Fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab as first-line treatment in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia: A long-term analysis of the German CLL Study Group (GCLLSG) registry.

Long-term data of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients with favorable risk who were treated with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR) within clinical trials show good efficacy. We here report long-term data collected within the GCLLSG registry. Altogether, 417 CLL patients who received first-line treatment with FCR were analyzed, of which 293 (70.3%) were treated outside of clinical trials. The median observation time from first-line was 95.8 (interquartile range 58.7-126.8) months. Focusing on data of 194 (46.5%) patients who received FCR first-line treatment after 2013 (start of data collection within GCLLSG registry), responses were documented in 85% of the patients, non-responses in 15%, and for 3.6% the assessment was missing. Median event-free survival (EFS, time until disease progression, subsequent treatment, or death) was 60.2 months with a 5-year EFS-rate of 50.6%. Patients with higher-risk disease, characterized by unmutated IGHV (N = 78), had a median EFS of 45.4 months with a 5-year EFS rate of 36.3%, while the median EFS was 77.5 months with a 5-year EFS rate of 60.3% in patients with mutated IGHV (N = 40). Median overall survival was not reached with a 5-year survival rate of 92.7%. In summary, first-line FCR was associated with long EFS, especially in patients exhibiting a mutated IGHV status.

The complex intervention day hospice - a quality-assured study on the implementation, realization, and benefits with model character for Germany (IMPULS) using the example of "Day hospice Adiuvantes".

BACKGROUND: Currently, a conclusive experience on the uniform implementation and benefits of day hospice structures and interventions is lacking in Germany. The following questions should be clarified: (1) Which structural conditions and interventional measures should be established in day hospices from the point of view of patients, relatives, and specialist staff?; (2) Are the planned structures or interventions feasible and implementable under real conditions and accepted by patients, relatives, and staff?; (3) How can a final implementation and intervention catalog for day hospices be designed?; (4) Is this final catalog of services feasible, reasonable, economical, and effective under everyday conditions in day hospices? METHODS: We planned to perform a multistage investigation, guided by the Medical Research Council Framework for the development and evaluation of complex interventions. In Stage 1, an initial theoretical construct on structures and interventions will be established through an extensive literature and guideline review on day hospices and through qualitative interviews. In a nominal group process, we will create a catalog of offers. In Stage 2, feasibility testing is conducted in a single-day hospice under real-life conditions using quantitative quality indicators and qualitative interviews. Structures and interventions can be adapted here if necessary. In a second nominal group process, a final structure and offer catalog is created, which is then implemented in Stage 3 in the day hospice under investigation and evaluated under real daily conditions through a process and effectiveness test. For this purpose, qualitative and quantitative quality indicators will be used and a comparative cohort of patients who are not cared for in the day hospice - but in the same network structure (oncology-palliative care network Lower Bavaria) - is examined. DISCUSSION: Finally, the initial statements on the reasonable and realizable structures or interventions in day hospices and their benefits in daily real-life conditions as well as possible optimization processes shall be made. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was retrospectively registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS-ID DRKS00031613, registration date April 04, 2023) and the display portal of the Center for Clinical Trials of the University Hospital Regensburg (Z-2022-1734-6, registration date July 01, 2023).

Tislelizumab plus zanubrutinib for Richter transformation: the phase 2 RT1 trial.

In patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia, Richter transformation (RT) reflects the development of an aggressive lymphoma that is associated with poor response to chemotherapy and short survival. We initiated an international, investigator-initiated, prospective, open-label phase 2 study in which patients with RT received a combination of the PD-1 inhibitor tislelizumab plus the BTK inhibitor zanubrutinib for 12 cycles. Patients responding to treatment underwent maintenance treatment with both agents. The primary end point was overall response rate after six cycles. Of 59 enrolled patients, 48 patients received at least two cycles of treatment and comprised the analysis population according to the study protocol. The median observation time was 13.9 months, the median age was 67 (range 45-82) years. Ten patients (20.8%) had received previous RT-directed therapy. In total, 28 out of 48 patients responded to induction therapy with an overall response rate of 58.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 43.2-72.4), including 9 (18.8%) complete reponse and 19 (39.6%) partial response, meeting the study's primary end point by rejecting the predefined null hypothesis of 40% (P = 0.008). Secondary end points included duration of response, progression-free survival and overall survival. The median duration of response was not reached, the median progression-free survival was 10.0 months (95% CI 3.8-16.3). Median overall survival was not reached with a 12-month overall survival rate of 74.7% (95% CI 58.4-91.0). The most common adverse events were infections (18.0%), gastrointestinal disorders (13.0%) and hematological toxicities (11.4%). These data suggest that combined checkpoint and BTK inhibition by tislelizumab plus zanubrutinib is an effective and well-tolerated treatment strategy for patients with RT. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04271956 .

