Real-World Data on Olaparib in Relapsed BRCA-mutated Ovarian Cancer: A Multicenter GINECO RETROLA Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Olaparib was approved in 2014 by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) as maintenance treatment for patients with breast cancer gene (BRCA)-mutated platinum-sensitive relapsed high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) following the results of the Study 19. We present the results of a national real-world study on the effectiveness of olaparib in relapsed BRCA-mutated EOC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with EOC, peritoneal, and/or fallopian-tube cancer treated with olaparib in a French Center between May 2014 and March 2017 were included. The primary end-point of the study was progression-free survival. RESULTS: Of the 128 patients analyzed, 89 were treated according to the EMA label. The median progression-free survival was 17.0 months. The most common treatment-related toxicity was fatigue. Treatment-related myelodysplastic syndrome (n=5) and a second cancer (n=1) were diagnosed. CONCLUSION: In this real-life setting, olaparib confirmed its efficacy and safety profile, as previously shown in clinical trials.

Doxorubicin alone versus doxorubicin with trabectedin followed by trabectedin alone as first-line therapy for metastatic or unresectable leiomyosarcoma (LMS-04): a randomised, multicentre, open-label phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic leiomyosarcomas have a poor prognosis, and currently doxorubicin alone is used as the standard first-line treatment. Doxorubicin combined with trabectedin has shown promising results in phase 1 and 2 studies. We aimed to identify and compare the progression-free survival of patients with metastatic or unresectable uterine or soft tissue leiomyosarcoma treated with doxorubicin and trabectedin combined as first-line therapy versus doxorubicin alone in a phase 3 trial. METHODS: LMS-04 was a randomised, multicentre, open-label, superiority phase 3 trial, which included patients from 20 centres of the French Sarcoma Group (anticancer centers or hospitals with an oncological unit) in France. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and had metastatic or relapsed unresectable leiomyosarcomas that had not previously been treated with chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), by means of an interactive web response system (permuted blocks of different sizes from two to six), to receive either intravenous doxorubicin alone (75 mg/m2) once every 3 weeks for up to six cycles or of intravenous doxorubicin (60 mg/m2) plus intravenous trabectedin (1·1 mg/m2) once every 3 weeks up to six cycles followed by maintenance with trabectedin alone. Surgery for residual disease was allowed in both groups after six cycles of treatment. Randomisation was stratified by tumour location (uterine vs soft tissue) and disease (locally advanced vs metastatic). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by blinded independent central review and according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours 1.1 criteria. Efficacy analyses were performed on all randomly assigned patients, based on the intention-to-treat principle. The safety population included all randomly assigned patients who received at least one cycle of treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02997358, and is closed to enrolment. FINDINGS: Between Jan 18, 2017, and March 21, 2019, 150 patients were enrolled (67 with uterine leiomyosarcomas and 83 with soft tissue leiomyosarcomas) and included in the intention-to-treat population: 76 in the doxorubicin alone group and 74 in the doxorubicin plus trabectedin group. The median duration of follow-up was 36·9 months (IQR 30·0-43·2) in the doxorubicine group and 38·8 months (32·7-44·2) in the doxorubicin plus trabectedin group. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer with doxorubicin plus trabectedin versus doxorubicin alone (12·2 months [95% CI 10·1-15·6] vs 6·2 months [4·1-7·1]; adjusted hazard ratio 0·41 [95% CI 0·29-0·58]; p<0·0001). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (ten [13%] of 75 patients in the doxorubicin alone group vs 59 [80%] in the doxorubicin plus trabectedin group), anaemia (four [5%] vs 23 [31%]), thrombocytopenia (0 vs 35 [47%]), and febrile neutropenia (seven [9%] vs 21 [28%]). Nine (12%) patients in the doxorubicin alone group and 15 (201%) patients in the doxorubicin plus trabectedin group has serious adverse events. There was only one treatment-related death, reported in the doxorubicin alone group (cardiac failure). INTERPRETATION: Doxorubicin plus trabectedin in first-line therapy was found to significantly increase progression-free survival in patients with metastatic or unresectable leiomyosarcomas compared with doxorubicin alone, despite a higher but manageable toxicity, and could be considered an option for the first-line treatment of metastatic leiomyosarcomas. FUNDING: PharmaMar.

