Tislelizumab versus chemotherapy as second-line treatment for European and North American patients with advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a subgroup analysis of the randomized phase III RATIONALE-302 study.

BACKGROUND: The phase III RATIONALE-302 study evaluated tislelizumab, an anti-programmed cell death protein 1 antibody, as second-line (2L) treatment for advanced/metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). This prespecified exploratory analysis investigated outcomes in patients from Europe and North America (Europe/North America subgroup). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with tumor progression during/after first-line systemic treatment were randomized 1 : 1 to open-label tislelizumab or investigator's choice of chemotherapy (paclitaxel, docetaxel, or irinotecan). RESULTS: The Europe/North America subgroup comprised 108 patients (tislelizumab: n = 55; chemotherapy: n = 53). Overall survival (OS) was prolonged with tislelizumab versus chemotherapy (median: 11.2 versus 6.3 months), with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.55 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35-0.87]; HR was similar irrespective of programmed death-ligand 1 score [≥10%: 0.47 (95% CI 0.18-1.21); <10%: 0.55 (95% CI 0.30-1.01)]. Median progression-free survival was 2.3 versus 2.7 months with tislelizumab versus chemotherapy [HR: 0.97 (95% CI 0.64-1.47)]. Overall response rate was greater with tislelizumab (20.0%) versus chemotherapy (11.3%), with more durable response (median duration of response: 5.1 versus 2.1 months). Tislelizumab had a favorable safety profile versus chemotherapy, with fewer patients experiencing ≥grade 3 treatment-related adverse events (13.0% versus 51.0%). Those on tislelizumab experienced less deterioration in health-related quality of life, physical functioning, and/or disease- and treatment-related symptoms (i.e. fatigue, pain, and eating problems) as compared to those on chemotherapy, per the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and QLQ-OES18 scores. CONCLUSIONS: As a 2L therapy for advanced/metastatic ESCC, tislelizumab improved OS and had a favorable safety profile as compared to chemotherapy in European/North American ESCC patients in the randomized phase III RATIONALE-302 study.

Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal cancer: a 13 years-retrospective monocentric study.

Background and study aim: Over the last 20 years, cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has progressively become a therapeutic option for peritoneal carcinomatosis thanks to its favourable oncologic results. The aim of this study is to analyse the overall survival and recurrence-free survival, after complete CRS and closed abdomen technique HIPEC for peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal cancer. Patients and methods: This retrospective study collected the data from all patients who underwent a CRS with HIPEC for colorectal cancer at "Cliniques universitaires Saint Luc" from October 2007 to December 2020. Ninety-nine patients were included. Results: The median follow-up was 34 months. Post-operative mortality and Clavien-Dindo grade III/IV morbidity rates were 2.0% and 28.3%. The overall 2-year and 5-year survival rates were 80.1% and 54.4%. Using the multivariate analysis, age at surgery, liver metastases and PCI score >13 showed a statistically significant negative impact on overall survival. The 2-year and 5-year recurrence-free survival rates were 33.9% and 22%. Using the multivariate analysis, it was found that liver metastases, the extent of carcinomatosis with PCI>7 have a statistically significant negative impact on recurrence-free survival. Conclusions: Despite a high recurrence rate, CRS followed by HIPEC to treat peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal origin offer encouraging oncologic results with a satisfying survival rate. When PCI>13, CRS and HIPEC does not seem to offer any survival benefit and to efficiently limit recurrence, our data are in favor of a maximum PCI of 7.

