Exploring management and outcomes of elderly patients with glioblastoma using data from two randomised trials (GEINO1401/EX-TEM).

PURPOSE: The impact of age on optimal management of glioblastoma remains unclear. A recent combined analysis of two randomised trials, GEINO14-01 and EX-TEM, found no benefit from extending post-radiation temozolomide in newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Here, we explore the impact of age. METHODS: Relevant intergroup statistics were used to identify differences in tumour, treatment and outcome characteristics based on age with elderly patients (EP) defined as age 65 years and over. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method. RESULTS: Of the combined 205 patients, 57 (28%) were EP. Of these, 95% were ECOG 0-1 and 65% underwent macroscopic resection compared with 97% and 61% of younger patients (YP) respectively. There were numerically less MGMT-methylated (56% vs. 63%, p = 0.4) and IDH-mutated (4% vs. 13%, p = 0.1) tumours in EP vs. YP. Following surgery, EP were more likely to receive short course chemoradiation (17.5% vs. 6%, p = 0.017). At recurrence, EP tended to receive or best supportive care (28.3% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.09) or non-surgical options (96.2% vs. 84.6%, p = 0.06), but were less likely to receive bevacizumab (23.1% vs. 49.5%, p < 0.01). Median PFS was similar at 9.3months in EP and 8.5months in YP, with similar median OS at 20months. CONCLUSION: In this trial population of predominantly fit EP, survival was similar to YP despite a proportion receiving less aggressive therapy at diagnosis and recurrence. Advancing age does not appear to be an adverse prognostic factor for glioblastoma when patients are fit for treatment, and a less aggressive approach in selected patients may not compromise outcomes.

A combined analysis of two prospective randomised studies exploring the impact of extended post-radiation temozolomide on survival outcomes in newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

PURPOSE: The optimal duration of post-radiation temozolomide in newly diagnosed glioblastoma remains unclear, with no published phase III randomised trials. Standard-of-care stipulates 6 months. However, in routine care, it is often extended to 12 months, despite lacking robust supporting data. METHODS: GEINO14-01 (Spain) and EX-TEM (Australia) studies enrolled glioblastoma patients without progression at the end of 6 months post-radiation temozolomide. Participants were randomised 1:1 to six additional months of temozolomide or observation. Primary endpoint was 6-month progression free survival from date of randomisation (6mPFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and toxicity. 204 patients were required to detect an improvement in 6mPFS from 50 to 60% (80% power). Neither study recruited sufficient patients. We performed a combined analysis of individual patient data. RESULTS: 205 patients were recruited: 159 in GEINO14-01 (2014-2018) and 46 in EX-TEM (2019-2022). Median follow-up was 20.0 and 14.5 months. Baseline characteristics were balanced. There was no significant improvement in 6mPFS (57.2% vs 64.0%, OR0.75, p = 0.4), nor across any subgroups, including MGMT methylated; PFS (HR0.92, p = 0.59, median 7.8 vs 9.7 months); or OS (HR1.03, p = 0.87, median 20.1 vs 19.4 months). During treatment extension, 64% experienced any grade adverse event, mainly fatigue and gastrointestinal (both 54%). Only a minority required treatment changes: 4.5% dose delay, 7.5% dose reduction, 1.5% temozolomide discontinuation. CONCLUSION: For glioblastoma patients, extending post-radiation temozolomide from 6 to 12 months is well tolerated but does not improve 6mPFS. We could not identify any subset that benefitted from extended treatment. Six months should remain standard-of-care.

SEOM clinical guidelines on nutrition in cancer patients (2018).