No Geographical Inequalities in Survival for Sarcoma Patients in France: A Reference Networks' Outcome?

The national reference network NETSARC+ provides remote access to specialized diagnosis and the Multidisciplinary Tumour Board (MTB) to improve the management and survival of sarcoma patients in France. The IGéAS research program aims to assess the potential of this innovative organization to address geographical inequalities in cancer management. Using the IGéAS cohort built from the nationwide NETSARC+ database, the individual, clinical, and geographical determinants of the 3-year overall survival of sarcoma patients in France were analyzed. The survival analysis was focused on patients diagnosed in 2013 (n = 2281) to ensure sufficient hindsight to collect patient follow-up. Our study included patients with bone (16.8%), soft-tissue (69%), and visceral (14.2%) sarcomas, with a median age of 61.8 years. The overall survival was not associated with geographical variables after adjustment for individual and clinical factors. The lower survival in precarious population districts [HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.48] in comparison to wealthy metropolitan areas (HR = 1) found in univariable analysis was due to the worst clinical presentation at diagnosis of patients. The place of residence had no impact on sarcoma patients' survival, in the context of the national organization driven by the reference network. Following previous findings, this suggests the ability of this organization to go through geographical barriers usually impeding the optimal management of cancer patients.

Ketamine in chronic pain: A Delphi survey.

BACKGROUND: There is no recommendation in Europe for the use of ketamine in patients with chronic pain. The heterogeneity of practice highlights the need to seek the advice of experts in order to establish a national consensus. This Delphi survey aimed to reach a national consensus on the use of ketamine in chronic pain in Pain clinics. METHODS: A collaborative four-round internet-based questionnaire was used. It was created after literature search on ketamine administration in chronic pain and included about 96 items. It discussed utility and advantages, adverse events and deleterious aspects, methods of administration, concomitant treatments and assessment of results. RESULTS: Twenty-eight experts completed all rounds of the survey with a total of 81.3% items reaching a consensual answer. Neuropathic pain represents the first indication to use ketamine, followed, with a good to moderate utility, by other situations (fibromyalgia, complex regional pain syndrome, central neuropathic pain, peripheral neuropathic pain, nociceptive pain, sensitization, opioid withdrawal, palliative care, depression). Experts agreed on the rare occurrence of adverse events. Concerning routes of administration, intravenous infusion with doses of 0.5-0.9 mg/kg/d for 4 days of treatment is preferred. Place of care is hospital, as in- or out-patient, with a quarterly administration of ketamine. Finally, ketamine effectiveness is assessed 1 month after infusion, and experts encourage combination with non-pharmacological treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi survey established a consensus of pain specialists on the use of ketamine in refractory chronic pain, thus providing a basis for future comparative trials. SIGNIFICANCE: This Delphi survey in chronic pain reached agreement on four main aspects: (1) Priority to treat neuropathic pain with evaluation of effectiveness at 1 month; (2) No deleterious effects in the majority of listed diseases/situations with the absence or <3% of suggested adverse events; (3) 0.5-0.9 mg/kg/d IV infusion; (4) Combination with non-pharmacological treatment.

Cemiplimab for Locally Advanced and Metastatic Cutaneous Squamous-Cell Carcinomas: Real-Life Experience from the French CAREPI Study Group.

Although cemiplimab has been approved for locally advanced (la) and metastatic (m) cutaneous squamous-cell carcinomas (CSCCs), its real-life value has not yet been demonstrated. An early-access program enrolled patients with la/mCSCCs to receive cemiplimab. Endpoints were best overall response rate (BOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), duration of response (DOR) and safety. The 245 patients (mean age 77 years, 73% male, 49% prior systemic treatment, 24% immunocompromised, 27% Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS) ≥ 2) had laCSCCs (35%) or mCSCCs (65%). For the 240 recipients of ≥1 infusion(s), the BOR was 50.4% (complete, 21%; partial, 29%). With median follow-up at 12.6 months, median PFS was 7.9 months, and median OS and DOR were not reached. One-year OS was 73% versus 36%, respectively, for patients with PS < 2 versus ≥ 2. Multivariate analysis retained PS ≥ 2 as being associated during the first 6 months with PFS and OS. Head-and-neck location was associated with longer PFS. Immune status had no impact. Severe treatment-related adverse events occurred in 9% of the patients, including one death from toxic epidermal necrolysis. Cemiplimab real-life safety and efficacy support its use for la/mCSCCs. Patients with PS ≥ 2 benefited less from cemiplimab, but it might represent an option for immunocompromised patients.

