Definitive radio(chemo)therapy versus upfront surgery in the treatment of HPV-related localized or locally advanced oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of stage I-III HPV+ oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPV-OPSCC) is based on either surgery ± adjuvant therapy or exclusive radio±chemotherapy. We sought to compare these two therapeutic strategies in terms of efficacy, tolerance and quality of life (QoL). METHODS: Patients treated for stage I-III HPV-OPSCC from 2010 to 2021 in 3 academic centers were included and sorted according to the treatment strategy: surgery or exclusive radio±chemotherapy. Efficacy and tolerance were retrospectively assessed, and a transversal exploratory QoL assessment was performed using QoL instruments. RESULTS: A total of 83 patients were included, with 21 undergoing non-minimally invasive surgery and 62 receiving definitive radio-±chemotherapy. 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were respectively 80% and 86% in the surgical group and 92% and 95% in the non-surgical group, with no significant difference. At the end of treatment, 64.5% of patients presented with a grade III toxicity, without significant difference between the two groups. No patient had late grade III toxicity at 24 months. Forty-five patients (11 in the surgical group, 34 in the non-surgical group) participated in an exploratory quality-of-life analysis. Patients reported significantly more fatigue and loss of appetite after surgery, whereas patients in the radio±chemotherapy group described significantly more salivary and oral problems and difficulty swallowing, but the median time between treatment completion and the response to the questionnaires. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in efficacy, physician-reported toxicity and overall patient-reported quality of life was found between non-minimally invasive surgery and radio±chemotherapy in the treatment of stage I-III HPV-OPSCC.

Prognostic stratification ability of the CPS+EG scoring system in HER2-low and HER2-zero early breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The CPS+EG scoring system was initially described in unselected early breast cancer (eBC) patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), leading to refined prognostic stratification, and thus helping to select patients for additional post-NAC treatments. It remains unknown whether the performance is the same in new biological breast cancer entities such as the HER2-low subtype. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Outcomes (disease-free (DFS) and overall survival OS)) of 608 patients with HER2-non amplified eBC and treated with NAC were retrospectively analyzed according to CPS-EG score. We compared the prognostic stratification abilities of the CPS+EG in HER2-low and HER2-0 eBC, analyzing ER+ and ER- tumors separately. RESULTS: In ER+ eBC, the CPS+EG scoring system seems to retain a prognostic value, both in HER2-low and HER2-0 tumors, by distinguishing populations with significantly different outcomes (good: score 0-1, poor: score 2-3, and very poor: score 4-5). Using C-indices for DFS and OS, CPS+EG provided the highest prognostic information in ER+ eBC, especially in HER2-0 tumors. In contrast, in ER- eBC, the CPS+EG does not appear to be able to distinguish different outcome groups, either in HER2-low or HER2-0 tumors. In ER- eBC, C-indices for DFS and OS were highest for pathological stage, reflecting the predominant prognostic importance of residual disease in this subtype. CONCLUSIONS: HER2-low status does not influence the prognostic performance of the CPS+EG score. Our results confirm the usefulness of the CPS+EG score in stratifying the prognosis of ER+ eBC after NAC, for both HER2-0 and HER2-low tumors. For ER- eBC, HER2-low status does not influence the performance of the CPS+EG score, which was lower than that of the pathological stage alone.

ONE SHOT - single shot radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: 18-month results of a single arm, multicenter phase I/II trial.

PURPOSE: To assess in a prospective, multicenter, single-arm phase I/II study the early safety and efficacy profile of single fraction urethra-sparing stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for men with localized prostate cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with low- and intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer without significant tumor in the transitional zone were recruited. A single-fraction of 19 Gy was delivered to the prostate, with 17 Gy dose-reduction to the urethra. Intrafraction motion was monitored using intraprostatic electromagnetic transponders with intra-fraction correction of displacements exceeding 3 mm. Genitourinary (GU), gastrointestinal (GI), and sexual toxicity during the first 18 months were evaluated using the CTCAE v4.0 grading scale. Quality of life was assessed using the International Prostate Symptom Score, the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index composite 26 score, and the International Index of Erectile Function score. RESULTS: Among the 45 patients recruited in 5 centers between 2017 and 2022, 43 received the single fraction without protocol deviations, and 34 had a minimal follow-up of 18 months. The worst GU toxicity was observed at day-5 after SBRT (42.5 % and 20 % with grade 1 and 2, respectively), returning to baseline at week-12 and month-6 (<3% with grade 2), with a 12 % grade 2 flare at month 18. Gl toxicity was mild in the acute phase, with no grade ≥ 2 events (12 % grade 1 at month 6). Grade-3 proctitis was observed in one patient at month 12, with < 3 % grade 2 toxicity at month 18. Mean GU and GI bother scores showed a decline at day 5, a complete recovery at month 6, and a flare between month 12 and 18. Mean PSA dropped from 6.2 ng/ml to 1.2 ng/ml at month 18 and 0.7 ng/ml at month 24. After a median follow-up time of 26 months, 3 biochemical failures (7 %) were observed at month 17, 21 and 30. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter phase I/II trial, we demonstrated that a 19 Gy single-fraction urethra-sparing SBRT is feasible and associated with an acceptable toxicity rate, mostly returning to the baseline at week-12 and with a symptoms flare between months 12 and 18. Longer follow-up is needed to assess the potential long-term adverse effects and the disease control efficacy.