Nutritional deficiency is a common medical problem that affects 15-40% of cancer patients. It negatively impacts their quality of life and can compromise treatment completion. Oncological therapies, such as surgery, radiation therapy, and drug therapies are improving survival rates. However, all these treatments can play a role in the development of malnutrition and/or metabolic alterations in cancer patients, induced by the tumor or by its treatment. Nutritional assessment of cancer patients is necessary at the time of diagnosis and throughout treatment, so as to detect nutritional deficiencies. The Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment method is the most widely used tool that also evaluates nutritional requirements. In this guideline, we will review the indications of nutritional interventions as well as artificial nutrition in general and according to the type of treatment (radiotherapy, surgery, or systemic therapy), or palliative care. Likewise, pharmacological agents and pharmaconutrients will be reviewed in addition to the role of regular physical activity.

SEOM clinical guidelines on cardiovascular toxicity (2018).

One of the most common side effects of cancer treatment is cardiovascular disease, which substantially impacts long-term survivor's prognosis. Cardiotoxicity can be related with either a direct side effect of antitumor therapies or an accelerated development of cardiovascular diseases in the presence of preexisting risk factors. Even though it is widely recognized as an alarming clinical problem, scientific evidence is scarce in the management of these complications in cancer patients. Consequently, current recommendations are based on expert consensus. This Guideline represents SEOM's ongoing commitment to progressing and improving supportive care for cancer patients.

Delay in starting radiotherapy due to neoadjuvant therapy does not worsen survival in unresected glioblastoma patients.

PURPOSE: We retrospectively examined the potential effect on overall survival (OS) of delaying radiotherapy to administer neoadjuvant therapy in unresected glioblastoma patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We compared OS in 119 patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy followed by standard treatment (NA group) and 96 patients receiving standard treatment without neoadjuvant therapy (NoNA group). The MaxStat package of R identified the optimal cut-off point for waiting time to radiotherapy. RESULTS: OS was similar in the NA and NoNA groups. Median waiting time to radiotherapy after surgery was 13 weeks for the NA group and 4.2 weeks for the NoNA group. The longest OS was attained by patients who started radiotherapy after 12 weeks and the shortest by patients who started radiotherapy within 4 weeks (12.3 vs 6.6 months) (P = 0.05). OS was 6.6 months for patients who started radiotherapy before the optimal cutoff of 6.43 weeks and 19.1 months for those who started after this time (P = 0.005). Patients who completed radiotherapy had longer OS than those who did not, in all 215 patients and in the NA and NoNA groups (P = 0.000). In several multivariate analyses, completing radiotherapy was a universally favorable prognostic factor, while neoadjuvant therapy was never identified as a negative prognostic factor. CONCLUSION: In our series of unresected patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment, in spite of the delay in starting radiotherapy, OS was not inferior to that of a similar group of patients with no delay in starting radiotherapy.

SEOM clinical guideline for treatment of cancer pain (2017).

Pain is a highly prevalent symptom in patients with cancer. Despite therapeutic advances and well-accepted treatment guidelines, a percentage of patients with pain are under-treated. Currently, it has been recognized that several barriers in pain management still exist and, in addition, there are new challenges surrounding complex subtypes of pain, such as breakthrough and neuropathic pain, requiring further reviews and recommendations. This is an update of the guide our society previously published and represents the continued commitment of SEOM to move forward and improve supportive care of cancer patients.

Peculiarities of the obese patient with cancer: a national consensus statement by the Spanish Society for the Study of Obesity and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology.

The relationship between obesity and cancer is clear and is present at all times during course of the disease. The importance of obesity in increasing the risk of developing cancer is well known, and some of the most prevalent tumours (breast, colorectal, and prostate) are directly related to this risk increase. However, there is less information available on the role that obesity plays when the patient has already been diagnosed with cancer. Certain data demonstrate that in some types of cancer, obese patients tolerate the treatments more poorly. Obesity is also known to have an impact on the prognosis, favouring lower survival rates or the appearance of secondary tumours. In this consensus statement, we will analyse the scientific evidence on the role that obesity plays in patients already diagnosed with cancer, and the available data on how obesity control can improve the quality of daily life for the cancer patient.

SEOM Clinical Guideline update for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (2016).