Starting Imatinib at 400 mg Daily in Patients with Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors Harboring KIT Exon 9 Mutations: A Retrospective, Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective analyses suggest that patients with advanced KIT exon 9-mutated gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) receiving imatinib 800 mg (rather than 400 mg) daily have better outcomes. In the adjuvant setting, the question of the optimal dose of imatinib remains unsettled. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to retrospectively assess the activity of imatinib 400 mg in both the adjuvant and the advanced settings. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a multicenter study of patients with KIT exon 9-mutated GIST starting imatinib at 400 mg daily. We examined the relapse-free survival (RFS) among high-risk patients either receiving or not receiving adjuvant imatinib. In patients with advanced disease, progression-free survival (PFS, progression under imatinib 400 mg), time to imatinib failure (TIF, progression under imatinib 400, then 800 mg upon first progression), and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. RESULTS: In the post-operative setting (n = 37), 20 patients received adjuvant imatinib. Median RFS in high-risk patients receiving adjuvant imatinib (n = 14) was not reached (95% CI 17.5-46.6) versus 13.6 months (95% CI 4.7-13.6) for those who did not (p = 0.37), after a median follow-up of 58 months. RFS at 36 months was 63% (30.3-96.6) versus 40% (95% CI 0-82.9), p = 0.2. In advanced disease (n = 28), median PFS, TIF and OS were 12.7 months (95% CI 6.1-18.2), 21.0 months (95% CI 17.4-28.1) and 47.0 months (95% CI 33.5-69.2), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the limitations of a retrospective analysis and the small number of patients, the benefit of adjuvant imatinib 400 mg daily in high-risk patients appeared relevant. Patients with advanced disease receiving imatinib 400 mg with subsequent dose escalation had a TIF similar to that observed with an initial dose of 800 mg. Intra-patient dose escalation in this setting might be an option.

Efficacy and safety of regorafenib in patients with metastatic or locally advanced chondrosarcoma: Results of a non-comparative, randomised, double-blind, placebo controlled, multicentre phase II study.

BACKGROUND: This multi-cohort trial explored the efficacy and safety of regorafenib for patients with advanced sarcomas of bone origin; this report details the cohort of patients with metastatic or locally advanced chondrosarcoma (CS), progressing after prior chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with CS, progressing despite prior standard therapy, were randomised (2:1) to receive regorafenib or placebo. Patients on placebo could crossover to receive regorafenib after centrally confirmed progressive disease. The primary endpoint was progression-free rate (PFR) at 12 weeks. With one-sided α of 0.05, and 80% power, at least 16/24 progression-free patients at 12 weeks were needed for success (P0 = 50%, P1 = 75%). RESULTS: From September 2014 to February 2019, 46 patients were included in the CS cohort, and 40 patients were evaluable for efficacy: 16 on placebo and 24 on regorafenib. Thirteen patients (54.2%; 95% CI [35.8%-[) were non-progressive at 12 weeks on regorafenib versus 5 (31.3%; 95% CI [13.2%-[);) on placebo. Median PFS was 19.9 weeks on regorafenib, and 8.0 on placebo. Fourteen placebo patients crossed over to regorafenib after progression. The most common grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events on regorafenib included hypertension (12%), asthenia (8%), thrombocytopenia (8%) and diarrhoea (8%). One episode of fatal liver dysfunction occurred on regorafenib. CONCLUSION: Although the primary endpoint was not met statistically in this small randomised cohort, there is modest evidence to suggest that regorafenib might slow disease progression in patients with metastatic CS after the failure of prior chemotherapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02389244).

Successive Osteosarcoma Relapses after the First Line O2006/Sarcome-09 Trial: What Can We Learn for Further Phase-II Trials?

