Efficacy of influenza vaccine (Fluvax) in cancer patients on treatment: a prospective single arm, open-label study.

PURPOSE: Influenza virus infection has significant morbidity and mortality in patients with medical co-morbidities who are also immunosuppressed. The efficacy of the seasonal influenza vaccine has not been well studied in patients receiving chemotherapy. We assessed the efficacy of seasonal influenza vaccine in patients with non-haematological malignancy on active treatment (chemotherapy and targeted therapy). METHODS: A prospective single arm, open label study with 53 patients with non-haematological cancers recruited during the 2011 and 2012 influenza seasons. Participants had one dose of 2011/2012 trivalent vaccine containing strains A/California/7/2009(H1N1), A/Perth/16/2009 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Fluvax) prior to or in-between treatment cycles. Haemagglutination inhibition antibody (HIA) titres in serum were measured at baseline 3, 6 and 24 weeks. Primary endpoint: seroconversion rate (SCR) at 3 weeks. Secondary endpoints: late SCR at 6 weeks. rate of sustained sero-protection titres (SPR) at 24 weeks. Seroconversion was defined as postvaccination ≥ 4-fold increase in HIA titre and sero-protection defined as a HIA ≥ 1:40. RESULTS: The SCR at 3 weeks were 35%, 30% and 22.5% to the H1N1, H3N2 and B/Bris strains, respectively. There were no new cases of late SC at 6 weeks or 24 weeks. The SPR at 3 weeks were 72.5%, 65% and 40%, respectively, to H1N1, H3N2 and B/Bris. The SPR at 24 weeks to H1N1, H3N2 and B/Bris were 40%, 52.5% and 17.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients on various solid tumour treatments achieve sero-protection rate congruent with the general population. The sero-protection HIA titres were not sustained at 24 weeks postvaccination.

Pregnancy screening prior to chemotherapy administration.

A retrospective case notes review was performed to determine compliance with screening for undetected pregnancy prior to commencement of chemotherapy at Flinders Medical Centre. All female patients aged 18-55 who commenced chemotherapy between January and December 2014 were included. During the first 12 months, for women identified as having childbearing potential, pre-chemotherapy pregnancy screening was performed only in 40% of patients under 40 years and in 20.5% of the entire age range.

Goserelin toxicities and preferences for ovarian suppression method in pre-menopausal women with breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Goserelin, a form of medical ovarian suppression, is an effective treatment for pre-menopausal women with breast cancer (PMBC). Meta-analysis data showed that similar efficacy is achieved with medical ovarian suppression and non-pharmacological ovarian suppression (NPOS) - oophorectomy or ovarian irradiation. The acceptance rate of NPOS remains low. AIMS: This study explored the reported toxicities of PMBC women and their preferred ovarian suppression method whilst on goserelin. METHODS: A postal survey consisting of 22 study-specific questions was sent to PMBC women who received goserelin at the Flinders Medical Centre. RESULTS: Nineteen women were identified from the database; 12 versus 7 women received goserelin in the adjuvant versus metastatic setting respectively. Thirteen (68.4%) responded to the survey. Women in the adjuvant cohort were more likely to report toxicities. The most common were hot flushes (100% vs 50% P = 0.033), myalgia/arthralgia (71.4% vs 16.7%, P = 0.048) and decreased libido (57/1% vs 16.7%, P = 0.135). NPOS was recalled to be offered to five (38.5%) women, with acceptance by one BRCA2 carrier. NPOS was declined initially due to fear of procedure, surgical/anaesthetic risk, invasiveness and planned future pregnancies. If given the option, upfront oophorectomy was indicated in seven (53.8%) women due to inconveniences with monthly goserelin. CONCLUSION: Half of PMBC women indicated a preference to NPOS, but only a minority recollected NPOS being discussed. Inconvenience with monthly goserelin is the main driver toward a preference of favouring NPOS. Clarification from larger trials that research patients' decision process and preferences regarding ovarian suppression is needed to validate our findings.