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting is one of the most worrisome adverse effects of chemotherapy for cancer patients. It can cause severe discomfort and affect the quality of life. In recent years, the incorporation of new drugs has increased the efficacy of antiemetic treatments in the control of emesis associated with chemotherapy. This guideline, in which we give some treatment recommendations with level of evidence and grade of recommendation, provides an update of the previously published guideline of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology and represents our continued commitment to improving supportive care in cancer patients.

Obesity as a risk factor in cancer: A national consensus of the Spanish Society for the Study of Obesity and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology.

In the last few years, many prospective studies have demonstrated a clear association between obesity and cancers of the colon and rectum, breast in post-menopausal women, endometrium, kidney, oesophagus and pancreas. Obesity is also associated with a high risk of recurrence and cancer-related death. The pathophysiology of obesity involves various changes that may be implicated in the relationship between obesity and cancer, such as excess inflammatory cytokines and chronic inflammation, hyperinsulinaemia, insulin resistance, and raised leptin and oestrogens. The Spanish Society for the Study of Obesity and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology have signed a cooperation agreement to work together towards reducing the impact of obesity in cancer. Preventing obesity prevents cancer.

SEOM guidelines on hydroelectrolytic disorders.

Hydroelectrolytic disorders are one of the most common metabolic complications in cancer patients. Although often metabolic alterations affecting various ions are part of the manifestations of the oncological disease, even in the form of paraneoplastic syndrome, we must not forget that very often, these disorders could be caused by various drugs, including some of the antineoplastic agents most frequently used, such as platin derivatives or some biologics. These guidelines review major management of diagnosis, evaluation and treatment of the most common alterations of sodium, calcium, magnesium and potassium in cancer patients. Aside from life-sustaining treatments, we have reviewed the role of specific drug treatments aimed at correcting some of these disorders, such as intravenous bisphosphonates for hypercalcemia or V2 receptor antagonists in the management of syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone secretion-related hyponatremia.

Two biomarker-directed randomized trials in European and Chinese patients with nonsmall-cell lung cancer: the BRCA1-RAP80 Expression Customization (BREC) studies.

BACKGROUND: In a Spanish Lung Cancer Group (SLCG) phase II trial, the combination of BRCA1 and receptor-associated protein 80 (RAP80) expression was significantly associated with outcome in Caucasian patients with nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The SLCG therefore undertook an industry-independent collaborative randomized phase III trial comparing nonselected cisplatin-based chemotherapy with therapy customized according to BRCA1/RAP80 expression. An analogous randomized phase II trial was carried out in China under the auspices of the SLCG to evaluate the effect of BRCA1/RAP80 expression in Asian patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility criteria included stage IIIB-IV NSCLC and sufficient tumor specimen for molecular analysis. Randomization to the control or experimental arm was 1 : 1 in the SLCG trial and 1 : 3 in the Chinese trial. In both trials, patients in the control arm received docetaxel/cisplatin; in the experimental arm, patients with low RAP80 expression received gemcitabine/cisplatin, those with intermediate/high RAP80 expression and low/intermediate BRCA1 expression received docetaxel/cisplatin, and those with intermediate/high RAP80 expression and high BRCA1 expression received docetaxel alone. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy-nine patients in the SLCG trial and 124 in the Chinese trial were assessable for PFS. PFS in the control and experimental arms in the SLCG trial was 5.49 and 4.38 months, respectively [log rank P = 0.07; hazard ratio (HR) 1.28; P = 0.03]. In the Chinese trial, PFS was 4.74 and 3.78 months, respectively (log rank P = 0.82; HR 0.95; P = 0.82). CONCLUSION: Accrual was prematurely closed on the SLCG trial due to the absence of clinical benefit in the experimental over the control arm. However, the BREC studies provide proof of concept that an international, nonindustry, biomarker-directed trial is feasible. Thanks to the groundwork laid by these studies, we expect that ongoing further research on alternative biomarkers to elucidate DNA repair mechanisms will help define novel therapeutic approaches. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00617656/GECP-BREC and ChiCTR-TRC-12001860/BREC-CHINA.