The purpose was to describe first and subsequent relapses in patients from the OS2006/Sarcome-09 trial, to help future trial design. We prospectively collected and analysed relapse data of all French patients included in the OS2006/Sarcome-09 trial, who had achieved a first complete remission. 157 patients experienced a first relapse. The median interval from diagnosis to relapse was 1.7 year (range 0.5-7.6). The first relapse was metastatic in 83% of patients, and disease was not measurable according to RECIST 1.1 criteria in 23%. Treatment consisted in systemic therapy (74%) and surgical resection (68%). A quarter of the patients were accrued in a phase-II clinical trial. A second complete remission was obtained for 79 patients. Most of them had undergone surgery (76/79). The 3-year progression-free and overall survival rates were 21% and 37%, respectively. In patients who achieved CR2, the 3y-PFS and OS rates were 39% and 62% respectively. Individual correlation between subsequent PFS durations was poor. For osteosarcoma relapses, we recommend randomised phase-II trials, open to patients from all age categories (children, adolescents, adults), not limited to patients with measurable disease (but stratified according to disease status), with PFS as primary endpoint, response rate and surgical CR as secondary endpoints.

Effectiveness of a nurse-led telephone follow-up in the therapeutic management of patients receiving oral antineoplastic agents: a randomized, multicenter controlled trial (ETICCO study).

PURPOSE: The use of oral cancer drugs (OAD) has increased over the last two decades. The objective of this study was to measure the impact of a nurse-led telephone follow-up in the therapeutic management of patients treated with an OAD regarding toxicity, medication adherence and quality of life. METHODS: A randomized, multicenter, controlled trial was conducted. All consecutive over 18-year-old patients, treated in medical oncology, radiotherapy, or hematology departments, receiving OAD for any cancer were invited to participate to the study. A total of 183 patients treated for solid or hematological cancers with an OAD were randomly assigned to receive a nurse-led telephone follow-up or standard care for 24 weeks. Data were collected between 2015 and 2018. RESULTS: Nurse telephone follow-up did not improve the global score toxicity in the intervention group. However, telephone calls directed by trained nurses induced a significant decrease in number of patients with grade 3 adverse events throughout the follow-up [OR 0.45 (IC à 95%) (0.23, 0.9)](P = 0.03). There was no significant difference in quality of life and medication adherence between groups at any follow-up time point. CONCLUSIONS: In this first French real-life study, the advice provided by qualified nurses via phone calls improved the management of grade 3 toxicities but failed to demonstrate an improvement of all grades of toxicities. More prospective studies are needed to confirm the impact of telephone calls on the toxicities related to OAD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial registration is NCT02459483. Protection committee SUD-ESTI registration is 2015-A00527-42 on 13 April 2015. National Agency for the Safety of Medicines and Health Products registration is 150619-B on the 27 may 2015.

Vaccination and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: Does Vaccination Increase the Risk of Immune-related Adverse Events? A Systematic Review of Literature.

INTRODUCTION: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become part of cancer treatments. Their main side effects are immune-related adverse events (irAEs). So far, there has been no recommendation regarding routine vaccinations during ICIs treatment. Clinicians are aware of the risk of irAEs increases in this specific situation. The aim of this review of literature is to summarize the main studies about vaccination and ICIs interactions. METHODS: A systematic assessment of literature articles was performed by searching in PubMed (MEDLINE), and major oncology meeting following PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: This review highlights the lack of literature. Indeed, most of the studies published were about influenza vaccination. Vaccination for patients under ICIs causes a humoral response and seems to be associated with an increase rate of seroconversion. Interestingly vaccination may provoke irAEs in ICIs-treated patients. So far, inactivated vaccines have not been contraindicated during ICI treatment. CONCLUSION: Larger prospective studies are needed in order to define a consensus on the use of vaccines under immunotherapy.

Dose-intensive regimen treatment for small-cell carcinoma of the ovary of hypercalcemic type (SCCOHT).

