A retrospective study on immune-related pneumonitis in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer undergoing treatment with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors.

Background: Lung cancer patients undergoing treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are at risk of developing immune-related (ir-)pneumonitis. Since lung cancer patients have competing reasons for respiratory symptoms, this poses a diagnostic challenge. This study aimed to explore diagnosis and management of ir-pneumonitis in this patient group. Materials and Methods: Suspected ir-pneumonitis was frequent in this group of patients. The cohort was characterized by high heterogeneity and lack of unequivocal diagnostic conclusions. Treatment of ir-pneumonitis was longer than recommended and involvement of pulmonologist was very infrequent. The result of this study reflects the difficulties in a daily clinical setting to diagnose and manage patients with lung cancer presenting with pulmonary symptoms. Results: Suspected ir-pneumonitis was frequent in this group of patients. The cohort was characterized by high heterogeneity and lack of unequivocal diagnostic conclusions. Treatment of ir-pneumonitis was longer than recommended and involvement of pulmonologist was very infrequent. The result of this study reflects the difficulties in a daily clinical setting to diagnose and manage patients with lung cancer presenting with pulmonary symptoms.

Cetuximab plus irinotecan administered biweekly with reduced infusion time to heavily pretreated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and related RAS and BRAF mutation status.

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is treated with cetuximab 250 mg/m2 administered weekly over 1 hour or biweekly (q2w) over 3.5 hours when combined with irinotecan. This prospective study investigated cetuximab 500 mg/m2 plus irinotecan 180 mg/m2 administered q2w over 1.5 hours independent of RAS or BRAF mutation status in mCRC patients in a third-line setting. The intention-to-treat population included 181 patients. No patients had complete response, 18% had partial responses (PR) and 48% stable disease (SD). For cetuximab, a relative dose intensity of ≥90% was reached in 78% and for irinotecan in 67% of the patients. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities were pain (17%), fatigue (9%), neutropenia (8%), diarrhea (8%), rash (8%), infection (7%) and hypersensitivity (3%). No deaths occurred. Next-generation sequencing in 96.7% of the patients revealed that 50.3% had RAS and BRAFV600E wild type (WT), with a mutation type (MT) in 45.1% of the RAS and 4.4% of the BRAFV600E genes. In patients with RAS-WT and RAS-MT tumors, a PR was obtained in 32% and 4% (P = .000003) and an SD in 43% and 53%, respectively, with a superior PFS (6.2 vs 3.7 months; hazard ratio [HR] 2.12, P = .00001) and OS (12.9 vs 8.8 months; HR 1.71, P = .0008). Treatment efficacy was poor in 7.4% of patients with an RAS mutation outside KRAS exon 2 and in 38% of patients with KRAS exon 2 mutations. Administration of cetuximab and irinotecan q2w, shortening treatment time from 3.5 to 1.5 hours, is recommended as standard therapy.

Surveillance With PET/CT and Liquid Biopsies of Stage I-III Lung Cancer Patients After Completion of Definitive Therapy: A Randomized Controlled Trial (SUPER).

Despite increased focus on prevention as well as improved treatment possibilities, lung cancer remains among the most frequent and deadliest cancer diagnoses worldwide. Even lung cancer patients treated with curative intent have a high risk of relapse, leading to a dismal prognosis. More knowledge on the efficacy of surveillance with both current and new technologies as well as on the impact on patient treatment, quality of life, and survival are urgently needed. We therefore designed a randomized phase 3 trial. In one arm, every other computed tomography (CT) scan is replaced by positron emission tomography/CT, the other arm is the standard follow-up scheme with CT. The standard arm is identical to the current national Danish follow-up program. The primary endpoint is to compare the number of relapses treatable with curative intent in the 2 arms. We aim to include 750 patients over a 3-year period. Additionally, we will test the feasibility of noninvasive lung cancer diagnostics and surveillance in the form of circulating tumor DNA analysis. For this purpose, blood samples are collected before treatment and at each following control. The blood samples are stored in a biobank for later analysis and will not be used for guiding patient treatment decisions.

Early 18F-FDG-PET/CT as a predictive marker for treatment response and survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with irinotecan and cetuximab.

BACKGROUND: To clarify if early reduction in standard uptake value (SUV) could predict metabolic response, radiologic response and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving third-line treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients were regardless of KRAS status, included in this phase II trial. They were treated with the monoclonal antibody, cetuximab, and the chemotherapeutic drug, irinotecan, every second week. A F18-fluorodeoxy glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) was scheduled before the first and second treatment, respectively, and then after every fourth treatment. Early metabolic response after one treatment and best overall metabolic response was calculated according to EORTC criteria (responders: ≥15% decrease in ∑SUVmax) and PERCIST (responders: ≥30% decrease in SULpeak). Best overall radiologic response was calculated according to RECIST 1.0. RESULTS: By EORTC criteria, early metabolic response predicted partial metabolic response (PMR) with a high positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.875 and a high negative predictive value (NPV) of 0.714. Partial radiologic response was predicted with a low PPV of 0.368 but a high NPV of 1.0. By PERCIST, PMR was predicted with a high PPV of 0.826 and an intermediate NPV of 0.667 and partial radiologic response was predicted with a low PPV of 0.5 but a high NPV of 1.0. Median OS was nearly the same with the two criteria sets; 14.1 months for early metabolic responders and 9.9 months for non-responders using EORTC criteria and 13.5 and 10.1 months, respectively, using PERCIST. CONCLUSIONS: With both EORTC criteria and PERCIST, early reduction in FDG uptake was predictive of a later partial metabolic and partial radiologic response to treatment. It was also predictive of significantly longer survival of early metabolic responders compared to non-responders. However, the sensitivities and specificities were not high enough to support clinical routine use.

