of the DEX1 and DEX3 arms and 75.0% in the DEX4 arm (95% confidence interval, -12.3% to 15% for each comparison). During the overall phase, CP rates were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: A simplified regimen of NEPA plus single-dose DEX offers comparable chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting prevention throughout 5 days post-chemotherapy with the advantage of sparing patients additional doses of DEX in the high-emetic-risk setting of cisplatin-based chemotherapy. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Dexamethasone (DEX) has traditionally played an integral role in the management of chemotherapy-induced emesis. Although generally considered safe, even short-term DEX use is associated with various side effects, and some evidence suggests that concurrent steroids may reduce the efficacy of immunotherapies. This study demonstrates comparable antiemetic control during the 5 days post-chemotherapy with a simplified regimen of netupitant/palonosetron plus single-dose DEX versus the standard 4-day DEX reference treatment in high-dose cisplatin. This represents a clinically relevant achievement as it not only simplifies antiemetic prophylaxis but also offers an opportunity to appropriately use in patients where caution with corticosteroid use is advised.

Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in elderly patients aged ≥ 75 years.

INTRODUCTION: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represent a cornerstone for the treatment of many advanced tumors. When 65 is considered as a cut-off age, ICIs are equally effective in younger and older patients. However, the efficacy of ICIs among patients aged ≥ 75 remains uncertain, since those patients were generally under-represented in clinical trials. We performed a pooled analysis of major randomized trials including data of outcome in very older population. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials published from the inception of each database to November 22th, 2019. We only included (1) randomized studies comparing ICIs alone or in combinations with no ICIs, (2) studies reporting data of patients older than 75 years, (3) studies for solid tumors, and (4) studies with HR and 95% confidence interval (CI) available for OS based on 75 years as cut-off age. All data were expressed as the combination of HR and 95% CI, and P < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of n = 8 publications for a total of n = 12 randomized studies were aggregated in the quantitative analysis. Overall, the pooled analysis showed a borderline significant OS benefit for ICIs compared to no ICIs arms (HR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.7-1; P = 0.05) in particular in first-line trials with HR = 0.77 (95%CI 0.61-0.96; P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: We conclude that ICIs may be offered in patients older than 75 years, providing a complete geriatric and clinical evaluation is performed in all subjects before starting therapy.

Effects of hypertension on cancer survival: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is usually associated with increased cardiovascular mortality. Uncertainty exists about the possible role of hypertension as a poor prognostic factor for cancer-specific mortality (CSM). To assess the association between pre-existing hypertension and the risk of mortality and relapse after a diagnosis of cancer, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library and EMBASE were searched from inception until May 2020, without language restrictions, for observational studies reporting the prognosis of patients with hypertension and cancer. The primary outcome of the study refers to CSM in hypertensive vs nonhypertensive patients, and secondary endpoints were overall mortality (OM) and progression- or relapse-free survival. The effect size was reported as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs. RESULTS: Mortality and relapse associated with hypertension in patients with various cancers were evaluated among 1 603 437 participants (n = 66 studies). Overall, diagnosis of cancer and hypertension was associated with an increased independent risk of OM (HR = 1.2 [95% CI, 1.13-1.27], P < .01) and CSM (HR = 1.12 [95% CI, 1.04-1.21], P < .01) but not of relapse (HR = 1.08 [95% CI, 0.98-1.19], P = .14). CONCLUSIONS: Among cancer patients, those with pre-existing hypertension have a poorer outcome, probably due to multifactorial reasons. Adequate control of lifestyle, more intensive follow-ups, monitoring for hypertension- and anticancer-related cardiovascular complications, and establishing multidisciplinary cardio-oncology units can be useful measures for reducing mortality and improving care in this setting.

Systemic doxycycline for pre-emptive treatment of anti-EGFR-related skin toxicity in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving first-line panitumumab-based therapy: a post hoc analysis of the Valentino study.