Urethra-Sparing Prostate Cancer Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy: Sexual Function and Radiation Dose to the Penile Bulb, the Crura, and the Internal Pudendal Arteries From a Randomized Phase 2 Trial.

PURPOSE: Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a common side effect after prostate cancer stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). We aimed to assess the correlation between the dose to the penile bulb (PB), internal pudendal arteries (IPA), and crura with the development of ED after ultrahypofractionation as part of a phase 2 clinical trial of urethra-sparing prostate SBRT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Among the 170 patients with localized prostate cancer from 9 centers included in the trial, 90 men with Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03 grade 0 to 1 ED (ED-) at baseline treated with 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions were selected for the present analysis. Doses delivered to the PB, crura, and IPA were analyzed and correlated with grade 2 to 3 ED (ED+) development. The effect on quality of life, assessed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC QLQ-PR25) questionnaire, was reported. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 6.5 years, 43% (n = 39) of the patients developed ED+, and 57% (n = 51) remained ED-. The dose delivered to the crura was significantly higher in ED+ patients than in ED- patients (7.7 vs 3.6 Gy [P = .014] for the Dmean and 18.5 vs 7.2 Gy [P = .015] for the D2%, respectively). No statistically significant difference between ED+ and ED- patients was observed for the dose delivered to the PB and IPA. The median ED+-free survival was worse in patients receiving a crura Dmean ≥ 4.7 versus < 4.7 Gy (51.5% vs 71.7%, P = .005) and a crura D2% > 12 versus ≤ 12 Gy (54.9% vs 68.9%, P = .015). No ED+-free survival differences were observed for doses delivered to the PB and IPA. Decline in EORTC QLQ-PR25 sexual functioning was significantly more pronounced in patients with higher doses to the crura. CONCLUSIONS: By keeping a Dmean and D2% to crura below 4.7 and 12 Gy, respectively, the risk of developing ED+ after prostate SBRT may be significantly reduced.

FOLFIRI-bevacizumab as a second-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer after gemcitabine-based chemotherapy.

Background: Advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC) has a poor prognosis. Gemcitabine with platinum chemotherapy was the standard first-line chemotherapeutic regimen until the recent addition of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies. After disease progression, the only second-line chemotherapy that has demonstrated a survival benefit versus supportive care is FOLFOX (folinic acid, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin), with a modest benefit. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of second-line FOLFIRI (folinic acid, fluorouracil, and irinotecan) combined with bevacizumab for advanced BTC. Methods: This single-center retrospective study enrolled patients with metastatic BTC (intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma [ICC], extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma [ECC], or gallbladder carcinoma) that progressed after first-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. FOLFIRI-bevacizumab was administered intravenously every 2 weeks [folinic acid 200 mg/m², fluorouracil 400 mg/m² (bolus), fluorouracil 2400 mg/m² (46-h continuous intravenous infusion), irinotecan 180 mg/m², and bevacizumab 5 mg/kg] until unacceptable toxicity, patient refusal, or disease progression. Results: Overall, 28 patients received the FOLFIRI-bevacizumab regimen after gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. The median overall survival (OS) was 9.0 months (95% CI 6.4-16.5). The OS rate was 39.3% (95% CI 24.8-62.3) and 10.7% (95% CI 3.7-32.1) at 12- and 24-months respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.2 months (95% CI 3.1-10.2) with FOLFIRI-bevacizumab. The PFS rates at 12 months and 24 months were 17.9% (95% CI 8.19-39.5] and 10.7% (95% CI 3.7-31.2), respectively. The overall response rate (ORR) to FOLFIRI-bevacizumab was 23.1%, with a disease control rate (DCR) of 69.3%. Grade 3-4 adverse events (sAE) were reported in 20 patients (71.4%) treated with FOLFIRI-bevacizumab. Conclusion: FOLFIRI-bevacizumab as a second-line treatment for advanced BTC after gemcitabine-based chemotherapy showed efficacy and safety with a promising tumor response rate in this retrospective single-center study.