Three-month life expectancy as inclusion criterion for clinical trials in advanced pancreatic cancer: is it really a valid tool for patient selection?

PURPOSE: To analyze the 3-month life expectancy rate in pancreatic cancer (PC) patients treated within prospective trials from the German AIO study group. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A pooled analysis was conducted for patients with advanced PC that were treated within five phase II/III studies conducted between 1997 and 2017 (Gem/Cis, Ro96, RC57, ACCEPT, RASH). The primary goal for the current report was to identify the actual 3-month survival rate, a standard inclusion criterion in oncology trials. RESULTS: Overall, 912 patients were included, 83% had metastatic and 17% locally advanced PC; the estimated median overall survival (OS) was 7.1 months. Twenty-one percent of the participants survived < 3 months, with a range from 26% in RC57 to 15% in RASH. Significant predictors for not reaching 3-month OS were > 1 previous treatment line (p < 0.001) and performance status (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the definition of a life expectancy of > 3 months as a standard inclusion criterion in clinical trials for advanced PC, a significant proportion of study patients does not survive > 3 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT00440167 (AIO-PK0104), NCT01729481 (RASH), NCT01728818 (ACCEPT).

Predictive Value of Minimal Residual Disease for Efficacy of Rituximab Maintenance in Mantle Cell Lymphoma: Results From the European Mantle Cell Lymphoma Elderly Trial.

PURPOSE: The outcome of older patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) has improved by the introduction of immunochemotherapy, followed by rituximab (R)-maintenance. Assessment of minimal residual disease (MRD) represents a promising tool for individualized treatment decisions and was a prospectively planned part of the European MCL Elderly trial. We investigated how MRD status influenced the efficacy of R-maintenance and how MRD can enable tailored consolidation strategies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Previously untreated patients with MCL age 60 years or older have been randomly assigned to R versus interferon-alpha maintenance after response to rituximab, fludarabine, cyclophosphamide (R-FC) versus rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone (R-CHOP). MRD monitoring was performed by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) following EuroMRD guidelines. RESULTS: A qPCR assay with a median sensitivity of 1 × 10-5 could be generated in 80% of 288 patients in an international, multicenter, multilaboratory setting. More extensive tumor dissemination facilitated the identification of a molecular marker. The efficacy of R-maintenance in clinical remission was confirmed for MRD-negative patients at the end of induction in terms of progression-free survival (PFS; hazard ratio [HR], 0.38 [95% CI, 0.21 to 0.63]) and overall survival (OS; HR, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.20 to 0.68]), particularly in R-CHOP-treated patients (PFS-HR, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.10 to 0.52]; OS-HR, 0.19 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.52]). R-maintenance appeared less effective in MRD-positive patients (PFS-HR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.26 to 1.02]) overall and after R-CHOP induction (PFS-HR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.28 to 1.26]). R-FC achieved more frequent and faster MRD clearance compared with R-CHOP. MRD positivity in clinical remission after induction was associated with a short median time to clinical progression of approximately 1-1.7 years. CONCLUSION: The results confirm the strong efficacy of R-maintenance in patients who are MRD-negative after induction. Treatment de-escalation for MRD-negative patients is discouraged by our results. More effective consolidation strategies should be explored in MRD-positive patients to improve their long-term prognosis.

