The prognostic factors in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: impact of treatment sequencing.

The prognosis of patients with advanced HCC can vary widely depending on factors such as the stage of the cancer, the patient's overall health, and treatment regimens. This study aimed to investigate survival outcomes and associated factors in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In this retrospective study, data from 23 medical oncology clinics were analyzed. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) values were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Prognostic factors associated with survival which were identified in univariate analysis were subsequently evaluated in a multivariate Cox-regression survival analysis was conducted using the backward stepwise (Conditional LR) method to determine the independent predictors of PFS and OS. Of 280 patients, 131 received chemotherapy and 142 received sorafenib, 6 received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 1 received nivolumab for first-line setting. The median follow-up time was 30.4 (95%CI 27.1-33.6) months. For-first line, median PFS was 3.1 (95%CI2.7-3.5) months, and it was significantly longer in patients who received sorafenib or atezolizumab-bevacizumab or nivolumab (PFS 5.8 (95%CI 4.2-7.5) than in those received chemotherapy (PFS 2.1 (95%CI 1.9-2.3) in the first-line setting (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that male gender (HR: 2.75, 95% CI: 1.53-4.94, p = 0.01), poor ECOG performance score (HR: 1.88, 95% CI: 1.10-3.21, p = 0.02), higher baseline AFP level (HR: 2.38, 95% CI: 1.54-3.67, p < 0.001) and upfront sorafenib treatment (HR,0.38; 95% CI: 0.23-0.62, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with shorter PFS. The median OS was 13.2 (95%CI 11.1-15.2) months. It was significantly longer in patients who received sorafenib or atezolizumab-bevacizumab or nivolumab in the first-line setting followed by TKIs (sorafenib or regorafenib, OS 18.6 (95%CI 13.8-23.5)) compared to those who received chemotherapy (OS 10.3 (95%CI 6.6-14.1)) in the first-line setting. The multivariate analysis revealed that upfront chemotherapy treatment approach, male gender (HR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.07-2.94, p = 0.02), poor ECOG performance score (HR: 1.96, 95% CI: 1.24-3.09, p = 0.004) and Child-Pugh score, presence of extrahepatic disease (HR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.09-2.18, p = 0.01), and higher baseline AFP value (HR: 1.50, 95% CI: 1.03-2.19, p = 0.03) were significantly associated with poor prognosis. Additionally, regarding of treatment sequence, upfront sorafenib followed by regorafenib showed a significantly lower risk of mortality (HR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.25-0.66, p < 0.001). Sorafenib followed by regorafenib treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of mortality rather than upfront sorafenib followed by BSC group or upfront chemotherapy followed by TKIs. These findings underscore the importance of the optimal treatment sequences to improve survival in patients with advanced HCC.

PNI as a Potential Add-On Biomarker to Improve the IMDC Intermediate Prognostic Score.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to assess the role of the adjusted PNI-IMDC risk scoring system in stratifying the intermediate group of metastatic RCC patients who received TKIS in the first-line setting. METHODS: A total of 185 patients were included. The adjusted PNI and IMDC model was used to divide the intermediate group into two groups: intermediate PNI-high and intermediate PNI-low groups. The statistical data were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: The results showed that the adjusted PNI-IMDC risk score, classic IMDC, and PNI had similar prognostic values. Adjusted PNI-IMDC risk score might be used for a more homogeneous differentiation of the classic intermediate group. On the other hand, multivariate analysis revealed that the presence of nephrectomy, adjusted favorable/intermediate (PNI-high) group, ECOG performance score, and presence of bone metastasis were independent predictors of OS. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-treatment PNI, as a valuable and potential add-on biomarker to the adjusted PNI-IMDC classification model, can be helpful for establishing an improved prognostic model for intermediate group mRCC patients treated with first-line TKISs. Further validation studies are needed to clarify these findings.

Molecular Pattern and Clinical Implications of KRAS/NRAS and BRAF Mutations in Colorectal Cancer.

The aim of our study was to evaluate the incidence of KRAS/NRAS and BRAF mutations, analyze molecular patterns, and investigate associations with clinical parameters of these mutations in CRC KRAS/NRAS and BRAF mutations analyzed by next-generation sequencing. The detection rates of these mutations and patients' demographics were recorded and the relationship between them was evaluated using the chi-square test. KRAS mutation was detected in 332 of 694 patients, while the mutation rates in KRAS exons 2/3 and 4 were 39.6%/3.2% and 5%, respectively. The most common mutation pattern was KRAS G12D. Five atypical variants were detected: V14I in KRAS exon 2, A18D, Q22K and T50I in exon 3, and T148P in exon 4. NRAS mutation was detected in 29 (4.5%) patients. One atypical variant L80W was detected in NRAS exon 3. BRAF mutation was seen in 37 (5.3%) patients, with BRAFV600E (83.8%) being the most common mutation pattern. NRAS mutation was significantly more frequent in patients > 64 years of age, BRAF mutation in women, and NRAS/BRAF mutations in right colon tumors. Grouping BRAF mutations into BRAFV600E and BRAFnon-V600E and their analysis according to specific tumor localizations showed that all four BRAFnon-V600E mutations originated in the rectum. In our study, KRAS exon 2 and other RAS mutation rates were higher than in the literature, while the BRAF v.600E mutation rate was similar. NRAS and BRAF mutations were significantly more frequent in the right colon. BRAF mutation was more common in women and in the right colon.