Safety of systemic anti-cancer treatment in oncology patients with non-severe COVID-19: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The viral pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has disrupted cancer patient management around the world. Most reported data relate to incidence, risk factors, and outcome of severe COVID-19. The safety of systemic anti-cancer therapy in oncology patients with non-severe COVID-19 is an important matter in daily practice. METHODS: ONCOSARS-1 was a single-center, academic observational study. Adult patients with solid tumors treated in the oncology day unit with systemic anti-cancer therapy during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in Belgium were prospectively included. All patients (n = 363) underwent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) serological testing after the first peak of the pandemic in Belgium. Additionally, 141 of these patients also had a SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test during the pandemic. The main objective was to retrospectively determine the safety of systemic cancer treatment, measured by the rate of adverse events according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, in SARS-CoV-2-positive patients compared with SARS-CoV-2-negative patients. RESULTS: Twenty-two (6%) of the 363 eligible patients were positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR and/or serology. Of these, three required transient oxygen supplementation, but none required admission to the intensive care unit. Hematotoxicity was the only adverse event more frequently observed in SARS-CoV-2 -positive patients than in SARS-CoV-2-negative patients: 73% vs 35% (P < 0.001). This association remained significant (odds ratio (OR) 4.1, P = 0.009) even after adjusting for performance status and type of systemic treatment. Hematological adverse events led to more treatment delays for the SARS-CoV-2-positive group: 55% vs 20% (P < 0.001). Median duration of treatment interruption was similar between the two groups: 14 and 11 days, respectively. Febrile neutropenia, infections unrelated to COVID-19, and bleeding events occurred at a low rate in the SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. CONCLUSION: Systemic anti-cancer therapy appeared safe in ambulatory oncology patients treated during the COVID-19 pandemic. There were, however, more treatment delays in the SARS-CoV-2-positive population, mainly due to a higher rate of hematological adverse events.

Regorafenib after failure of gemcitabine and platinum-based chemotherapy for locally advanced/metastatic biliary tumors: REACHIN, a randomized, double-blind, phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a high unmet clinical need for treatments of advanced/metastatic biliary tract cancers after progression on first-line chemotherapy. Regorafenib has demonstrated efficacy in some gastrointestinal tumors that progress on standard therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: REACHIN was a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase II study designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of regorafenib in patients with nonresectable/metastatic biliary tract cancer that progressed after gemcitabine/platinum chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned 1 : 1 to best supportive care plus either regorafenib 160 mg once daily 3 weeks on/1 week off or placebo until progression or unacceptable toxicity. No crossover was allowed. The primary objective was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary objectives were response rate, overall survival, and translational analysis. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients with intrahepatic (n = 42), perihilar (n = 6), or extrahepatic (n = 9) cholangiocarcinoma, or gallbladder carcinoma (n = 9) were randomized, 33 to each treatment group (33 per group). At a median follow-up of 24 months, all patients had progressed and six patients were alive. Median treatment duration was 11.0 weeks [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.0-15.9] in the regorafenib group and 6.3 weeks (95% CI: 3.9-7.0) in the placebo group (P = 0.002). Fourteen of 33 patients (42%) in the regorafenib group had a dose reduction. Stable disease rates were 74% (95% CI: 59-90) in the regorafenib group and 34% with placebo (95% CI: 18-51; P = 0.002). Median PFS in the regorafenib group was 3.0 months (95% CI: 2.3-4.9) and 1.5 months (95% CI: 1.2-2.0) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.49; 95% CI: 0.29-0.81; P = 0.004) and median overall survival was 5.3 months (95% CI: 2.7-10.5) and 5.1 months (95% CI: 3.0-6.4), respectively (P = 0.28). There were no unexpected/new safety signals. CONCLUSION: Regorafenib significantly improved PFS and tumor control in patients with previously treated metastatic/unresectable biliary tract cancer in the second- or third-line setting. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered in the European Clinical Trials Register database (EudraCT 2012-005626-30) and at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02162914).

The role of the pathologist and clinical implications in colorectal liver metastasis.

Colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) affect about 50% of colorectal cancer patients. With the improvement of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the introduction of targeted therapy, resectability of CRLM and survival rates have improved over time. However, 60-70% of patients still recur. Several pathological and molecular parameters have been described as prognostic factors after CRLM resection. These parameters encompass not only tumoral features, but also non-tumoral ones, such as chemotherapy related liver injury, or factors related to tumour environment, namely Immunoscore. This review summarizes these prognostic indicators to clarify which patho-molecular parameters should be addressed in the pathological report.