PURPOSE: Small cell carcinoma of the ovary of hypercalcemic type (SCCOHT) is a rare and rapidly lethal disease affecting young women. Cytoreductive surgery associated with chemotherapy followed by a high dose chemotherapy regimen (HDC) demonstrated improved outcomes in a unique prospective and several retrospective studies, and this report aimed to confirm these results in an independent and larger cohort. METHODS: Between 2006 and 2018, we conducted a multicentric prospective study on 44 women diagnosed with SCCOHT. Patients were treated homogeneously with optimal cytoreductive surgery and chemotherapy protocol for four to six cycles (PAVEP). In case of complete response, patients received HDC with stem-cell support, followed by pelvic radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was the event-free survival (EFS) in the per-protocol cohort. Secondary analysis explored the effect of HDC with outcomes. RESULTS: Mean age at diagnosis was 33 years old (range 13.8-75.8). 14 patients presented with stage FIGO I, 21 with stage III and 9 with stage IV. Median follow-up was 53.4 months. 38 patients underwent optimal surgery with up to 6 cycles of PAVEP. 30 received HDC, and 21 pelvic radiotherapy. 21 relapses were reported leading to death for 18 patients. Median EFS in the per-protocol cohort was 18.2 months, and 2-year EFS rate was 40%. HDC was significantly associated with better overall survival (p < .001). Grades 3/4 adverse events were frequent but, in most cases, manageable, although one grade-5 adverse-event occurred during HDC. CONCLUSION: Intensive regimen containing multidrug chemotherapy, HDC and pelvic radiotherapy, for the management of SCCOHT, demonstrated encouraging survival and should be proposed for all patients. However, the significant toxicity cost associated is of concern and it should be restricted to expert centers.

Results of API-AI based regimen in osteosarcoma adult patients included in the French OS2006/Sarcome-09 study.

In the OS2006 study, patients younger than 18 years were treated with a methotrexate-based regimen (MTX), patients older than 25 years with a doxorubicin-cisplatin-ifosfamide-based regimen (API-AI), whereas patients aged 18-25 years received either API-AI or MTX. We herein report the prespecified subgroup analysis of the outcome of 106 patients treated with API-AI. Preoperative chemotherapy combined three doxorubicin-ifosfamide-cisplatin (API) and two doxorubicin-ifosfamide (AI) courses. Postoperative chemotherapy was assigned by risk group: localised patients with a good histological response (<10% viable cells) received two AI and two cisplatin-ifosfamide (PI) courses; patients with synchronous metastases, poor histological response or unresectable primary received five cycles of etoposide-ifosfamide (EI). Of the 106 patients, 61 were randomised to receive or not zoledronate. Median age was 30 years (range 18-67), 66 (62%) patients were >25 years. The primary tumours were axial in 28 patients (26%), and 28 (26%) presented with metastases. Ninety-six patients (91%) had surgery, conservative in 82 (85%); 36 patients (38%, 95% CI 28-48%) were good responders. Toxicity was manageable, with no significant difference in severe acute toxicity between patients aged >25 years and those younger. With a median follow-up of 4.8 years, the 5-year event-free survival and overall survival rates were 46% (95% CI 36-56) and 57% (95% CI 47-67), respectively. The primary tumour size and initial metastases correlated with a higher risk of event. In these 106 osteosarcoma adult patients, API-AI proved feasible with no excess of toxicity, and favourable activity despite poor-prognosis factors.

Methotrexate-Etoposide-Ifosfamide Compared with Doxorubicin-Cisplatin-Ifosfamide Chemotherapy in Osteosarcoma Treatment, Patients Aged 18-25 Years.

Purpose: The French standard chemotherapy for osteosarcoma combines high-dose methotrexate (HDM) and etoposide-ifosfamide (EI) in children and adolescents, and API-AI (doxorubicin-cisplatin-ifosfamide) in adults. We herein present the results of M-EI and API-AI in 18- to 25-year-old patients. Methods: Patients, 18-25 years old, received either M-EI or API-AI regimens. M-EI comprised seven M and two EI doses preoperatively then M-EI in standard-risk patients (good histological response without metastasis) and five M-AP (methotrexate-doxorubicin-cisplatin) in high-risk patients (poor histological response, metastasis, and/or unresectable primary), postoperatively. API-AI comprised three API and two AI doses preoperatively, then two AI and two PI in standard-risk patients and five EI in high-risk patients, postoperatively. Results: We analyzed 95 patients 18-25 years of age: 55 received M-EI and 40 API-AI. The groups had similar baseline characteristics. Eighty-nine patients (94%) had surgery. Twenty-nine of 55 M-EI patients (60%) and 16/40 API-AI patients (41%) had good histological responses to preoperative chemotherapy. At 5 years, event-free survival was 50% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 39-60) and overall survival was 65% (95% CI: 54-74). Acute toxicity was similar, without treatment-related deaths. Conclusions: Survival outcomes with M-EI and API-AI were not significantly different. Tolerance was acceptable with both regimens. HDM is thus feasible for young adults. However, our study limitations preclude any definitive conclusions.