Classifying invasive lobular carcinoma as special type breast cancer may be reducing its treatment success: A comparison of survival among invasive lobular carcinoma, invasive ductal carcinoma, and no-lobular special type breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The literature contains different information about the prognosis of invasive lobular carcinoma of breast cancer (BC). We aimed to address the inconsistency by comparatively examining the clinical features and prognosis of invasive lobular carcinoma patients in our university and to report our experience by dividing our patients into various subgroups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Records of patients with BC admitted to Trakya University School of Medicine Department of Oncology between July 1999 and December 2021 were reviewed. The patients were divided into three groups (No-Special Type BC, Invasive Lobular Special Type BC, No-Lobular Special Type BC). Patient characteristics, treatment methods and oncological results are presented. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Statistical significance of survival among the selected variables was compared by using the log-rank test. RESULTS: The patients in our study consisted of 2142 female and 15 male BC patients. There were 1814 patients with No-Special Type BC, 193 patients with Invasive Lobular Special Type BC, and 150 patients with No-Lobular Special Type BC. The duration of disease-free survival (DFS) was 226.5 months for the No-Special Type BC group, 216.7 months for the No-Lobular Special Type BC group, and 197.2 months for the Invasive Lobular Special Type BC group, whereas the duration of overall survival (OS) was 233.2 months for the No-Special Type BC group, 227.9 for the No-Lobular Special Type BC group, and 209.8 for the Invasive Lobular Special Type BC group. The duration of both DFS and OS was the lowest in the Invasive Lobular Special Type BC group. Multivariate factors that were significant risk factors for OS were Invasive Lobular Special Type BC histopathology (p = .045), T stage, N stage, stage, skin infiltration, positive surgical margins, high histological grade, and mitotic index. Modified radical mastectomy, chemotherapy, radiotherapy and use of tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors for more than 5 years were significant protective factors for overall survival. CONCLUSION: The histopathological subgroup with the worst prognosis in our study was Invasive Lobular Special Type BC. Duration of DFS and OS were significantly shorter in Invasive Lobular Special Type BC than No-Lobular Special Type BC group. The classification of Invasive Lobular BC under the title of Special Type BC should be reconsidered and a more accurate treatment and follow-up process may be required.

Breast Cancer Subtypes and Prognosis: Answers to Subgroup Classification Questions, Identifying the Worst Subgroup in Our Single-Center Series.

Purpose: Many studies report the triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) as the worst subgroup, as such patients do not benefit from anti-hormonal therapy and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) antagonists. While HER2 overexpression was a poor prognostic factor in breast cancer before trastuzumab (Herceptin) was available, TNBC is often reported as the worst BC subgroup since targeted therapy is currently not possible. Since the patience-specific experiences and the current literature did not always align, we aimed to determine the BC subgroup with the shortest survival in our center. Methods: The records of patients with BC who were admitted to Trakya University Faculty of Medicine Department of Medical and Radiation Oncology between July 1999 and December 2019 were reviewed. Patients were divided into four main groups (Luminal A, Luminal B, TNBC, and HER2-enriched) according to the St Gallen International Consensus Panel and four subgroups in accordance with estrogen receptor, progestin receptor and HER2 positivity. Patient characteristics, treatment characteristics and clinical outcomes of the four main subgroups were evaluated. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the significance of survival differences among the selected variables was compared by using the Log rank test. Factors affecting disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed by Cox regression analysis. Results: Statistical analysis was performed on 2017 patients, after excluding patients with phyllodes tumor, carcinoma-in-situ and missing information from a total of 2474 patients with BC. There were 952 (47.1%) patients in the Luminal A group, 236 (34.1%) in the Luminal B group, 236 (11.7%) in the TNBC group and 142 (7.1%) patients in the HER2 enriched group. HER2-enriched patients had the shortest survival (p < 0.001), with 113.70 ± 7.17 months of DFS and 125.45 ± 3.03 months of OS. For patients who received Herceptin, DFS was 101.50 ± 6.4 months and OS was 118.14 ± 6.16. Patients who did not receive Herceptin had 92.79 ± 18 months of DFS and 94.44 ± 15.23 months of OS. Conclusion: The HER2-enriched subgroup had the worst prognosis despite receiving targeted therapy. While the duration of DFS and OS had no significant difference between TNBC and Luminal A-B subgroups, HER2 enriched subgroup had significantly shorter survival when compared to any other subgroup. HER2-enriched subgroup had a 10-fold greater risk of death compared to the Luminal A subgroup.