Prospective assessment of XRCC3, XPD and Aurora kinase A single-nucleotide polymorphisms in advanced lung cancer.

PURPOSE: New therapeutic approaches are being developed based on findings that several genetic abnormalities underlying non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) can influence chemosensitivity. The identification of molecular markers, useful for therapeutic decisions in lung cancer, is thus crucial for disease management. The present study evaluated single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in XRCC3, XPD and Aurora kinase A in NSCLC patients in order to assess whether these biomarkers were able to predict the outcomes of the patients. METHODS: The Spanish Lung Cancer Group prospectively assessed this clinical study. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed stage IV or IIIB (with malignant pleural effusion) NSCLC, which had not previously been treated with chemotherapy, and a World Health Organization performance status (PS) of 0-1. Patients received intravenous doses of vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1, every 21 days for a maximum of 6 cycles. Venous blood was collected from each, and genomic DNA was isolated. SNPs in XRCC3 T241M, XPD K751Q, XPD D312N, AURORA 91, AURORA 169 were assessed. RESULTS: The study included 180 patients. Median age was 62 years; 87 % were male; 34 % had PS 0; and 83 % had stage IV disease. The median number of cycles was 4. Time to progression was 5.1 months (95 % CI, 4.2-5.9). Overall median survival was 8.6 months (95 % CI, 7.1-10.1). There was no significant association between SNPs in XRCC3 T241M, XPD K751Q, XPD D312N, AURORA 91, AURORA 169 in outcome or toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that SNPs in XRCC3, XPD or Aurora kinase A cannot predict outcomes in advanced NSCLC patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy.

Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes modulate survival in cisplatin/gemcitabine-treated non-small-cell lung cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Impaired DNA repair capacity may favorably affect survival in cisplatin/gemcitabine-treated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. We investigated the association of survival with genetic polymorphisms in X-ray repair cross-complementing group 1 and group 3 (XRCC3), xeroderma pigmentosum group D (XPD), excision repair cross-complementing group 1, ligase IV, ribonucleotide reductase, TP53, cyclooxygenase-2, interleukin-6, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma, epidermal growth factor, methylene-tetra-hydrofolate reductase and methionine synthase. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and thirty-five stage IV or IIIB (with malignant pleural effusion) NSCLC patients treated with cisplatin/gemcitabine from different hospitals of the Spanish Lung Cancer Group were genotyped for 14 different polymorphisms in 13 genes. Polymorphisms were detected by the TaqMan method, using genomic DNA extracted from baseline blood samples. RESULTS: Median survival was significantly increased in patients harboring XRCC3 241 MetMet: 16 months versus 10 months for patients with ThrMet and 14 months for those with ThrThr (P = 0.01). The risk of death ratio was significantly lower for MetMet than for ThrMet patients (hazard ratio, 0.43; P = 0.01). In the multivariate Cox model, XRCC3 241 remained an independent prognostic factor (hazard ratio: XRCC3 241 MetMet, 0.44; P = 0.01), and XPD 751 and XRCC1 399 also emerged as significant prognostic factors (hazard ratios: XPD 751 LysGln, 0.46, P = 0.03; XRCC1 399 ArgGln, 0.61, P = 0.04). No other association was observed between genotype and survival. CONCLUSION: XRCC3 241 MetMet is an independent determinant of favorable survival in NSCLC patients treated with cisplatin/gemcitabine. A simple molecular assay to determine the XRCC3 241 genotype can be useful for customizing chemotherapy.

Phase II Trial of Doxorubicin Plus Escalated High-Dose Ifosfamide in Patients With Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcomas of the Adult: A Study of the Spanish Group for Research on Sarcomas (GEIS).