The Oncology Biomarker Discovery framework reveals cetuximab and bevacizumab response patterns in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Precision medicine has revolutionised cancer treatments; however, actionable biomarkers remain scarce. To address this, we develop the Oncology Biomarker Discovery (OncoBird) framework for analysing the molecular and biomarker landscape of randomised controlled clinical trials. OncoBird identifies biomarkers based on single genes or mutually exclusive genetic alterations in isolation or in the context of tumour subtypes, and finally, assesses predictive components by their treatment interactions. Here, we utilise the open-label, randomised phase III trial (FIRE-3, AIO KRK-0306) in metastatic colorectal carcinoma patients, who received either cetuximab or bevacizumab in combination with 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid and irinotecan (FOLFIRI). We systematically identify five biomarkers with predictive components, e.g., patients with tumours that carry chr20q amplifications or lack mutually exclusive ERK signalling mutations benefited from cetuximab compared to bevacizumab. In summary, OncoBird characterises the molecular landscape and outlines actionable biomarkers, which generalises to any molecularly characterised randomised controlled trial.

Key Prognostic Factors Create a Composite Risk Score to Stratify Patients into High- and Low-Treatment Benefit Groups: A Multicenter, Retrospective Data Analysis of 84 Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients Treated with Regorafenib as Part of the CORRECT and CONSIGN Trials.

INTRODUCTION: In further-line mCRC treatment, median progression-free survival (PFS) is rather short, and many patients do not benefit from any antitumor treatment and should therefore be treated according to best-supportive care. A risk score based on standard laboratory values using markers of tumor inflammation aims to define a patient cohort with high treatment benefit and might offer insights into tumor biology. As regorafenib has been dropped off the German market due to an unfavorable risk-benefit ratio, patient selection is key for any further-line treatment option. METHODS: We used Cox regression analysis to determine laboratory markers that are independent prognostic factors of OS and PFS outcome. The influence of these variables was weighted using an estimator, which was calculated using Cox regression analysis. The estimators were implemented as multiplication factors, resulting in a risk score. A cut-off value for the resulting risk values was then determined via Cox regression analysis resulting in a low- and high-risk subgroup. RESULTS: Using data of 82 patients, a risk score identifying long-term survival in patients with last-line mCRC treatment could be calculated. The following parameters were associated with significantly longer survival in multivariate analysis: NLR ≤5 (p = <0.001), AP ≤200 U/L (p = 0.001), CRP ≤3.2 mg/dL (p = <0.001). The following estimator values were used to calculate a risk score: NLR: 0.132 (p = 0.046), AP: 0.004 (p = 0.014), and CRP: 0.032 (p = 0.039). Implementing the estimators as multiplication factors yielded the following risk score: 0.132*NLR + 0.004*AP + 0.032*CRP = Risk value. Cox regression resulted in low- and high-risk subgroups with risk values below and above 1.4, respectively. In the group with a low-risk score (<1.4), patients had a median OS of 10.5 months after initiating regorafenib. Patients with a high-risk score (>1.4) survived only 3.3 months after starting therapy with regorafenib (n = 43, p < 0.001, HR = 3.76). CONCLUSIONS: The presented composite risk score stratifies patients into two prognostic subgroups characterized by standard laboratory values. Patients with signs of systemic inflammation characterized by elevated NLR, AP, and CRP have a high composite risk score and a significant shorter overall survival. Although this score needs to be prospectively validated in larger cohorts, it may be used to stratify patients suitable for further-line treatment studies.

Effectiveness, safety and quality of life of trifluridine/tipiracil in pretreated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: Real-world data from the noninterventional TACTIC study in Germany.

