Proton pump inhibitors and cancer treatments: Emerging evidence against coadministration.

BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used in cancer patients despite accumulating data showing that they can impact the efficacy of major anticancer drugs. This is particularly important with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs). RESULTS: Most TKIs require gastric acidity for their absorption and some retrospective series demonstrated that coprescription decreases the survival benefit of some TKI use (erlotinib, gefitinib and pazopanib). Relations between microbiota, the immune system, and the efficacy of immunotherapy are now obvious, just as modifications to gut flora after PPIs use are well-known. Many retrospective articles, including articles based on individual-participant data from randomized studies, demonstrated that patients treated with CPIs have a poorer outcome (overall survival, progression-free survival and response rate) when they received PPIs concomitantly, while there was no impact of such coprescription among patients in control arms, not treated with immunotherapies. Similar data were also observed in patients treated with palbociclib. CONCLUSION: For these interactions, it is very important to use the precautionary principle and warn patients and physicians about this. In patients who require acid suppression because of severe symptoms, using antacids or H2 blockers could be recommended.

How to Balance Prognostic Factors in Controlled Phase II Trials: Stratified Permuted Block Randomization or Minimization? An Analysis of Clinical Trials in Digestive Oncology.

In controlled phase II trials, major prognostic factors need to be well balanced between arms. The main procedures used are SPBR (Stratified Permuted Block Randomization) and minimization. First, we provide a systematic review of the treatment allocation procedure used in gastrointestinal oncology controlled phase II trials published in 2019. Second, we performed simulations using data from six phase II studies to measure the impacts of imbalances and bias on the efficacy estimations. From the 40 articles analyzed, all mentioned randomization in both the title and abstract, the median number of patients included was 109, and 77.5% were multicenter. Of the 27 studies that reported at least one stratification variable, 10 included the center as a stratification variable, 10 used minimization, 9 used SBR, and 8 were unspecified. In real data studies, the imbalance increased with the number of centers. The total and marginal imbalances were higher with SBR than with minimization, and the difference increased with the number of centers. The efficiency estimates per arm were close to the original trial estimate in both procedures. Minimization is often used in cases of numerous centers and guarantees better similarity between arms for stratification variables for total and marginal imbalances in phase II trials.

Did the COVID-19 pandemic delay treatment for localized breast cancer patients? A multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Longer times between diagnosis and treatments of cancer patients have been estimated as effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, relatively few studies attempted to estimate actual delay to treatment at the patient level. OBJECTIVE: To assess changes in delays to first treatment and surgery among newly diagnosed patients with localized breast cancer (BC) during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We used data from the PAPESCO-19 multicenter cohort study, which included patients from 4 French comprehensive cancer centers. We measured the delay to first treatment as the number of days between diagnosis and the first treatment regardless of whether this was neoadjuvant chemotherapy or surgery. COVID-19 pandemic exposure was estimated with a composite index that considered both the severity of the pandemic and the level of lockdown restrictions. We ran generalized linear models with a log link function and a gamma distribution to model the association between delay and the pandemic. RESULTS: Of the 187 patients included in the analysis, the median delay to first treatment was 42 (IQR:32-54) days for patients diagnosed before and after the start of the 1st lockdown (N = 99 and 88, respectively). After adjusting for age and centers of inclusion, a higher composite pandemic index (> = 50 V.S. <50) had only a small, non-significant effect on times to treatment. Longer delays were associated with factors other than the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: We found evidence of no direct impact of the pandemic on the actual delay to treatment among patients with localized BC.

PIPAC in patients with peritoneal metastases from gastrointestinal tract (PIPOX01): An open label, non-comparative phase 1/2 dose escalation and expansion trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite modern systemic chemotherapy, survival remains poor for patients with advanced isolated peritoneal metastases from the gastrointestinal tract. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) with oxaliplatin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a phase 1/2, open label, non-comparative, dose escalation and expansion trial of PIPAC with oxaliplatin in patients with a peritoneal cancer index (PCI) of more than 5, 13 and 15 for respectively a gastric, small bowel and colorectal primary cancer, and who had received at least three months of systemic chemotherapy. PIPAC cycle lengths were 4-6 weeks with systemic chemotherapy allowed 15 days after each PIPAC. PCI and oxaliplatin tumor concentration were assessed every PIPAC cycle. The main endpoints were tolerability, tumor response, and survival. RESULTS: Between 2017 and 2020, 34 patients were enrolled in three centers, in this phase 1/2 study, of whom 25 were evaluable at the recommended dose determined in the phase I trial (90 mg/m2 plus systemic 5-FU). Before inclusion, patients received a median of 2 [1-4] chemotherapy lines and had a median PCI of 22.5 [7-29]. At this dose, the safety profile showed acceptable tolerability. Eight patients (32 %) had grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events. Minor (grade 1/2) adverse events were mainly abdominal pain (n = 19, 76 %) and nausea (n = 16, 64 %). Median PFS was 6.1 months and median OS was 13 months. CONCLUSION: In patients with advanced and refractory peritoneal metastasis, PFS of 6.1 months is encouraging. A prospective randomized phase II study is required.