Second-Line Chemotherapy for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinomas: What Is the Real Gain?

BACKGROUND: The presence of actionable alterations in advanced biliary tract cancer patients opened new therapeutic possibilities for second-line treatments. However, for around 60% of the patients, chemotherapy remains the only therapeutic option. The aim of our study was to evaluate outcomes and prognostic parameters in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas treated with second-line chemotherapy. METHODS: A total of 255 consecutive metastatic intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) patients were retrospectively reviewed and clinicopathologic and survival data were collected. RESULTS: Fourty-four percent of ICC patients underwent second-line chemotherapy. In particular, younger ICC patients with better ECOG PS status, and with disease control after first-line chemotherapy were those who were treated with second-line treatments. Median progression-free survival in the patients treated with second-line chemotherapy was 3 months. Finally, the patients affected by intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with better ECOG PS, with prior surgical resection of the primary tumor, who responded to first-line chemotherapy, and had better progression-free survival with second-line chemotherapy, were associated with better outcomes in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Not all patients seem to benefit from second-line chemotherapy. To improve therapeutic decisions, performance status and disease control with first-line chemotherapy should lead to the decision on the usefulness of second-line treatments in advanced ICC patients.

A Simple Overview of Pancreatic Cancer Treatment for Clinical Oncologists.

Pancreatic cancer (PDAC) is one of the most aggressive solid tumors and is showing increasing incidence. The aim of our review is to provide practical help for all clinical oncologists and to summarize the current management of PDAC using a simple "ABC method" (A-anatomical resectability, B-biological resectability and C-clinical conditions). For anatomically resectable PDAC without any high-risk factors (biological or conditional), the actual standard of care is represented by surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. The remaining PDAC patients should all be treated with initial systemic therapy, though the intent for each is different: for borderline resectable patients, the intent is neoadjuvant; for locally advanced patients, the intent is conversion; and for metastatic PDAC patients, the intent remains just palliative. The actual standard of care in first-line therapy is represented by two regimens: FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel. Recently, NALIRIFOX showed positive results over gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel. There are limited data for maintenance therapy after first-line treatment, though 5-FU or FOLFIRI after initial FOLFIRINOX, and gemcitabine, after initial gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel, might be considered. We also dedicate space to special rare conditions, such as PDAC with germline BRCA mutations, pancreatic acinar cell carcinoma and adenosquamous carcinoma of the pancreas, with few clinically relevant remarks.

Thirty-day mortality in hospitalised patients with lung cancer: incidence and predictors.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with lung cancer experience high rates of hospitalisation, mainly due to the high risk of complications that emerge during the natural history of the disease. We designed a retrospective, single-centre, observational study aimed at defining the clinical predictors of 30-day mortality in hospitalised patients with lung cancer. METHODS: Clinical records from the first admission of patients with lung cancer to the oncology ward of the University Hospital of Parma from 1 January 2017 to 1 January 2022 were collected. RESULTS: 251 consecutive patients were enrolled at the time of data cut-off. In the univariate analysis, baseline clinical predictors of 30-day mortality were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) (≥2 vs 0-1: 27.5% vs 14.8%, p=0.028), high Blaylock Risk Assessment Screening Score (BRASS) (high vs intermediate-low: 34.3% vs 11.9%, p<0.001), presence of pain (yes vs no: 24.4% vs 11.7%, p=0.009), number of metastatic sites (≥3 vs <3: 26.5% vs 13.4%, p=0.017) and presence of bone metastases (yes vs no: 29.0% vs 10.8%, p=0.001). In the multivariate analysis, high BRASS remained significantly associated with increased 30-day mortality (high vs intermediate-low; OR 2.87, 95% CI 1.21 to 6.78, p=0.016). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that baseline poor ECOG PS, high BRASS, presence of pain, high tumour burden and presence of bone metastases could be used as clinical predictors of 30-day mortality in hospitalised patients with lung cancer. In particular, the BRASS scale should be used as a simple tool to predict 30-day mortality in hospitalised patients with lung cancer.