The prospective, multicenter, noninterventional TACTIC study assessed effectiveness and safety of trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in a real-world setting in Germany, thus evaluating the external validity of the findings from the pivotal RECOURSE trial. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary objectives included progression-free survival (PFS), safety, and quality of life (QoL). Subgroups comprised patients with good (<3 metastatic sites at inclusion, ≥18 months from diagnosis of first metastasis to inclusion) or poor (remaining patients) prognostic characteristics (GPC/PPC). GPC without liver metastases was considered best prognostic characteristics (BPC). In total, 307 eligible patients (pretreated or not suitable for other available therapies) were treated with FTD/TPI. Overall, median [95%-CI] OS was 7.4 months [6.4-8.6], median PFS was 2.9 months [2.8-3.3]. In BPC (n = 65) and GPC (n = 176) compared to PPC (n = 124) subgroup, median OS (13.3 [9.1-17.6] vs 8.9 [7.6-9.8] vs 5.1 [4.4-7.0] months) and median PFS (4.0 [3.3-5.3] vs 3.4 [3.0-3.7] vs 2.6 [2.4-2.8] months) were longer. Patient-reported QoL, assessed by validated questionnaires (EQ-5D-5L, PRO-CTCAE), was stable throughout FTD/TPI treatment. Predominant FTD/TPI-related adverse events of grades 3 or 4 were neutropenia (13.0%), leukopenia (7.5%), and anemia (5.2%). Altogether, palliative FTD/TPI therapy in patients with pretreated mCRC was associated with prolonged survival, delayed progression, maintained health-related QoL, and manageable toxicity. Low metastatic burden and indolent disease were favorable prognostic factors for survival. TACTIC confirms the effectiveness and safety of FTD/TPI, highlighting its value in routine clinical practice.

Consequences of the Corona crisis on outpatient oncological care - a qualitative study among nurses and medical assistants.

INTRODUCTION: The Covid-19 pandemic has caused great personal stress for medical staff. To ensure adequate outpatient care for cancer patients, extensive safety and hygiene measures must be taken. This interview-based study examines the effects-both personal and professional-of the pandemic on the work routine of outpatient hematology/oncology nurses and medical assistants. PATIENTS, MATERIALS AND METHODS: Half a year after the outbreak of Covid-19 and the introduction of infection control regulations in three outpatient hematological/oncological centers, the affected medical staff (n = 15) were surveyed about the consequences for patient care and clinical work using audio-recorded telephone interviews. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using a qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The Covid-19 pandemic has complicated the medical care of cancer patients, but only a slight deterioration of medical and psycho-oncological care was observed. The level of stress experienced by medical staff is moderate, with hygiene and safety measures at the workplace helping to reduce stress. CONCLUSION: From the point of view of medical staff, the Covid-19 pandemic has had a moderate impact on the outpatient care of cancer patients. Safety measures against Covid-19 are decisive for ensuring the continuation of therapy and for motivating employees.

Inpatient Hospices in Germany: Medical Care Situation and Use of Supportive Oncological Therapies for Symptom Control in Tumor Patients.

Background: More than 80% of the residents in German hospices suffer from tumor disease. But the administration of supportive-oncological therapies in hospices for symptom control is controversially discussed. Objectives: This study aims to investigate the care situation of tumor patients in German hospices with regard to medical care and the use of supportive-oncological therapies. Methods: In February 2019, all hospices in Germany were offered the opportunity to participate in an anonymous online survey on medical and drug care for their tumor patients. The survey was conducted using the online platform SoSci Survey and ended in April 2019. The analysis was descriptive. Results: Of 202 hospices, 112 responded to the questionnaire. The hospices were distributed nationwide. Most have 8 to 10 places. More than 80% of hospice residents are tumor patients, and the length of stay is usually three to four weeks. Medical care is primarily provided by primary care physicians. While specialized outpatient palliative care is increasingly involved in care, hematologists/oncologists are rarely represented. Supportive-oncological therapies are rarely prescribed, whereas medication for other chronic conditions is often continued. The percentage of supportive-oncological therapies prescribed is higher in hospices with oncology co-care. Conclusions: Although most hospice residents suffer from malignant disease, co-care by a hematologist/oncologist is rare. Supportive-oncology therapies, particularly for symptom relief, may therefore be rarely used. However, since a small select group of hospice residents may benefit from these therapies, further investigation in this direction should be undertaken.

Oral and Subcutaneous Anticancer Therapy Training Course for Non-physician Healthcare Professionals: a Survey Evaluating the Relevance of its Content and its Implications in the Practice of Cancer Care.