Actionable molecular alterations in advanced gynaecologic malignancies: updated results from the ProfiLER programme.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to identify actionable genomic alterations in the gynaecological subpopulation of the ProfiLER programme and to report clinical efficacy of recommended targeted treatment (RTT). METHODS: The ProfiLER programme (NCT01774409) is a multicentric prospective trial aiming to implement molecular profiling in patients with advanced refractory cancers. In this programme, tumour DNA is analysed by targeted next-generation sequencing (69 genes) and by whole genome array comparative genomic hybridisation. Clinical cases and genomic profiles are presented in a dedicated molecular tumour board to guide treatment strategies. We report here an analysis of patients with gynaecological cancers included in this trial. RESULTS: From February 2013 to February 2017, 309 patients with gynaecologic cancer were included; 279 (90%) had sufficient quality, and 131 patients (42.4%) had at least one actionable genomic alteration in cancer cells. Four alterations were shared by at least 3% of the patients: 27 (9.7%) PIK3CA mutations, 15 (5.4%) KRAS mutations, 11 (3.9%) ERBB2 amplifications and 9 (3.2%) CDKN2A deletions. Forty-one treatments were initiated among 39 patients (12.6% of the screened population): 8 (20%) had a partial response, and other 10 (24%) had a stable disease. The median progression-free survival was 2.7 months. The median overall survival was 15.6 months for patients who received a RTT. CONCLUSION: Molecular profiling identified actionable alterations in 42.4% of patients with advanced refractory gynaecologic cancer, but only 12.6% were treated with a RTT. Among them, 46% derived clinical benefit (5.8% of the screened population).

Efficacy and safety of regorafenib in adult patients with metastatic osteosarcoma: a non-comparative, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Regorafenib has proven activity in patients with pretreated gastrointestinal stromal tumours and colorectal and hepatocellular carcinoma. We designed REGOBONE to assess the efficacy and safety of regorafenib for patients with progressive metastatic osteosarcoma and other bone sarcomas. This trial comprised four parallel independent cohorts: osteosarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, chondrosarcoma, and chordoma. In this Article, we report the results of the osteosarcoma cohort. METHODS: In this non-comparative, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial, patients aged 10 years or older with histologically confirmed osteosarcoma whose disease had progressed after treatment with one to two previous lines of chemotherapy for metastatic disease and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either oral regorafenib (160 mg/day, for 21 of 28 days) or matching placebo. Patients in both groups also received best supportive care. Randomisation was done using a web-based system and was stratified (permuted block) by age at inclusion (<18 vs ≥18 years old). Investigators and patients were masked to treatment allocation. Patients in the placebo group, after centrally confirmed progressive disease, could cross over to receive regorafenib. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients without disease progression at 8 weeks. Analyses were done by modified intention to treat (ie, patients without any major entry criteria violation who initiated masked study drug treatment were included). All participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analyses. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02389244, and the results presented here are the final analysis of the osteosarcoma cohort (others cohorts are ongoing). FINDINGS: Between Oct 10, 2014, and April 4, 2017, 43 adult patients were enrolled from 13 French comprehensive cancer centres. All patients received at least one dose of assigned treatment and were evaluable for safety; five patients were excluded for major protocol violations (two in the placebo group and three in the regorafenib group), leaving 38 patients who were evaluable for efficacy (12 in the placebo group and 26 in the regorafenib group). 17 of 26 patients (65%; one-sided 95% CI 47%) in the regorafenib group were non-progressive at 8 weeks compared with no patients in the placebo group. Ten patients in the placebo group crossed over to receive open-label regorafenib after centrally confirmed disease progression. 13 treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in seven (24%) of 29 patients in the regorafenib group versus none of 14 patients in the placebo group. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events during the double-blind period of treatment included hypertension (in seven [24%] of 29 patients in the regorafenib group vs none in the placebo group), hand-foot skin reaction (three [10%] vs none), fatigue (three [10%] vs one [3%]), hypophosphataemia (three [10%] vs none), and chest pain (three [10%] vs none). No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Regorafenib demonstrated clinically meaningful antitumour activity in adult patients with recurrent, progressive, metastatic osteosarcoma after failure of conventional chemotherapy, with a positive effect on delaying disease progression. Regorafenib should be further evaluated in the setting of advanced disease as well as potentially earlier in the disease course for patients at high risk of relapse. Regorafenib might have an important therapeutic role as an agent complementary to standard cytotoxic chemotherapy in the therapeutic armamentarium against osteosarcoma. FUNDING: Bayer HealthCare.