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery for locally advanced colorectal cancer : feasibility, short-term and oncologic outcomes.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Data about single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) in locally advanced colorectal cancers are scarce. This study aimed to evaluate perioperative and shortterm oncologic outcomes of SILS in pT3-T4 colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From 2011 to 2015 data from 249 SILS performed in our Colorectal Unit were entered into a prospective database. Data regarding patients with a pT3-T4 colorectal adenocarcinoma were compared to those with pTis-pT2. Factors influencing conversion were assessed by multivariate analysis. RESULTS: There were 100 consecutive patients (T3-T4 = 70, Tis-T2 = 30). Demographics were similar. Tumor size was significantly larger in the T3-T4 group [3.9cm vs 2cm; p<0.001]. In T3-T4 patients we found a significant higher number of lymph nodes harvested [20 vs 13 ; p<0.001]. Early (<30 days) severe (Clavien-Dindo classification>2) postoperative complication rate was similar between groups (8.6% vs 10% ; p = 0.999), as well as conversion rate (18.6% vs 6.7% ; p = 0.220). Finally, there were no differences in terms of hospital stay and mortality rate. On multivariate analysis, age (OR = 1.06, 95%CI: 1.012-1.113 ; p = 0.015] and stage IV (OR = 5.372, 95%CI: 1.320-21.862, p = 0.019) were independently associated with conversion. CONCLUSIONS: SILS for locally advanced colorectal cancer did not affect the short-term outcomes in this series and oncological clearance remained satisfactory. Age and stage IV disease are independent risk factors for conversion.

Lymph node ratio and surgical quality are strong prognostic factors of rectal cancer: results from a single referral centre.

AIM: Nodal stage is a strong prognostic factor of oncological outcome of rectal cancer. To compensate for the variation in total number of harvested nodes, calculation of the lymph node ratio (LNR) has been advocated. The aim of the study was to compare the impact, on the long-term oncological outcome, of the LNR with other predictive factors, including the quality of total mesorectal excision (TME) and the state of the circumferential resection margin. METHOD: Consecutive patients having elective surgery for nonmetastatic rectal cancer were extracted from a prospectively maintained database. Retrospective uni- and multivariate analyses were performed based on patient-, surgical- and tumour-related factors. The prognostic value of the LNR on overall survival (OS) and on overall recurrence-free survival (ORFS) was assessed and a cut-off value was determined. RESULTS: From 1998 to 2013, out of 456 patients, 357 with nonmetastatic disease were operated on for rectal cancer. Neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy was administered to 66.7% of the patients. The mean number of lymph nodes retrieved was 12.8 ± 8.78 per surgical specimen. A lower lymph node yield was obtained in patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (11.8 vs 14.2; P = 0.014). The 5-year ORFS was 71.8% and the 5-year OS was 80.1%. Multivariate analysis confirmed LNR, the quality of TME and age to be independent prognostic factors of OS. LNR, age and perineural infiltration were independently associated with ORFS. Low- and high-risk patients could be discriminated using an LNR cut-off value of 0.2. CONCLUSION: LNR is an independent prognostic factor of OS and ORFS. In line with the principles of optimal surgical management, the quality of TME and lymph node yield are essential technical requirements.

Pathological responses after angiogenesis or EGFR inhibitors in metastatic colorectal cancer depend on the chemotherapy backbone.

BACKGROUND: Optimal preoperative treatment before colorectal cancer metastases (CRCM) resection remains unclear. This study evaluated pathological responses (pR) in CRCM resected after chemotherapy alone or combined with angiogenesis or epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors. METHODS: Pathological response was retrospectively evaluated on 264 resected metastases from 99 patients. The proportion of responding metastases after different preoperative treatments was reported and compared. Patient's progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared based on pR. RESULTS: The combination of anti-angiogenics with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy resulted in more pR than when they were combined with irinotecan-based chemotherapy (80% vs 50%; P<0.001). Inversely, the combination of EGFR inhibitors with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy seemed to induce fewer pR than when they were combined with irinotecan-based treatment (53% vs 72%; P=0.049). Overall survival at 5 years was improved for patients with a pR in all resected metastases compared with those who did not achieve a pR (68.5% vs 32.6%; P=0.023) and this response was the only factor predicting OS in a multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: The chemotherapy partner combined with angiogenesis or EGFR inhibitors influenced pR in resected CRCM. In our exploratory analysis anti-angiogenic/oxaliplatin-based regimens and anti-EGFR/irinotecan-based regimens were associated with the highest pR. Prospective randomised trials should be performed to validate these observations.