Background. To explore the tolerance and the activity of high-dose ifosfamide (IFOS) combined with doxorubicin (DXR) at 50 mg/m(2) every 4 weeks in patients with soft tissue sarcomas. Methods. DXR was given IV bolus and IFOS by continuous infusion at 2 g/m(2)/day. Initial IFOS dose (12 g/m(2)) was adjusted to 10, 13, or 14 g/m(2) according to toxicity. Results. Seventy patients received 277 cycles (median 3 cycles, range 1-10), 34% with IFOS dose increased, 30% decreased, and 48% delivered at 12 g/m(2). Toxicity grade 4 occurred on granulocytes (67% of patients) or platelets (19%), 54% had febrile neutropenia, 31% grade 3/4 asthenia, and 26% abandoned the study due to toxicity. Three toxic deaths occurred. In 57 non-GIST patients objective activity was 45.6% (95% CI, 32 to 58%). Conclusion. At least 4 cycles were tolerated by 71% of patients, most receiving DXR 50 mg/m(2) plus IFOS 10-12 g/m(2), with substantial toxicity.

Cisplatin plus gemcitabine versus a cisplatin-based triplet versus nonplatinum sequential doublets in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a Spanish Lung Cancer Group phase III randomized trial.

PURPOSE: To compare the survival benefit obtained with cisplatin plus gemcitabine, a cisplatin-based triplet, and nonplatinum sequential doublets in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Stage IIIB to IV NSCLC patients were randomly assigned to receive cisplatin 100 mg/m2 day 1 plus gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m2 days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks for six cycles (CG); cisplatin 100 mg/m2 day 1 plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 and vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks for six cycles (CGV); or gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 plus vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks for three cycles, followed by vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 plus ifosfamide 3 g/m2 day 1, every 3 weeks for three cycles (GV-VI). RESULTS: Five hundred fifty-seven patients were assigned to treatment (182 CG, 188 CGV, 187 GV-VI). Response rates were significantly inferior for the nonplatinum sequential doublet (CG, 42%; CGV, 41%; GV-VI, 27%; CG v GV-VI, P =.003). No differences in median survival or time to progression were observed. Toxicity was higher for the triplet: grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (GC, 32%; CGV, 57%; GV-VI, 27%; P <.05); neutropenic fever (CG, 4%; CGV, 19%; GV-VI, 5%; P <.0001); grade 3 to 4 thrombocytopenia (CG, 19%; CGV, 23%; GV-VI, 3%; P =.0001); and grade 3 to 4 emesis (GC, 22%; GCV, 32%; GV-VI, 6%; P <.0001). CONCLUSION: On the basis of these results, CG remains a standard regimen for first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC.

Randomised double blind crossover study comparing ondansetron, granisetron and tropisetron. A cost-benefit analysis.

The goals of this work were to compare the relative efficacy of ondansetron, granisetron and tropisetron in a randomised double blind crossover trial, evaluating objective, subjective and pharmacoeconomic parameters. To this end, 136 patients were enrolled, 120 of whom were eligible and evaluable. Each patient received three identical chemotherapy cycles with an antiemetic protocol which consisted in dexamethasone 20 mg i.v. and a tapering dose schedule for 4 days, and a single i.v. dose of an antiserotoninergic drug in each cycle. Arm A patients received tropisetron 5 mg; arm B patients, granisetron 3 mg; and arm C patients, ondansetron 24 mg. Numbers of patients and days with emetic episodes, grade of nausea, patient preference, headaches, need for metoclopramide, nursing or medical consultation, or admission to emergency room or ward were evaluated. There was no difference in the percentage incidence of acute or delayed nausea and vomiting. Twenty-five per cent of patients preferred tropisetron, 30% preferred granisetron, and 45% preferred ondansetron (P<0.01). Toxicity was mild in less than 10% of patients. Direct and indirect costs of treatment varied from 19.74 to 28.53 euros for tropisetron, 31.07-46.51 euros for granisetron and 22.76-62.61 euros for ondansetron. There was no difference in objective activity. In the schedules studied, patients preferred ondansetron. Indirect costs amount to less than 10% of the total antiemetic cost. Direct costs varied widely and should be considered whenever an antiemetic drug is selected.