CT versus FDG-PET/CT response evaluation in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with irinotecan and cetuximab.

We compared morphologic computed tomography (CT)-based to metabolic fluoro-deoxy-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/CT-based response evaluation in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and correlated the findings with survival and KRAS status. From 2006 to 2009, patients were included in a phase II trial and treated with cetuximab and irinotecan every second week. They underwent FDG-PET/CT examination at baseline and after every fourth treatment cycle. Response evaluation was performed prospectively according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.0) and retrospectively according to Positron Emission Tomography Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST). Best overall responses were registered. Sixty-one patients were eligible for response evaluation. Partial response (PR) rate was 18%, stable disease (SD) rate 64%, and progressive disease (PD) rate 18%. Partial metabolic response (PMR) rate was 56%, stable metabolic disease rate 33%, and progressive metabolic disease (PMD) rate 11%. Response agreement was poor, κ-coefficient 0.19. Hazard ratio for overall survival for responders (PR/PMR) versus nonresponders (PD/PMD) was higher for CT- than for FDG-PET/CT evaluation. Within patients with KRAS mutations, none had PR but 44% had PMR. In conclusion, morphologic and metabolic response agreement was poor primarily because a large part of the patients shifted from SD with CT evaluation to PMR when evaluated with FDG-PET/CT. Furthermore, a larger fraction of the patients with KRAS mutations had a metabolic treatment response.

Dual time point imaging fluorine-18 flourodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for evaluation of large loco-regional recurrences of breast cancer treated with electrochemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Electrochemotherapy is a local anticancer treatment very efficient for treatment of small cutaneous metastases. The method is now being investigated for large cutaneous recurrences of breast cancer that are often confluent masses of malignant tumour with various degrees of inflammation. To this end 18-Flourine-Flourodeoxyglucose-Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (FDG-PET/CT) could be a method for response evaluation. However, a standard FDG-PET/CT scan cannot differentiate inflammatory tissue from malignant tissue. Dual point time imaging (DTPI) FDG-PET has the potential of doing so. The purpose of this study was to investigate if DTPI FDG-PET/CT could assess response to electrochemotherapy and to assess the optimal timing of imaging. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Within a phase II clinical trial 11 patients with cutaneous recurrences had FDG-PET/CT scans at three time points: 60 min, 120 min and 180 min after FDG injection. The scans were performed before and 3 weeks after electrochemotherapy. RESULTS: A significant reduction in maximum standard uptake value at 60 min post injection was seen after treatment. Furthermore a change in the FDG uptake pattern was observed; from increasing uptake in up to 180 min post injection before treatment to stabilization of FDG uptake at 120 min post injection after treatment. The change in FDG uptake pattern over time lead to change of response in three target lesions; two lesions changed from stable metabolic disease to partial metabolic response and one lesion changed from partial metabolic response to stable metabolic disease. To ensure detection of the change in uptake pattern, scanning 60 and 180 min post injection seems optimal. CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows that FDG-PET/CT 60 and 180 min after tracer injection is a promising tool for response evaluation of cutaneous recurrences of breast cancer treated with electrochemotherapy.

Comparison of EORTC criteria and PERCIST for PET/CT response evaluation of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with irinotecan and cetuximab.

UNLABELLED: The study aim was to compare European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) criteria with PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST) for response evaluation of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with a combination of the chemotherapeutic drug irinotecan and the monoclonal antibody cetuximab. METHODS: From 2006 to 2009, patients with metastatic colorectal cancer were prospectively included in a phase II trial evaluating the combination of irinotecan and cetuximab every second week, as third-line treatment. (18)F-FDG PET/CT was performed between 1 and 14 d before the first treatment and after every fourth treatment cycle until progression was identified by CT with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Response evaluation with (18)F-FDG PET/CT was retrospectively performed according to both EORTC criteria and PERCIST, classifying the patients into 4 response categories: complete metabolic response (CMR), partial metabolic response (PMR), stable metabolic disease (SMD), and progressive metabolic disease (PMD). Individual best overall metabolic response (BOmR) was registered with both sets of criteria, as well as survival within response categories, and compared. RESULTS: A total of 61 patients and 203 PET/CT scans were eligible for response evaluation. With EORTC criteria, 38 had PMR, 16 had SMD, and 7 had PMD as their BOmR. With PERCIST, 34 had PMR, 20 had SMD, and 7 had PMD as their BOmR. None of the patients had CMR. There was agreement between EORTC criteria and PERCIST in 87% of the patients, and the corresponding κ-coefficient was 0.76. Disagreements were confined to PMR and SMD. Median overall survival (OS) in months with EORTC criteria was 14.2 in the PMR group and 7.2 in the combined SMD + PMD group. With PERCIST, it was 14.5 in the PMR group and 7.9 in the SMD + PMD group. CONCLUSION: Response evaluation with EORTC criteria and PERCIST gave similar responses and OS outcomes with good agreement on BOmR (κ-coefficient, 0.76) and similar significant differences in median OS between response groups. Compared with EORTC criteria, we find PERCIST unambiguous because of clear definitions and therefore more straightforward to use.