Seeding of the percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy site from head and neck carcinoma: case report and review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is a relatively safe procedure and is an important supportive treatment for patients with advanced head and neck cancer. Although tumor seeding has been reported in various sites, seeding at the PEG exit site is a rare complication. METHODS AND RESULTS: We describe a clinical case in which squamous cell carcinoma of the hypopharynx implanted at the site of PEG insertion and was successfully removed by surgery. PEG was previously placed by the "pull" technique. A review of the literature, discussion of the mechanism of spread, and recommendations to avoid this complication are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: To avoid this rare and poor prognostic complication, the "pull" technique should be avoided for PEG placement in any patient with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. An alternative method such as the "push" technique should be preferred.

Liver-directed therapies: does it make sense in the current therapeutic strategy for patients with confined liver colorectal metastases?

Nearly half of patients with colorectal cancer will have metastases in the course of their disease and the liver appears to be the most common location for metastases. For patients with confined hepatic colorectal metastases, complete surgical resection is the only chance for cure, with a 5-year postoperative survival rate between 35% and 50%. Over the past 5 years, combinations of chemotherapy with targeted therapies have succeeded in inducing tumoral response and have made curative surgery of initially unresectable liver metastases possible. However despite optimal preoperative treatment, disease in the majority of patients remains unresectable. For patients with liver-limited or liver-dominant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the current challenges are to explore different locoregional treatments to improve local control, overall survival (OS), and curative resection. In this way, liver-directed therapy, which is defined by injection, infusion, or embolization of chemotherapy or loaded radionuclide (with radioactive yttrium-90) microspheres into the arterial liver vasculature, has been an appealing investigational method for patients with liver-confined mCRC, in whom it has yielded reproducibly higher response rates (RRs) than conventional intravenous therapy. In this article, we propose to review, compare, and discuss the clinical benefit, the current indications, and the optimal use of liver-directed therapies for patients with liver-dominant mCRC.

Familial adenomatous polyposis: clinical presentation, detection and surveillance.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer related death in the western countries. It remains an important health problem, often under-diagnosed. The symptoms can appear very late and about 25% of the patients are diagnosed at metastatic stage. Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is an inherited colorectal cancer syndrome, characterized by the early onset of hundred to thousands of adenomatous polyps in the colon and rectum. Left untreated, there is a nearly 100% cumulative risk of progression to CRC by the age of 35-40 years, as well as an increased risk of various other malignancies. CRC can be prevented by the identification of the high risk population and by the timely implementation of rigid screening programs which will lead to special medico-surgical interventions.

Quality of care indicators in rectal cancer.

Quality of health care is a hot topic, especially with regard to cancer. Although rectal cancer is, in many aspects, a model oncologic entity, there seem to be substantial differences in quality of care between countries, hospitals and physicians. PROCARE, a Belgian multidisciplinary national project to improve outcome in all patients with rectum cancer, identified a set of quality of care indicators covering all aspects of the management of rectal cancer. This set should permit national and international benchmarking, i.e. comparing results from individual hospitals or teams with national and international performances with feedback to participating teams. Such comparison could indicate whether further improvement is possible and/or warranted.

Epidermal growth factor receptor targeted therapies for solid tumours.

The majority of human epithelial cancers is frequently characterized by a functional activation of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-driven-pathways. Today, two classes of EGFR inhibitors are routinely used in the clinic: anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies such as cetuximab and panitumumab and small-molecule inhibitors of the EGFR tyrosine kinase activity such as erlotinib and gefitinib. Anti-EGFR therapies have been approved in several countries for the treatment of metastatic nonsmall-cell lung cancer, colorectal cancer, squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck, and pancreatic cancer. This article summarizes the clinical evidence of the anticancer activity of anti-EGFR treatment, and considers the current, and controversial, clinical issues with respect to their optimal use in the treatment of patients with cancer. Mechanisms of resistance to anti-EGFR treatment are also briefly discussed.

