SEOM-GEMCAD-TTD clinical guidelines for the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer (2023).

Colorectal cancer (CRC) has a 5-year overall survival rate of over 60%. The decrease in the rate of metastatic disease is due to screening programs and the population's awareness of healthy lifestyle. Similarly, advancements in surgical methods and the use of adjuvant chemotherapy have contributed to a decrease in the recurrence of resected disease. Before evaluating a patient's treatment, it is recommended to be discussed in a multidisciplinary tumor board. In stage II tumors, the pathologic characteristics of poor prognosis must be known (T4, number of lymph nodes analyzed less than 12, lymphovascular or perineural invasion, obstruction or perforation, poor histologic grade, presence of tumor budding) and it is mandatory to determine the MSI/MMR status for avoiding administering fluoropyridimidines in monotherapy to patients with MSI-H/dMMR tumors. In stage III tumors, the standard treatment consists of a combination of fluoropyrimidine (oral or intravenous) with oxaliplatin for 6 months although the administration of CAPOX can be considered for 3 months in low-risk tumors. Neoadjuvant treatment is not consolidated yet although immunotherapy is achieving very good preliminary results in MSI-H patients. The use of ctDNA to define the treatment and monitoring of resected tumors is only recommended within studies. These guidelines are intended to help decision-making to offer the best management of patients with non-metastatic colon cancer.

SEOM-GEMCAD-TTD clinical guidelines for the systemic treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (2022).

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in Spain. Metastatic disease is present in 15-30% of patients at diagnosis and up to 20-50% of those with initially localized disease eventually develop metastases. Recent scientific knowledge acknowledges that this is a clinically and biologically heterogeneous disease. As treatment options increase, prognosis for individuals with metastatic disease has steadily improved over recent decades. Disease management should be discussed among experienced, multidisciplinary teams to select the most appropriate systemic treatment (chemotherapy and targeted agents) and to integrate surgical or ablative procedures, when indicated. Clinical presentation, tumor sidedness, molecular profile, disease extension, comorbidities, and patient preferences are key factors when designing a customized treatment plan. These guidelines seek to provide succinct recommendations for managing metastatic CRC.

Recommendations for the optimal management of peritoneal metastases in patients with colorectal cancer: a TTD and GECOP-SEOQ expert consensus statement.

Peritoneal metastases (PM) occur when cancer cells spread inside the abdominal cavity and entail an advanced stage of colorectal cancer (CRC). Prognosis, which is poor, correlates highly with tumour burden, as measured by the peritoneal cancer index (PCI). Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) in specialized centres should be offered especially to patients with a low to moderate PCI when complete resection is expected. The presence of resectable metastatic disease in other organs is not a contraindication in well-selected patients. Although several retrospective and small prospective studies have suggested a survival benefit of adding hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) to CRS, the recently published phase III studies PRODIGE-7 in CRC patients with PM, and COLOPEC and PROPHYLOCHIP in resected CRC with high-risk of PM, failed to show any survival advantage of this strategy using oxaliplatin in a 30-min perfusion. Final results from ongoing randomized phase III trials testing CRS plus HIPEC based on mitomycin C (MMC) are awaited with interest. In this article, a group of experts selected by the Spanish Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours (TTD) and the Spanish Group of Peritoneal Oncologic Surgery (GECOP), which is part of the Spanish Society of Surgical Oncology (SEOQ), reviewed the role of HIPEC plus CRS in CRC patients with PM. As a result, a series of recommendations to optimize the management of these patients is proposed.

