A phase II study of sorafenib in recurrent and/or metastatic salivary gland carcinomas: Translational analyses and clinical impact.

BACKGROUND: Pre-clinical and clinical evidence suggests a rationale for the use of anti-angiogenic agents, including sorafenib, in recurrent and/or metastatic salivary gland carcinomas (RMSGCs). This study evaluates the activity of sorafenib in patients with RMSGCs and also investigates whether the activity of sorafenib could be related to its main tailored targets (i.e. BRAF, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 [VEGFR2], platelet-derived growth factor receptor α [PDGFRα] and ß, RET, KIT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received sorafenib at 400 mg BID. The primary end-point was response rate (RR) including complete response or partial response (PR); secondary end-points included RR according to Choi criteria, disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients (19 adenoid cystic cancers, ACC) were enrolled. Six PRs were recorded. RR was 16% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6-32; 11% in ACC and 22% in non-ACC). Choi criteria could be applied in 30 out of 37 cases with a RR of 50% (95% CI: 31-69%); DCR was 76% (95% CI: 59-88%). Incidence of ≥G3 adverse events was 29.7%. Median PFS and OS for the entire population were 5.9 months and 23.4 months, respectively. Median PFS and OS were 8.9 and 26.4 months for ACC versus 4.2 and 12.3 months for non-ACC patients. All the cases showed expression of PDGFRß in the stroma and VEGFR2 in endothelial cells; PDGFRα positivity was found in the stroma of four (27%) cases. All except for two cases showed no PDGFRß, VEGFR2 and PDGFRα expression in the tumour cells. KIT expression was restricted to ACC and a weak RET expression was limited to one adenocarcinoma, not otherwise specified (NOS). No BRAF mutation was found. No correlation was observed between the sorafenib activity and the expression of its markers although all six responders (two ACC, one adenocarcinoma, NOS, one salivary duct cancer [SDC], one high-grade mucoepidermoid [HG-MEC] and one poorly-differentiated cancer) are enriched in the stromal component showing a PDGFRß immunodecoration. In ACCs, immunohistochemistry revealed MYB protein expression in 15/16 cases (94%) and the MYB-NFIB fusion oncogene was observed in 9/14 (64%). CONCLUSIONS: Sorafenib is the first anti-angiogenic agent to demonstrate activity in RMSGC patients, particularly in some histotypes such as HG-MEC, SDC and adenocarcinoma, NOS. The PDGFRß-positive rich stromal component characterising these histotypes and the lack of correlation between the activity of sorafenib and its targets suggests anti-angiogenic effect as the prevalent mechanism of action of sorafenib in SGCs.

Double-contrast barium enema and computerised tomography in the pre-operative evaluation of rectal carcinoma: are they still useful diagnostic procedures?

PURPOSE: In modern management of rectal carcinoma, the preoperative evaluation of disease parameters is important for selection of therapeutic options. Such parameters are currently defined through endorectal ultrasonography or endoscopic ultrasonography. A retrospective analysis of the parameters obtained with double-contrast barium enema (DCBE) and endorectal balloon computed tomography (CT) was conducted to verify the diagnostic reliability of the radiological techniques and to establish whether there is still an indication for their use. METHODS: 53 consecutive patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal half of the rectal ampulla underwent double contrast barium enema examination and CT of the pelvis with endorectal balloon. On the basis of the DCBE and CT assessment we evaluated: 1) the distance between the cranial extremity of the anal canal and the distal margin of the neoplasm; 2) the radial diffusion of the tumor; 3) the metastatic involvement of the perirectal and inferior mesenteric lymph nodes. RESULTS: 1) CT and DBCE measurements of the distal margin tended to coincide, but both tended to overestimate the measurement when compared to the pathologic examination; 2) in the identification of neoplastic infiltration of perirectal fat (T3) CT had 100% sensitivity, 78.7% specificity and 86.8% accuracy; 3) the CT sensitivity for detecting lymph node metastasis was 52.6%, specificity 85.3% and accuracy 73.6%. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic information provided by the radiological examinations is comparable to that of clinical and instrumental methods currently employed for staging of rectal carcinoma, although the latter are preferred because they are more readily accessible and less costly. DCBE and CT can therefore be usefully employed for staging of cancer of the rectum in those cases in which there are limitations of the current standard methods.

Diagnostic and interventional radiology in the post-operative period and follow-up of patients after rectal resection with coloanal anastomosis.

Surgical treatment of carcinoma of the distal third of the rectum with anal sphincter preservation is increasingly used in accredited cancer centers. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic usefulness of radiological investigations in the management of patients who had undergone resection with coloanal anastomosis for carcinoma of the rectum, in the immediate post-operative period, during closure of the protective colostomy and in the follow-up of symptomatic recanalized patients. A total of 175 patients who had undergone total rectal resection with end-to-side anastomosis for carcinoma of the distal third of the rectal ampulla, most of whom had received postoperative radiotherapy, were evaluated radiologically. In the postoperative period radiological investigation was ordered only for symptomatic patients to detect pathology of the anastomosis and the pouch sutures and was used direct film abdominal radiography and contrast-enhanced radiography of the rectal stump with a water-soluble radio-opaque agent. Before closure of the colostomy, 2 months after rectal excision or approximately 4 months after if postoperative radiotherapy was given, the anastomosis and pouch of all patients, even asymptomatic ones, were studied with water-soluble contrast enema to check for normal canalization. In the follow-up after recanalization radiological examinations were done to complete the study of the large intestine if the endoscopist was not able to examine it up to the cecum. Of the 175 patients examined radiologically during the postoperative period and/or subsequent follow-up, 95 showed no pathological findings. Seventy-nine patients had fistulas of the coloanal anastomosis or the pouch, 23 of which supplied a presacral collection. In the absence of severe sepsis, the only therapeutic measures were systemic antibiotics and washing of the surgical catheters to maintain efficient operation. In 2 patients in whom transanal drainage was performed radiologically the fistula was cured in 1 week. In 36 cases of cicatricial stenosis, 17 at the coloanal anastomosis and 19 at the pouch, radiological examination always detected the lesion, correctly defining its anatomical characterisitics, nature and extension. Of the 19 cases of stenosis treated radiologically, 15 recovered an adequate intestinal calibre for tients operated on, 21 cases of reccurrence were detected. Radiological examination was requested as the first investigation in only one of these cases, for a patient with subocclusion. Radiological investigations in patients who have undergone colonanal anastomosis are of read diagnostic value in the immediate post-operative period, during closure of the protective colostomy and in the follow-up of symptomatic recanalized patients.