Prostate cancer in men aged less than 50 years at diagnosis.

PURPOSE: Prostate cancer (CaP) in younger men (age ≤50 years) appears to present differently compared with older men. This study describes CaP characteristics and outcomes in Australian young men. METHODS: The South Australian Prostate Cancer Clinical Outcomes Collaborative database was used to identify men diagnosed with CaP 1998-2012. Men were stratified by age at diagnosis into groups ≤50, 50-70 and ≥70 years. Primary outcomes of cumulative biochemical recurrence (BCR) and cumulative prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) were assessed at 5 and 10 years. RESULTS: In total, 7018 men were included. At time of diagnosis, 182 (2.6 %) were aged ≤50 years. Median follow-up exceeded 4 years. Younger men had a greater proportion of T stage <2 disease, lower median PSA and higher rates of Gleason score <7 (all p < 0.001). They were more likely to experience active surveillance (AS) (4.9, 3.1, 1.5 %) or radical prostatectomy (RP) (70, 55, 8 %) and less likely radiotherapy (13, 24, 29 %) as their principal modality (all p < 0.001). Although only 4.9 % underwent AS, 48 % of men ≤50 years were eligible for AS. Men ≤50 years had both the lowest unadjusted cumulative BCR and PCSM at 10 years. After multivariate analysis, BCR was not significantly different. Sample size limited multivariate analysis of PCSM. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, men ≤50 years with CaP had less aggressive clinical characteristics, but were more likely to undergo RP. They appear to experience lower unadjusted PCSM, but similar rates of adjusted BCR. Further studies are needed to assess whether AS is appropriately utilised in these men.

Meta-analysis of BRAF mutation as a predictive biomarker of benefit from anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody therapy for RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) that harbours a BRAF V600E mutation (BRAF MT) is associated with poorer outcomes. However, whether this mutation is predictive of treatment benefit from anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) is uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published up to July 2014 that evaluated the effect of BRAF MT on the treatment benefit from anti-EGFR mAbs for mCRC. RESULTS: Seven RCTs met the inclusion criteria for assessment of overall survival (OS), whereas eight RCTs met the inclusion criteria for assessment of progression-free survival (PFS). For RAS WT/BRAF MT tumours, the hazard ratio for OS benefit with anti-EGFR mAbs was 0.97 (95% CI; 0.67-1.41), whereas the hazard ratio was 0.81 (95% CI; 0.70-0.95) for RAS WT/BRAF WT tumours. However, the test of interaction (P=0.43) was not statistically significant, highlighting that the observed differences in the effect of anti-EGFR mAbs on OS according to the BRAF mutation status may be due to chance alone. Regarding PFS benefit with anti-EGFR mAbs, the hazard ratio was 0.86 (95% CI; 0.61-1.21) for RAS WT/BRAF MT tumours as compared with 0.62 (95% CI; 0.50-0.77) for RAS WT/BRAF WT tumours (test of interaction, P=0.07). INTERPRETATION: This meta-analysis demonstrates that there is insufficient evidence to definitively state that RAS WT/BRAF MT individuals attain a different treatment benefit from anti-EGFR mAbs for mCRC compared with RAS WT/BRAF WT individuals. As such, there are insufficient data to justify the exclusion of anti-EGFR mAb therapy for patients with RAS WT/BRAF MT mCRC.

Delayed onset of benign pleural effusion following concurrent chemoradiotherapy for inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer.

Chronic benign pleural effusion (BPE) is a rare complication of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for inoperable stage IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This report presents three cases of BPE, the workup to differentiate this benign condition from recurrence of cancer and recommends a pleural biopsy as part of the diagnostic process. These inflammatory exudates often remain indolent, and may not require drainage or surgical intervention. In the absence of clinical, radiological and pathological evidence of recurrent disease, we recommend clinicians manage these patients expectantly, using regular clinical assessment and imaging.