Pathologic complete response and survival in HER2-low and HER2-zero early breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancers without HER2 amplification but still expressing this membrane protein constitute a new entity called HER2-low tumors. It is important to characterize them in terms of sensitivity to treatment and prognosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To investigate chemosensitivity and long-term prognosis of HER2-low early breast cancer (eBC), compared to HER2-0 tumors, we retrospectively retrieved clinicopathological characteristics, response to treatment, and survival data from 511 patients treated for eBC with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in a French cancer center between 2007 and 2018. Factors associated with the achievement of pathologic complete response (pCR) and survival were studied among hormone receptor positive (HR+) and negative (HR-) eBC. RESULTS: A total of 280 HR+ (61% HER2-low), and 231 HR- (28% HER2-low) eBC were included. We found classical clinicopathological factors usually associated with chemosensitivity and prognosis, in both HR+ and HR- eBC. By uni- and multivariable analysis, HER2 status (low vs 0) was not independently associated with pCR, either in HR+ or HR- eBC. Relapse free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were not significantly different between HER2-low and HER2-0 among HR+ tumors. In contrast, among HR- negative tumors, RFS and OS were slightly better in HER2-0 eBC by univariable but not by multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In eBC patients treated with NAC, taking into account HR expression subtype and other current clinicopathological features, HER2-low tumors did not appear to have different chemosensitivity or prognosis, compared to their HER2-0 counterparts.

Every-Other-Day Versus Once-a-Week Urethra-Sparing Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy: 5-Year Results of a Randomized Phase 2 Trial.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to present the 5-year results from a prospective, multicenter, phase 2 randomized trial of every-other-day (EOD) versus once-a-week (QW) urethra-sparing stereotactic body radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 2012 and 2015, 170 patients with cT1c-3aN0M0 prostate cancer from 9 European institutions were randomized to 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions (6.5 Gy/fraction to the urethra) delivered either EOD (arm A, n = 84) or QW (arm B, n = 86). The median follow-up was 78 months (interquartile range, 66-89 months) and 77 months (interquartile range, 66-82 months) for arms A and B, respectively. RESULTS: Among the 165 patients treated and retained for the final analysis (arm A, n = 82; arm B, n = 83), acute toxicity (National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03 scale) was mild or absent, with no differences between arms. The 5-year grade 2 or greater genitourinary toxicity-free survival was 75.9% and 76.1% for arms A and B, respectively (P = .945), whereas the 5-year grade 2 or greater gastrointestinal toxicity-free survival was 89% and 92% for arms A and B, respectively (P = .596). No changes in European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-PR25 scores were observed in both arms for genitourinary, gastrointestinal, and sexual domains at 5-year follow-up compared with baseline. At the last follow-up, biochemical failure was observed in 14 patients in the EOD arm and in 7 patients in the QW arm, with a 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival rate of 92.2% and 93% for arms A and B, respectively (P = .13). CONCLUSIONS: Stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer with a 10% dose reduction to urethra was associated with a minimal effect on urinary function and quality of life regardless of an EOD or QW fractionation schedule. Biochemical control so far has been encouraging and much alike in both study arms, although longer follow-up is probably needed to assess the true value of overall treatment time on disease outcome.

Same Performance Changes after Live High-Train Low in Normobaric vs. Hypobaric Hypoxia.

PURPOSE: We investigated the changes in physiological and performance parameters after a Live High-Train Low (LHTL) altitude camp in normobaric (NH) or hypobaric hypoxia (HH) to reproduce the actual training practices of endurance athletes using a crossover-designed study. METHODS: Well-trained triathletes (n = 16) were split into two groups and completed two 18-day LTHL camps during which they trained at 1100-1200 m and lived at 2250 m (P i O2 = 111.9 ± 0.6 vs. 111.6 ± 0.6 mmHg) under NH (hypoxic chamber; FiO2 18.05 ± 0.03%) or HH (real altitude; barometric pressure 580.2 ± 2.9 mmHg) conditions. The subjects completed the NH and HH camps with a 1-year washout period. Measurements and protocol were identical for both phases of the crossover study. Oxygen saturation (S p O2) was constantly recorded nightly. P i O2 and training loads were matched daily. Blood samples and VO2max were measured before (Pre-) and 1 day after (Post-1) LHTL. A 3-km running-test was performed near sea level before and 1, 7, and 21 days after training camps. RESULTS: Total hypoxic exposure was lower for NH than for HH during LHTL (230 vs. 310 h; P < 0.001). Nocturnal S p O2 was higher in NH than in HH (92.4 ± 1.2 vs. 91.3 ± 1.0%, P < 0.001). VO2max increased to the same extent for NH and HH (4.9 ± 5.6 vs. 3.2 ± 5.1%). No difference was found in hematological parameters. The 3-km run time was significantly faster in both conditions 21 days after LHTL (4.5 ± 5.0 vs. 6.2 ± 6.4% for NH and HH), and no difference between conditions was found at any time. CONCLUSION: Increases in VO2max and performance enhancement were similar between NH and HH conditions.