A randomized phase II study to compare oxaliplatin plus 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (FOLFOX4) versus oxaliplatin plus raltitrexed (TOMOX) as first-line chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare TOMOX versus FOLFOX4 as first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 191 chemotherapy-naïve patients were randomized to receive TOMOX or FOLFOX4. Patients were evaluated every 3 months and chemotherapy was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Overall response rate was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: 183 patients were included in the intent-to-treat analysis (92 TOMOX and 91 FOLFOX4). Overall response rate was 45.6 and 36.3 % (p = 0.003) for TOMOX and FOLFOX4, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed in overall survival (15.6 and 17.2 months; p = 0.475); progression-free survival (7.7 and 8.7 months; p = 0.292), and response duration (6.4 and 7.6 months; p = 0.372) for TOMOX and FOLFOX4, respectively. Grades 3 and 4 neutropenia (p < 0.0001) and leukopenia (p = 0.028) were more common with the FOLFOX4 regimen, while hepatic disorders and asthenia were higher in TOMOX group (p = ns). There were two treatment-related deaths in the FOLFOX4 arm and one in the TOMOX arm. Quality of life analysis based on the SF-36 revealed differences between the two regimens for physical and mental composite scores after 6 weeks, and for body pain and emotional role functioning after 6 and 12 weeks; all of these favored the FOLFOX4 arm (p ≤ 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: TOMOX and FOLFOX4 seem to have similar efficacy and are well tolerated in the first-line treatment for advanced CRC with different profiles of toxicity. The convenient TOMOX regimen may offer an alternative to fluoropyrimidine-based regimens.

Pilot study on workload estimate in breast cancer, lung cancer and colorectal cancer in a Medical Oncology Service at Valme hospital.

New advances in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer and the increased incidence and prevalence of this disease have led to an increase in the number and duration of visits in Medical Oncology in the last few years. Based on the functions of a medical oncologist and the time recommended for each work activity established by the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), we carried out a pilot study on the three most frequent neoplasias in our country [breast cancer (BC), lung cancer (LC) and colorectal cancer (CRC)], in order to determine the real time each patient requires from a physician and thus establish a recommendation on the number of medical oncologists necessary. Using the actual itinerary of the first 20 patients of 2009 in each of the three neoplasias seen at the Medical Oncology Service of the Virgen de Valme University Hospital, we measured the number of visits, the antineoplastic treatments received, the number of hospital admissions and average length of stay. During the years following the study, these data were estimated based on the natural history of each neoplasia. During the first year, the average time spent by the medical oncologist was 235, 390 and 265 min on each outpatient with BC, LC and CRC, respectively. In hospitalisation, the average oncologist/patient minutes were 40, 360 and 118 for BC, LC and CRC, respectively. Finally, the time spent on each visit or day of hospitalisation was that recommended by the SEOM, achieving an ultimate ratio of 1 oncologist for every 83 first visits.

SEOM clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma.

Gastric adenocarcinomas are tumours of decreasing incidence in the Western world, although they are still the fourth leading cause of cancer mortality. The purpose of these clinical guidelines is to provide recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of this disease based on the best available evidence. Regarding resectable gastric cancer, the various potential therapeutic options are discussed (adjuvant or perioperative chemotherapy, and adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy). With regard to advanced or metastatic disease, different alternative combinations of conventional cytotoxic agents including a platinum agent (cisplatin or oxaliplatin) and a fluoropyrimidine (5-FU, capecitabine or S1), with or without a third drug (epirubicin or docetaxel), as well as their integration with new biological agents (trastuzumab in HER2+ tumours), are discussed. Finally, an outline is provided of the main lines of research and development of therapies for this disease.

Functions and workload of medical oncologists in Spain.

The functions and workload of medical oncologists are becoming increasingly relevant as cancer is a priority health issue in our country. Taking into account the specific characteristics and complexity of caring for cancer patients, the time of physicians attached to Medical Oncology could be distributed as follows: 70% for consultation (including participation in tumour committees and multidisciplinary units), 15% for research and 15% for training, teaching and clinical sessions. The time distribution for Heads of Services or Heads of Units is different, since it must also include their clinical management tasks, team coordination, and relations with other services and institutions. The average time, calculated in minutes, spent on each activity per patient is as follows: first visit and "second visit or results visit" 60-90 min; successive visits at the day hospital 15 min; successive visits of patients for follow-up or checkups 20 min; visits with family members 15-20 min; telephone or e-mail consultations 5-10 min; hospitalisation 20 min; and interconsultation 30-60 min. Also, participation in multidisciplinary committees takes up 60-120 min of an oncologist's time each week. When new technologies such as electronic medical records, e-mail and other software are used, these times increase with a correction factor that is still to be defined and which could vary according to the centre. Finally, the ratio recommended by SEOM is one medical oncologist for every 83 new patients a year.

