Metastatic inflammatory breast cancer: survival outcomes and prognostic factors in the national, multicentric, and real-life French cohort (ESME).

BACKGROUND: Primary inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is a rare and aggressive entity whose prognosis has been improved by multimodal therapy. However, 5-year overall survival (OS) remains poor. Given its low incidence, the prognosis of IBC at metastatic stage is poorly described. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study aimed to compare OS calculated from the diagnosis of metastatic disease between IBC patients and non-IBC patients in the Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics database (N = 16 702 patients). Secondary objectives included progression-free survival (PFS) after first-line metastatic treatment, identification of prognostic factors for OS and PFS, and evolution of survival during the study period. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2014, 7465 patients with metastatic breast cancer and known clinical status of their primary tumor (T) were identified (582 IBC and 6883 non-IBC). Compared with metastatic non-IBC, metastatic IBC was associated with less hormone receptor-positive (44% versus 65.6%), more human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (30% versus 18.6%), and more triple-negative (25.9% versus 15.8%) cases, more frequent de novo M1 stage (53.3% versus 27.7%; P < 0.001), and shorter median disease-free interval (2.02 years versus 4.9 years; P < 0.001). With a median follow-up of 50.2 months, median OS was 28.4 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 24.1-33.8 months] versus 37.2 months (95% CI 36.1-38.5 months) in metastatic IBC and non-IBC cases, respectively (P < 0.0001, log-rank test). By multivariate analysis, OS was significantly shorter in the metastatic IBC group compared with the metastatic non-IBC group [hazard ratio = 1.27 (95% CI 1.1-1.4); P = 0.0001]. Survival of metastatic IBC patients improved over the study period: median OS was 24 months (95% CI 20-31.9 months), 29 months (95% CI 21.7-39.9 months), and 36 months (95% CI 27.9-not estimable months) if diagnosis of metastatic disease was carried out until 2010, between 2011 and 2012, and from 2013, respectively (P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: IBC is independently associated with adverse outcome when compared with non-IBC in the metastatic setting.

FOLFIRINOX in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a retrospective study.

Background: Peritoneal carcinomatosis (pcm) in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (mpdac) is frequently encountered in day-to-day practice, but rarely addressed in the literature. The objective of the present study was to describe the management and outcome of patients diagnosed with pcm. Methods: Data for all consecutive patients with mpdac treated in our centre between 1 January 2014 and 31 August 2015 were analyzed retrospectively. Computed tomography imaging was centrally reviewed by a dedicated radiologist to determine the date of pcm diagnosis. Results: The analysis included 48 patients. Median age in the group was 61 years, and 41 patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ecog ps) of 0-1. All patients presented with pcm either synchronously (group 1) or metachronously (group 2). Those groups differed significantly by baseline ecog ps and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (nlr), with ecog ps being poorer and nlr being higher in group 1. In addition to pcm, the main sites of metastasis were liver (62.5%) and lungs (31.3%). First-line chemotherapy in 36 patients (75%) was folfirinox (fluorouracil-irinotecan-leucovorin-oxaliplatin). The median overall survival for the entire population was 10.81 months [95% confidence interval (ci): 7.16 months to 14.16 months]; it was 13.17 months (95% ci: 5.9 months to 15.4 months) for patients treated with folfirinox. Median overall survival was 7.13 months (95% ci: 4.24 months to 10.41 months) for patients in group 1 and 14.34 months (95% ci: 9.79 months to 19.91 months) for patients in group 2, p = 0.1296. Conclusions: Compared with other metastatic sites, synchronous pcm seems to be a poor prognostic factor. It could be more frequently associated with a poor ecog ps and a nlr greater than 5 in this group of patients. In patients with mpdac and pcm, either synchronous or metachronous, folfirinox remains an efficient regimen.

Endocrine therapy or chemotherapy as first-line therapy in hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: For hormone receptor-positive (HR+) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2-) negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC), international guidelines recommend endocrine therapy as first-line treatment, except in case of 'visceral crisis'. In the latter case, chemotherapy is preferred. Few studies have compared these two strategies. We used the Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics (ESME) programme, UNICANCER, a large national observational database (NCT03275311), to address this question. METHODS: All patients who initiated treatment for a newly diagnosed HR+ HER2-negative MBC between January 2008 and December 2014 in any of the 18 French Comprehensive Cancer Centers participating to ESME were selected. Patients should be aromatase inhibitor (AI)-sensitive (no previous AI or relapse occurring more than 1 year after last adjuvant AI). Objectives of the study were evaluation of progression-free and overall survival (OS) according to the type of first-line treatment adjusted on main prognostic factors using a propensity score. RESULTS: Six thousand two hundred sixty-five patients were selected: 2733 (43.6%) received endocrine therapy alone, while 3532 (56.4%) received chemotherapy as first-line therapy. Among the latter, 2073 (58.7%) received maintenance endocrine therapy. Median OS was 60.78 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 57.16-64.09) and 49.64 months (95% CI, 47.31-51.64; p < 0.0001) for patients receiving endocrine therapy alone and chemotherapy ± maintenance endocrine therapy, respectively. However, this difference was not significant after adjusting on the propensity score (hazard ratio: 0.943, 95% CI 0.863-1.030, p = 0.19). CONCLUSION: In this large retrospective cohort of patients with AI-sensitive metastatic luminal BC, OS was similar, whether first-line treatment was chemotherapy or endocrine therapy. In agreement with international guidelines, endocrine therapy should be the first choice for first-line systemic treatment for MBC in the absence of visceral crisis.