The creation of antitumor agents with an oral or subcutaneous route of administration has had important positive implications in the development of drugs to treat cancers, but issues such as false drug intake, uncontrolled side effects, and limited supervision may jeopardize the ability of these agents to improve treatment. A potential solution is the recruitment of non-physician healthcare professionals (i.e., nurses and physician assistants) and a special training course for them that focuses on the improvement of patient compliance. We developed and implemented three special professional training modules for non-physician healthcare professionals, which focus on the pharmacological aspects and side effects of oral and subcutaneous antitumor medications in regard to management strategies and communication issues that these non-physician healthcare professionals should address. Subsequently, we administered a questionnaire survey evaluating the course content and the implementation of the course in practice to the training participants to collect data for its implementation. Of 165 questionnaires that were administered, 44 (27%) were answered. The participants rated the course as being highly useful for their daily work. The participants reported a significant improvement in their professional expertise from the course. They emphasized the importance of medical topics and practical content to be included in the course delivery. The course encouraged 75% of the responders to start independent consultations with cancer patients that focused on questions of medication adherence for oral and subcutaneous antitumor medications, as well as the management of their side effects. Based on our results, at least a portion of the non-physician healthcare workforce is highly interested in engaging in active and autonomous co-supervision of patients who are treated with oral and subcutaneous antitumor medications. In addition to the theoretical basics of the treatment modalities, educational courses on oral and subcutaneous antitumor medications for non-physician healthcare professionals should focus on practical training and topics relevant to patient care.

The CLL12 trial: ibrutinib vs placebo in treatment-naïve, early-stage chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Observation is the current standard of care for patients with early-stage asymptomatic chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), as chemotherapy-based interventions have failed to prolong survival. We hypothesized that early intervention with ibrutinib would be well tolerated and lead to superior disease control in a subgroup of early-stage patients with CLL. The phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled CLL12 trial randomly assigned asymptomatic, treatment-naïve Binet stage A CLL patients at increased risk of progression in a 1:1 ratio to receive ibrutinib (n = 182) or placebo (n = 181) at a dose of 420 mg daily. At a median follow-up of 31 months, the study met its primary endpoint by significantly improving event-free survival in the ibrutinib group (median, not reached vs 47.8 months; hazard ratio = 0.25; 95% confidence interval = 0.14-0.43, P < .0001). Compared with placebo, ibrutinib did not increase overall toxicity, yielding similar incidence and severity of adverse events (AEs). The most common serious AEs were atrial fibrillation, pneumonia, and rash in the ibrutinib group, and basal cell carcinoma, pneumonia, and myocardial infarction in the placebo group. Ibrutinib-associated risk for bleeding (33.5%) was decreased by prohibiting the use of oral anticoagulants through an amendment of the study protocol and by avoiding CYP3A4 drug-drug interactions. Ibrutinib confirms efficacy in CLL patients at an early stage with an increased risk of progression. However, the results do not justify changing the current standard of "watch and wait." This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02863718.

The tumor patient in the COVID-19 pandemic-an interview-based study of 30 patients undergoing systemic antiproliferative therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Five months after COVID-19 first occurred and protective regulations were introduced, patients at three outpatient hematological/oncological centers in Bavaria who had received antiproliferative tumor therapy (n = 30) were questioned about the pandemic's impact. PATIENTS, MATERIALS AND METHODS: In recorded semi-structured telephone interviews, the patients answered questions about their quality of life, treatment procedures, their relationship with medical care staff and modern communication technologies. Each interview consisted of 28 questions. The average length of an interview was 30 minutes. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed by means of a qualitative content analysis according to Mayring. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic adds to the burden of patients by decreasing their social contacts. They perceived the new isolation and protective measures in outpatient clinics as mostly positive and said its impact had been only slightly adverse. With the implemented safety measures, they feel adequately protected and looked after and want their antiproliferative therapy to be performed as scheduled. Talking to medical staff provides additional reassurance. CONCLUSION: Although the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the social isolation of tumor patients, it has had only a minor effect on tumor therapy in the surveyed patient population. The benefits of modern communication options to tumor patients remains uncertain and should be investigated further in future studies.

Bendamustine, followed by ofatumumab and ibrutinib in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL2-BIO): primary endpoint analysis of a multicenter, open-label phase-II trial.