Phase II study of trastuzumab and cisplatin as first-line therapy in patients with HER2-positive advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer.

INTRODUCTION: HER2 over-expression and/or amplification are present in 9-38% of gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers and are correlated to poor outcome. We conducted a multicentre phase II trial to evaluate trastuzumab in combination with cisplatin in patients with untreated HER2-positive advanced gastric or GEJ cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Chemo-naïve patients with measurable, non-resectable, advanced or metastatic gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma, with HER2 over-expression and/or amplification (IHC 3+, or IHC 2+ and FISH+), age ≥18 years, ECOG ≤2, left ventricle ejection fraction ≥50% and adequate organ function were eligible. Treatment consisted of trastuzumab (8 mg/kg on cycle 1 day 1 as loading; 6 mg/kg in subsequent cycles) and cisplatin (75 mg/m(2)), both intravenously on day 1, every 21 days. RESULTS: Twenty-two out of 228 patients (10%) were HER2- positive and were included in this phase II trial. The median age was 66 years and ECOG 0/1 was 41%/59%. The median number of cycles was 4 (range 1-41). The confirmed ORR was 32% and disease control was achieved in 64% of patients. Median time to progression was 5.1 months. Grade 3 adverse events included asthenia (27%), neutropenia (18%), anorexia (14%), diarrhoea (9%) and abdominal pain (9%). There were no grade 4 toxicities or treatment-related deaths. Higher baseline HER extracellular domain (ECD) levels were associated with better outcome in terms of response and survival. CONCLUSIONS: Trastuzumab in combination with cisplatin is an active regimen and has a favourable toxicity profile in advanced HER2-positive gastric or gastroesophageal cancers.

Recommendations on current approach to gastric cancer.

The management of gastric cancer has been updated by the Grupo Español de Tratamiento de Tumores Digestivos (TTD). A multidisciplinary approach is essential in these patients including a precise diagnosis and staging and correct nutritional evaluation. For resectable disease, surgical resection remains the treatment mainstay and both perioperatory chemotherapy and postoperatory chemo-radiotherapy are considered standard complementary treatments. In advanced disease chemotherapy should always be considered. There are different reference schemes (TCF, XC, ECF, EXC) and the therapeutic option has to be individualised. Recently a phase III trial has shown a significant improvement in overall survival when trastuzumab is added to cisplatin-capecitabine or cisplatin-5-fluorouracil in patients with HER2+ advanced gastric cancer. Currently, there are several ongoing clinical trials evaluating the role of other new drugs against cellular targets. It would be desirable to incorporate biomarker studies in these trials in order to identify the best treatment for each patient.

Adjuvant chemotherapy for stages II, III and IV of colon cancer.

Colorectal cancer is the third most frequent malignant neoplasm in Western countries. After complete resection, 5-year overall survival varies according to the initial stage. Adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) is indicated in patients with colon cancer at high-risk stage II, stage III and after complete resection of metastases. 5-Fluorouracil (5FU), alone or modulated with levamisol or leucovorin (LV), oral fluoropyrimidines, raltitrexed, irinotecan and oxaliplatin have been studied as adjuvant therapy for colon cancer. Nowadays, oxaliplatin-based regimens, FOLFOX or FLOX, are considered as the standard adjuvant CT. If there are contraindications for oxaliplatin, the best alternatives are capecitabine or continuous infusion of 5FU/LV. The role of monoclonal antibodies, cetuximab and bevacizumab, combined with oxaliplatin/fluoropyrimidine-based CT is under investigation in clinical trials. This article reviews the state of the art and the future perspectives of adjuvant therapy in colon cancer. Prognostic and predictive factors are also commented on.