Impact of Chemotherapy-induced Menopause in Women of Childbearing Age With Non-metastatic Breast Cancer - Preliminary Results From the MENOCOR Study.

BACKGROUND: Young patients with breast cancer treated with chemotherapy can experience ovarian failure, which can lead to chemotherapy-induced menopause (CIM) impacting the quality of life (QoL). A prospective study was set out to evaluate the impact of CIM on QoL in women of childbearing age with non-metastatic breast cancer, and this article reports results of the interim analysis conducted to evaluate feasibility and to see preliminary results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 58 women (age, 18-46 years) with newly diagnosed breast cancer and treated with chemotherapy were eligible. QoL was assessed by self-administered questionnaires (Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 [QLQ-C30], Quality of Life Questionnaire-Breast 23 [QLQ-BR23], and Kupperman index) and hormonal variations (anti-Müllerian hormone [AMH], follicle-stimulating hormone, and estradiol) were explored. We compared patients with ≥ 12 months amenorrhea (CIM) (n = 41) to patients with < 12 months of amenorrhea (non-CIM) (n = 17). RESULTS: A good inclusion rate (approximately 4/month) and sufficient data enabled us to perform this analysis. QLQ-C30 failed to show any difference between CIM and non-CIM patients (P = .5). In contrast, at 6 months post-chemotherapy, CIM patients tended to have lower QoL as shown by QLQ-BR23 (P = .16) and more severe climacteric symptoms (P = .01). Regarding hormonal variations, AMH pre-treatment level was higher in non-CIM patients (P = .0032). We also noted that CIM patients were older (P = .00013), had shorter menstruation cycle (P = .082), and experienced faster amenorrhea (P = .088). CONCLUSIONS: The study is technically feasible, and our preliminary results underline that age in association with pre-treatment AMH level could be helpful to predict ovarian function. QLQ-BR23 seemed to be stronger, more precise, and appropriate to evaluate QoL changes in patients with breast cancer than the QLQ-C30.

Cancer patients treated with intravenous chemotherapy for the first time. What are their needs? What do they lack? A qualitative-quantitative mixed approach.

INTRODUCTION: The announcement of cancer coupled with initiation of its treatment impacts patients' psychological and physical states as well as their lifestyles. The objective of this study was to identify and confirm the needs of patients starting off on anticancer chemotherapy treatment. METHODS: This study was based on a qualitative-quantitative mixed method. In 2009, a qualitative study was conducted at the Lucien Neuwirth Cancer Institut for cancer patients undergoing intravenous chemotherapy for the first time. Exploratory and semi-directed interviews were carried out by a sociologist. In 2014, a questionnaire was hetero-administered to 100 patients starting off on chemotherapy. RESULTS: Forty patients were interviewed in 2009. Ninety-seven patients answered the questionnaire in 2014. Food was a theme that was identified by a majority of patients in 2009 (13/40) and confirmed in 2014: 63% needed help in identifying favorable food and 67% in identifying those that had to be avoided. The other needs identified were those linked to better understanding of the treatment, of how it may affect the couple, its side effects, hygiene and beauty, and knowledge about other treatments. These needs were confirmed in 2014. New needs were elicited in 2014: activities and leisure (33%), psychological needs (32.6%), and family relations (29.9%). CONCLUSION: This study enabled us to identify, confirm, and enrich our knowledge of the needs of cancer patients starting off on intravenous chemotherapy. These results led to the modification of an existing patient education program for these patients, in order to fulfill their needs in an updated and tailored manner.