The introduction of targeted agents has revolutionized the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia but only few patients achieve complete remissions and minimal residual disease negativity with ibrutinib monotherapy. This multicenter, investigator-initiated phase-II study evaluates a sequential treatment with two cycles of bendamustine debulking for patients with a higher tumor load, followed by ofatumumab and ibrutinib induction and maintenance treatment. An all-comer population, irrespective of prior treatment, physical fitness and genetic factors was included. The primary endpoint was the investigator assessed overall response rate at the end of induction treatment. Of 66 patients enrolled, one patient with early treatment discontinuation was excluded from the efficacy analysis as predefined by the protocol. Thirty-nine patients (60%) were treatment-naive and 26 patients (40%) had relapsed/refractory CLL, 21 patients (32%) had a del(17p) and/or TP53 mutation and 45 patients (69%) had an unmutated IGHV status. At the end of the induction, 60 of 65 patients (92%) responded and 9 (14%) achieved minimal residual disease negativity (<10-4) in peripheral blood. No unexpected or cumulative toxicities occurred, most common CTC °III/IV adverse events were neutropenias, anaemia, infusion-related reactions, and diarrhoea. This sequential treatment of bendamustine debulking, followed by ofatumumab and ibrutinib was well tolerated without unexpected safety signals and showed a good efficacy with an overall response rate of 92%. Ongoing maintenance treatment aims at deeper responses with minimal residual disease negativity. However, ibrutinib should still be used as a single agent outside clinical trials. Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT02689141.

[Onko-Nexus: A Bavarian "Caretaker Project" to Overcome the Interface Outpatient/Hospitalized Division - Three-Year Results]. / Onko-Nexus: Ein bayerisches "Kümmererprojekt" zur Überwindung der Schnittstelle ambulanter/stationärer Sektor ­ die drei Jahresergebnisse.

The Onko-Nexus ("Caretaker-Project"), sponsored by the Bavarian Ministry for Health and Nursing, is dedicated to improving the outpatient/hospitalized care interface issue for patients with highly complex malignant diseases requiring inpatient care in a university hospital. A total of 26 patients were recruited during the 3-year period of the project. The patients were managed and supported by 2 "Caretakers" (physician assistants), one from the outpatient unit and one working in the wards. Additionally, the university hospital provided a special consultation hour in an oncological private practice close to patient's home. After completion of the project, 9 patients and the 2 "Caretakers" were interviewed via guided qualitative interviews. The main benefits for the patients were intensive support, avoiding long journeys and the close contact between hospital and private practice. The project had a clear positive effect on the patients' quality of life.

Quality of life and outcome of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer receiving first-line chemotherapy with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine: Real-life results from the prospective QOLIXANE trial of the Platform for Outcome, Quality of Life and Translational Research on Pancreatic Cancer registry.

Few data exist on health-related quality of life (QoL) in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) receiving first-line chemotherapy (Awad L ZE, Mesbah M Boston, MA. Applying survival data methodology to analyze quality of life data, in Mesbah M, Cole BF, Ting Lee M-L (eds): Statistical Methods for Quality of Life Studies: Design, Measurements and Analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002). The QOLIXANE study is a prospective, noninterventional, multicenter substudy of the Platform for Outcome, Quality of Life and Translational Research on Pancreatic Cancer (PARAGON) registry, which evaluated QoL in patients with mPC receiving first-line gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel chemotherapy in real-life setting. QoL was prospectively measured via EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaires at baseline and every month thereafter. Therapy and efficacy parameters were prospectively collected. Main objectives were the rate of patients without deterioration of Global Health Status/QoL (GHS/QoL) at 3 and 6 months. Six hundred patients were enrolled in 95 German study sites. Median progression-free survival was 5.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.2-6.3). Median overall survival (OS) was 8.9 months (95% CI, 7.9-10.2), while median time to deterioration of GHS/QoL was 4.7 months (95% CI, 4.0-5.6). With a baseline GHS/QoL score of 46 (SD, 22.8), baseline QoL of the patients was severely impaired, in most cases due to loss in role functioning and fatigue. In the Kaplan-Meier analysis, 61% and 41% of patients had maintained GHS/QoL after 3 and 6 months, respectively. However, in the QoL response analysis, 35% and 19% of patients had maintained (improved or stable) GHS/QoL after 3 and 6 months, respectively, while 14% and 9% had deteriorated GHS/QoL with the remaining patients being nonevaluable. In the Cox regression analysis, GHS/QoL scores strongly predicted survival with a hazard ratio of 0.86 (P < .0001). Patients with mPC have poor QoL at baseline that deteriorates within a median of 4.7 months. Treatment with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel is associated with maintained QoL in relevant proportions of patients. However, overall, results remain poor, reflecting the aggressive nature of the disease.