EVERSUN: a phase 2 trial of alternating sunitinib and everolimus as first-line therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesised that alternating inhibitors of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) and mammalian target of rapamycin pathways would delay the development of resistance in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A single-arm, two-stage, multicentre, phase 2 trial to determine the activity, feasibility, and safety of 12-week cycles of sunitinib 50 mg daily 4 weeks on / 2 weeks off, alternating with everolimus 10 mg daily for 5 weeks on / 1 week off, until disease progression or prohibitive toxicity in favourable or intermediate-risk aRCC. The primary end point was proportion alive and progression-free at 6 months (PFS6m). The secondary end points were feasibility, tumour response, overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs). The correlative objective was to assess biomarkers and correlate with clinical outcome. RESULTS: We recruited 55 eligible participants from September 2010 to August 2012. DEMOGRAPHICS: mean age 61, 71% male, favourable risk 16%, intermediate risk 84%. Cycle 2 commenced within 14 weeks for 80% of participants; 64% received ≥22 weeks of alternating therapy; 78% received ≥22 weeks of any treatment. PFS6m was 29/55 (53%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 40% to 66%). Tumour response rate was 7/55 (13%; 95% CI 4% to 22%, all partial responses). After median follow-up of 20 months, 47 of 55 (86%) had progressed with a median progression-free survival of 8 months (95% CI 5-10), and 30 of 55 (55%) had died with a median OS of 17 months (95% CI 12-undefined). AEs were consistent with those expected for each single agent. No convincing prognostic biomarkers were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The EVERSUN regimen was feasible and safe, but its activity did not meet pre-specified values to warrant further research. This supports the current approach of continuing anti-VEGF therapy until progression or prohibitive toxicity before changing treatment. AUSTRALIAN NEW ZEALAND CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY: ACTRN12609000643279.

Extended RAS mutations and anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody survival benefit in metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) prolong survival in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene (KRAS) exon 2 wild-type tumors. Recent evidence has suggested that other RAS mutations (in exons 3 and 4 of KRAS and exons 2, 3 and 4 of a related gene, NRAS) may also be predictive of resistance. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating anti-EGFR mAbs that have assessed tumors for new RAS mutations. Tumors with the new RAS mutations were compared with both tumors without any RAS mutations and tumors with KRAS exon 2 mutations with respect to anti-EGFR treatment progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) benefit. RESULTS: Nine RCTs comprising a total of 5948 participants evaluated for both KRAS exon 2 and new RAS mutations met the inclusion criteria. Approximately 20% of KRAS exon 2 wild-type tumors harbored one of the new RAS mutations. Tumors without any RAS mutations (either KRAS exon 2 or new RAS mutations) were found to have significantly superior anti-EGFR mAb PFS (P < 0.001) and OS (P = 0.008) treatment effect compared with tumors with any of the new RAS mutations. No difference in PFS or OS benefit was evident between tumors with KRAS exon 2 mutations and tumors with the new RAS mutations. Results were consistent between different anti-EGFR agents, lines of therapy and chemotherapy partners. Anti-EGFR mAb therapy significantly improved both PFS {hazard ratio 0.62 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50-0.76]} and OS [hazard ratio 0.87 (95% CI 0.77-0.99)] for tumors without any RAS mutations. No PFS or OS benefit was evident with use of anti-EGFR mAbs for tumors harboring any RAS mutation (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Tumors harboring one of the new RAS mutations are unlikely to significantly benefit from anti-EGFR mAb therapy in mCRC.

Comparison of peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC) versus subcutaneously implanted port-chamber catheters by complication and cost for patients receiving chemotherapy for non-haematological malignancies.