INTRODUCTION: The combination of anti-EGFRs and doublet chemotherapy is considered the optimal upfront option for patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The prophylactic or reactive treatment with tetracyclines for EGFR inhibitor-induced skin toxicity is currently clinical practice, though non-conclusive results are available. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of the Valentino study that randomized RAS wild-type mCRC patients to two panitumumab-based maintenance regimens after the first-line induction, aimed at assessing the safety and efficacy of the administration of a pre-emptive doxycycline prophylaxis for anti-EGFR-related skin toxicity. We assessed the rate of treatment-related and panitumumab-related adverse events (AEs), treatment intensity, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 226 patients, out of the 229 enrolled in the Valentino study, were eligible for the analysis. Overall, 143 (63%) and 83 (37%) patients received or not the antibiotic prophylaxis for skin toxicity. Any grade and G3/4 panitumumab-related AEs were reported in 89% versus 92% (p = 0.650) and 27% versus 27% (p = 1.000) patients who received or not the pre-emptive prophylaxis, respectively. Any grade and G3/4 skin rash occurred in 81% versus 90% (p = 0.085) and 27% versus 25% (p = 0.876) patients receiving or not the prophylaxis, respectively. No significant differences in terms of treatment duration, treatment delays or dose reductions, PFS, and OS were observed in the two sub-populations. CONCLUSION: The adequate management of anti-EGFR-related skin toxicity is fundamental to optimize the outcome of mCRC patients, balancing the survival benefit with patients' quality of life, especially in the first-line setting.

Red blood cell transfusions and the survival in patients with cancer undergoing curative surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Allogenic red blood cell transfusions exert a potential detrimental effect on the survival when delivered to cancer patients undergoing surgery with curative intent. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the association between perioperative allogenic red blood cell transfusions and risk of death as well as relapse after surgery for localized solid tumors. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were searched from inception to March 2019 for studies reporting the outcome of patients receiving transfusions during radical surgery for non-metastatic cancer. Risk of death and relapse were pooled to provide an adjusted hazard ratio with a 95% confidence interval [hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval {CI})]. Mortality and relapse associated with perioperative transfusion due to cancer surgery were evaluated among participants (n = 123 studies). Overall, RBC transfusions were associated with an increased risk of death [HR = 1.50 (95% CI 1.42-1.57), p < 0.01] and relapse [HR = 1.36 (95% CI 1.26-1.46), p < 0.01]. The survival was reduced even in cancer at early stages [HR = 1.45 (1.36-1.55), p < 0.01]. In cancer patients undergoing surgery, red blood cell transfusions reduced the survival and increased the risk of relapse. Transfusions based on patients' blood management policy should be performed by applying a more restrictive policy, and the planned preoperative administration of iron, if necessary, should be pursued.

A Pharmacological Analysis of the Activity and Failure of the Medical Treatment of High-Grade Osteosarcoma.

Osteosarcomas (OSs) are a group of neoplasms originating from bone cells, usually presenting in three specific age groups: children, young adults, and the elderly. High-grade OS is an extremely malignant tumor mainly due to evolution into metastatic disease, usually in the lungs. Survival of these patients has improved since the 1980s thanks to close cooperation between oncologists, oncological surgeons and orthopedic surgeons. Unfortunately, no progress has been made in the last 30 years and new, more effective drugs are needed. This article reviews the biological and pharmacological basis of the treatment of OS. Models of clinical pharmacology of the active drugs, toxic effects and reasons for primary and secondary resistance to old and new drugs are discussed.

Total Neoadjuvant Therapy in Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Treatment Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The addition of induction chemotherapy to concomitant neoadjuvant chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer could increase pathological downstaging and act on occult micrometastatic disease, leading ultimately to a better outcome. A systematic review was carried out of the existing literature on the treatment outcomes of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) on locally advanced rectal cancer. TNT was defined as chemotherapy using cycles of induction and/or consolidation in conjunction with standard chemoradiotherapy prior to surgery. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed according to the PRISMA statement up until January 2019. The primary endpoints were complete pathologic response (pCR), disease-free survival, and overall survival rates. RESULTS: A total of 28 studies (3 retrospective and 25 prospective for a total of 3579 patients) were included in the final analysis (n = 2688 treated with TNT and n = 891 with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy therapy). The pooled pCR rate was 22.4% (95% CI 19.4%-25.7%) in all patients treated with TNT (n = 27 studies with data available). In n = 10 comparative studies with data available, TNT was found to increase the odds of pCR by 39% (1.40, 95% CI 1.08-1.81, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of induction or consolidation chemotherapy to standard neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy results in a higher pCR rate. Given that the comparative analysis was derived from few randomized publications, large confirmatory trials should be carried out before a strong recommendation is made in favor of TNT.