[A survey among family doctors on care reality of patients under oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapies]. / Befragung von Hausärzt*innen zur Versorgung von Patienten unter oralen Tyrosinkinaseinhibitoren.

INTRODUCTION: Oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapies are becoming increasingly more important in the treatment of malignant diseases. Monitoring with focus on adherence, side effects and interactions poses new challenges for medical care. The role and capabilities of family doctors in the care of TKI patients are yet unclear and should be uncovered in a nationwide survey. METHODS: From April to July 2016, 3,000 family doctors in Germany were asked to complete a written questionnaire regarding their capabilities for co-supervision of TKI patients. RESULTS: The response rate was 18% (n=553). The peak age was between 50 and 60 years. 81% were specialists in general medicine, 14% specialists in internal medicine and 5% general practitioners. 98% cared for no or less than 10 TKI patients per quarter. Knowledge of side effects and interaction potential of TKIs was low in over 90%. 83% preferred monitoring by the treating oncologist and 93% felt uncertain about treatment monitoring. The control of adherence was of little importance in 66%. The number of treated TKI patients had a significant impact on knowledge and opportunities for treatment monitoring. There was a significant correlation between knowledge about TKIs and confidence in treatment monitoring. In general, younger doctors tended to be more confident in treatment monitoring, and specialists in internal medicine tended to have more knowledge than specialists in general medicine general practitioners and general practitioners. DISCUSSION: Currently, the low number of TKI patients, little knowledge about TKI, and the desire for specialist care are limiting the possibilities of co-caring for TKI patients by family doctors. CONCLUSION: Although family doctors are generally motivated to care for tumor patients, routine treatment controls of TKI patients conducted by family doctors seem hardly possible at the moment and should currently remain with the specialist.

Use of symptom-focused oncological cancer therapies in hospices: a retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is controversy regarding the practical implementation of symptom-focused oncological cancer therapies to hospice residents. In this study, we aim to analyse the use and indication of supportive-oncological cancer therapies in hospices. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective survey of all residents of two hospice centres in the government district of Lower Bavaria, Germany. Hospice 1 (H1) was a member of an oncological-palliative medical network, and hospice 2 (H2) was independently organized. The evaluation period was the first 40 months after the opening of the respective hospice care centre. Demographical and epidemiological data as well as indications and type of supportive-oncological cancer therapies were recorded. A descriptive analysis and statistical tests were performed. RESULTS: Of the 706 residents, 645 had an underlying malignant disease. The average age was 72 years and the mean residence time was 28 days. The most frequent cancer types were gastrointestinal cancers, gynaecological cancers and bronchial carcinomas. Overall 39 residents (33 in H1 and 6 in H2, p < 0.01) received symptom-focused oncological cancer therapy. The average age of these residents was 68 years, and the mean residence time was 55 days. The most common therapeutic indications were dyspnoea and pain. The most common symptom-focused oncological cancer therapies were bisphosphonates, transfusions (erythrocyte- and platelet- concentrates), radiotherapy and anti-proliferative drugs (chemotherapy, anti-hormonal- and targeted- therapies). Patients with therapy lived significantly longer than patients without therapy (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Symptom-focused oncological cancer therapies can be implemented in hospices; however, their implementation seems to require certain structural and organizational prerequisites as well as careful patient selection. As a palliative medical approach, the focus is to ameliorate the symptoms and not prolong life. Symptom-focused oncology treatment could be a further and important part for the therapy of hospice patients in the future.