Locoregional and radioisotopic targeted treatment of neuroendocrine tumours.

Gastro-entero-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (GEP NET) are a heterogeneous group of proliferative disorders whose management dramatically relies on tumour biology. For well-differentiated, low-proliferative index tumours, locoregional treatment and targeted radioisotopic therapies offer an attractive and seemingly efficient alternative to palliative surgical resections. Lack of well-designed, prospective, randomized multicentric studies hinders a balanced evaluation of available locoregional treatment methods: embolization, chemo-embolization, radio-embolization. According to available datas, all techniques achieve a 50-60% radiological response rate and almost 80% of symptomatic relieve for the patients, while their impact on progression-free and overall survival remains not assessable. Same conclusions can be drawn for radiolabeled targeted therapies like MetaiodoBenzylGuanidine (MIBG) and Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy (PRRT), which, provided that their target is expressed by tumour cells, can deliver therapeutic doses of radiation to neoplastic tissues. 131I-MIBG has been associated with a 50% symptomatic response rate and mainly haematological toxicities. PRRT with 111In-DiethyleneTriamineentaacetic Acid-Octreotide, [90Y-DOTA0-Tyr3]-Octreotide, or [177Lu-DOTA0-Tyr3]-Octreotate seem to alleviate symptoms in 50% of patients and obtain a radiological response in 30-38%. Renal toxicity, partially preventable, is more frequent than previously thought and result in an annual decrease in glomerular function by 4 to 8% per year. Forthcoming research in GEP NET should by a majority be designed in randomized, prospective and multicentric fashion. Locoregional disease trials must focus on clinical outcome differences between embolization techniques (embolization, chemoembolization and radioembolization) and surgery. In disseminated disease, studies should assess radiolabeled targeted therapies efficiency when administered along with and compared to new biological and older chemotherapeutic agents.

Role of chemotherapy in gastro-entero-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: the end of a story?

Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumours (GEP NET) are heterogeneous and rare malignancies although their prevalence is increasing. Multiple therapeutic approaches are available to date for their management, including surgery, hormonal and immune radionucleide therapies and chemotherapy. The purpose of this review is to collect, examine, and analyze data available regarding contemporary chemotherapeutic management of GEP NET in order to determine whether or not chemotherapy still takes place in the therapeutic arsenal of GEP NET. We therefore performed a systematic search of all the English-spoken literature regarding GEP NET. Anthracyclins, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), DTIC and streptozotocin are amongst the most commonly used chemotherapeutic agents, usually prescribed in combination. Their efficiency in reducing tumor burden is not always associated with better survival, perhaps due to severe toxicity. Chemotherapy in GEP NET is mainly devoted to poorly differentiated tumours, but also in well differentiated carcinomas either not eligible or resistant to other therapies. Chemotherapy remains therefore useful in specific cases of GEP NET management. However, a new era of antitumoral agents, such as targeted therapies, could eventually replace these old recipes in the near future.

Treatment of colorectal liver metastases: a review.

Liver metastases from colorectal cancer (CRC) have a poor prognosis. Despite recent advances in the management of advanced disease with chemotherapy, liver resection remains the only hope for cure for patients with colorectal liver metastases. Approximately 15% of patients with stage IV CRC referred to specialist centers have metastatic liver disease deemed to be resectable at presentation. Over the last five years, combination chemotherapeutic regimens, namely 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid with irinotecan or oxaliplatin and, more recently, integrating targeted monoclonal antibodies, have been shown to downsize the tumour burden to an extent that sometimes allows initially unresectable metastases to be excised. Five-year survival rates following liver resection range between 25% and 55% compared with 0% and 5% for non-operated patients. Beyond liver resection, the rationale for "pseudo-adjuvant" chemotherapy lacks scientific evidence, despite some promising data. However, perioperative chemotherapy for resectable lesions is gaining ground in current practice. In this article we review the state of the art treatment for CRC liver metastases and, considering the results of recent trials, try to determine the appropriate role of chemotherapy.