PURPOSE: Indwelling central venous catheters (CVCs) have been increasingly used to enable delivery of intravenous chemotherapy. We aimed to compare the safety and cost of two commonly used CVCs, peripherally inserted central venous catheter (PICCs) and ports, in the delivery of chemotherapy in patients with non-haematological malignancies. METHODS: Seventy patients were randomly assigned to receive either a PICC or a port. The primary endpoint was occurrence of major complications, which required removal of the CVC and secondary endpoints included occurrence of any complications. RESULTS: Port devices were associated with fewer complications compared with PICC lines (hazard ratio of 0.25, CI, 0.09-0.86, P = 0.038). Major complication rate was lower in the port arm compared to the PICC arm (0.047 versus 0.193 major complications/100 catheter days, P = 0.034) with 6 versus 20 % of patients experiencing major complications, respectively. Thrombosis, the most common complication, was significantly higher in the PICC arm compared to the port arm (25 versus 0 %, P = 0.013). Quality of life and cost estimates did not differ significantly between the two arms. CONCLUSIONS: Port devices are associated with a lower risk of complications, with no difference in cost, compared to PICC lines in patients with non-haematological malignancies receiving intravenous chemotherapy.

Accelerated BEP for metastatic germ cell tumours: a multicenter phase II trial by the Australian and New Zealand Urogenital and Prostate Cancer Trials Group (ANZUP).

BACKGROUND: This Australian single-arm, multicenter, phase II trial evaluated feasibility, tolerability and activity of accelerated bleomycin, etoposide and cisplatin (BEP) as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic germ cell tumours. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were planned to receive cisplatin 20 mg/m(2) and etoposide 100 mg/m(2) days 1-5, and pegfilgrastim 6 mg day 6, all repeated every 2 weeks for four cycles (three cycles for good prognosis). Bleomycin was given at 30 000 IU weekly to a total of 12 doses (9 doses for good prognosis). Primary end point was feasibility, defined as the proportion of patients able to complete the etoposide and cisplatin components of BEP and be eligible to receive a fourth cycle of BEP by day 50. RESULTS: Twelve poor, 16 intermediate and 15 good prognosis (n = 43) eligible patients were enrolled. Two patients aged >40 years were ineligible and excluded from analyses. The regimen was feasible in 86%, not feasible in 7% and not assessable in 7% of patients. Most common grade 3/4 adverse events were non-neutropenic infection (16%) and febrile neutropenia (12%). Complete response (CR) to chemotherapy and surgery was achieved in 33% poor-prognosis, 81% intermediate-prognosis and 100% good-prognosis patients. At median follow-up of 27 months (range 6-42), the 2-year progression-free survival was 50% for poor-prognosis, 94% for intermediate-prognosis and 92% for good-prognosis patients. CONCLUSION: Accelerated BEP is feasible and tolerable. Efficacy data appear to be promising. This trial and a similar UK study provide the rationale for a randomised trial comparing accelerated versus standard BEP. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Registration number. ACTRN 12607000294459.

Results of a 7-day aprepitant schedule for the prevention of nausea and vomiting in 5-day cisplatin-based germ cell tumor chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of adding a 7-day aprepitant schedule to a 5HT3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone for patients with germ cell tumors receiving first-line 5-day cisplatin-based chemotherapy. METHODS: In a single-arm, open-label, multi-center, phase 2 trial, chemo-naive patients received aprepitant 125 mg PO (per oral) on day 1 and 80 mg PO on days 2 to 7, a 5HT3 receptor antagonist on days 1 to 5, and dexamethasone 8 mg on days 1 to 8. The primary endpoint was no emesis (vomiting or dry retching) during days 1 to 7 of cycle 1. RESULTS: Fifty patients were recruited. For cycle 1, proportions reporting no emesis on day 1, no emesis on days 1 to 7, no nausea on day 1, and no nausea on days 1 to 7 were 96, 82, 71, and 27%, respectively. The efficacy was maintained in all cycles with over 80% of patients reporting no emesis on any given day of any given cycle. Emesis was more common on days 4 to 7 (68% episodes) than on days 1 to 3 (32% episodes). Over any 24-h period, 49% of patients with emesis reported no more than two episodes, and 62% of patients with nausea reported intensity as 3 or less on a scale from 0 to 10. There were no unexpected or serious adverse events reported. CONCLUSION: Adding 7 days of aprepitant to a 5HT3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone effectively controlled acute and delayed emesis with 5-day cisplatin regimens. Days of nausea were more common than days of vomiting.