EPIGIST: An observational real-life study on patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors receiving imatinib.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are rare, but represent the most common mesenchymal neoplasms of the gastrointestinal tract. EPIdemiology GIST, is an observational multicenter longitudinal follow-up cohort study reporting the prescribing patterns of imatinib in patients with GIST and the impact of the treatment in a real-world (standard clinical) setting. METHODS: Eligible patients had a confirmed diagnosis of unresectable or metastatic KIT-positive GIST and started treatment with imatinib for the first time between May 24, 2002, and June 30, 2010. During routine visits, annual collection of clinical characteristics was requested, i.e., age, GIST stage at diagnosis, history, imatinib treatment duration and dosage, adherence, and concomitant medications. Survival outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Other data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of 151 patients enrolled, imatinib was initiated for 126 patients before enrollment and for 25 patients on the day of enrollment or soon after. The patient characteristics were similar to those in published prospective trials. The estimated 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-year overall survival rates were 90.4% (95% confidence interval [CI; 84.8%-94.0%]), 84.7% (95% CI [78.1%-89.4%]), 73.0% (95% CI [65.0%-79.4%]), and 60.7% (95% CI [51.4%-68.8%]), respectively. The most common adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (39%), asthenia (39%), eyelid or periorbital edema (32%), abdominal pain (23%), and anemia (21%). Eight of 126 serious AEs were possibly related to the treatment as assessed by investigators. CONCLUSIONS: Study results showed that patients in real-life populations are generally treated in accordance with national and international clinical recommendations and have outcomes comparable to those of patients in clinical trials.

Survival impact of centralization and clinical guidelines for soft tissue sarcoma (A prospective and exhaustive population-based cohort).

PURPOSE: The outcome of sarcoma has been suggested in retrospective and non-exhaustive studies to be better through management by a multidisciplinary team of experts and adherence to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). The aim of this prospective and exhaustive population based study was to confirm the impact of adherence to CPGs on survival in patients with localized sarcoma. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Between 2005 and 2007, all evaluable adult patients with a newly diagnosis of localized sarcoma located in Rhone Alpes region (n = 634), including 472 cases of soft-tissue sarcoma (STS), were enrolled. The prognostic impact of adherence to CPGs on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed by multivariate Cox model in this cohort. RESULTS: The median age was 61 years (range 16-92). The most common subtypes were liposarcoma (n = 133, 28%), unclassified sarcoma (n = 98, 20.7%) and leiomyosarcoma (n = 69, 14.6%). In the initial management phase, from diagnosis to adjuvant treatment, the adherence to CPGs for patients with localized STS was 36% overall, corresponding to 56%, 85%, 96% and 84% for initial surgery, radiation therapy, chemotherapy and follow-up, respectively. Adherence to CPGs for surgery was the strongest independent prognostic factor of PFS, along with age, gender, grade, and tumor size. For OS, multivariate analysis adherence to CPGs for surgery was a strong independent prognostic factor, with an important interaction with a management in the regional expert centers. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates impact of CPGs and treatment within an expert center on survival for STS patients in a whole population-based cohort.

Treatment patterns and survival in an exhaustive French cohort of pazopanib-eligible patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS).

BACKGROUND: The French EMS study prospectively collected exhaustive data from STS patients diagnosed in the Rhone-Alpes region from 2005 to 07. METHODS: The database included diagnosis/histology, surgery, radiotherapy, systemic treatments and treatment response. Treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with metastatic disease, excluding adipocytic sarcoma and GIST were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 888 total patients, 145 were included based on having metastatic disease and appropriate subtypes. All patients received treatment with systemic therapy being most common (74%, n = 107), followed by radiotherapy (30%, n = 44) and surgery (23%, n = 33). Doxorubicin, alone or in combination, was the most common first line systemic therapy (65%, n = 46). Drugs without license in sarcoma were used in 38-83% of treatments depending on treatment line. 24% of frontline patients demonstrated an objective response, decreasing to 11% objective responses in second line but no responses were documented beyond second line, with median PFS declining with each additional line. Median PFS also declined in patients receiving surgery compared to those receiving no surgery (8-15 m vs 5 m). Median OS from metastatic diagnosis for patients receiving systemic therapy was double that of patients without systemic treatment (24 m vs 12 m, p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes in this population were poor and declined with successive treatment. However, results suggest that further anticancer therapies in recurrent sarcoma might be beneficial.