Impact of third-line treatment with irinotecan plus cetuximab on non-tumor standardized uptake values in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

The correct interpretation of metabolic response in cancer cells to therapy requires knowledge of how tumor-free tissue responds to the same treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate standardized uptake values (SUVs) in tumor-free regions of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer prior to and following therapy, via the use of 18-fluoride fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT). On baseline 18F-FDG PET/CT scans (n=51), volumes of interest (VOI) were obtained from tumor-free tissue (aortic arch, liver and spleen) and SUVs normalized to total body mass were registered. The procedure was repeated for a follow-up scan two weeks following a single administration of the third-line treatment with irinotecan plus cetuximab. The mean differences in SUV prior to and following therapy were non-significant (P>0.05) in all the registered tumor-free regions. Correlation coefficients indicated a significant result between the variables (0.74-0.84; P<0.001). This study suggests that the early assessment of metabolic response may be made following the administration of third-line therapy with irinotecan plus cetuximab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to second-line treatment with irinotecan.

Observer variability in a phase II trial - assessing consistency in RECIST application.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the consistency of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) application in a phase II trial. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic non-resectable colorectal cancer treated with a combination of an antibody and a chemotherapeutic drug, were included. Computed tomography (CT) scans (thorax, abdomen and pelvis) were performed at baseline and after every fourth treatment cycle. RECIST was intended for response evaluation. The scans were consecutively read by a heterogeneous group of radiologists as a part of daily work and hereafter retrospectively reviewed by a dedicated experienced radiologist. Agreement on best overall response (BOR) between readers and reviewer was quantified using κ-coefficients and the discrepancy rate was correlated with the number of different readers per patient using a χ(2)-test. RESULTS: One hundred patients with 396 CT scans were included. Discrepancies between the readers and the reviewer were found in 47 patients. The majority of discrepancies concerned the application of RECIST. With the review, BOR changed in 17 patients, although, only in six patients the change was potentially treatment altering. Overall, the κ-coefficient of agreement between readers and reviewer was 0.71 (good). However, in the subgroup of responding patients the κ-coefficient was 0.21 (fair). The number of patients with discrepancies was significantly higher with three or more different readers per patient than with less (p =0.0003). CONCLUSION: RECIST was not consistently applied and the majority of the reader discrepancies were RECIST related. Post review, 17 patients changed BOR; six patients in a potentially treatment altering manner. Additionally, we found that the part of patients with discrepancies increased significantly with more than three different readers per patient. The findings support a peer-review approach where a few dedicated radiologists perform double blinded readings of all the on-going cancer trial patients' CT scans.

Impact of ABCB1 variants on neutrophil depression: a pharmacogenomic study of paclitaxel in 92 women with ovarian cancer.

The standard treatment for ovarian cancer in advanced stages is post-surgery treatment with taxane-platin chemotherapy. Despite an initial high response rate, most patients eventually relapse. The dose-limiting toxicities of paclitaxel are neutropenia and neuropathy, but the inter-individual variability is large. The aim of this prospective study was to investigate the impact of genetic variants in key drug metabolizing/transporter genes on toxicity and compliance. CYP2C8*3 and three ABCB1 polymorphisms were chosen for primary analysis, and a host of other candidate genes was explored in 92 prospectively recruited Scandinavian Caucasian women with primary ovarian cancer who were treated with paclitaxel and carboplatin. A single investigator assessed the clinical toxicity in 97% of the patients. Patients carrying variant alleles of ABCB1 C3435T experienced more pronounced neutrophil decrease (63%, 72% and 80% for 3435CC, CT and TT, respectively; p-value 0.03). A similar association was found for G2677T/A, p-value 0.02. For C1236T, there was a trend with p-value 0.06. No statistically significant correlations were found for paclitaxel compliance and sensory neuropathy in the primary analysis. Variants in the drug transporter ABCB1 gene are possibly associated with the neutrophil suppressing effect of paclitaxel in patients with ovarian cancer. This finding has implications for the understanding of bone marrow suppression and future tailored chemotherapy.

Bevacizumab in combination with cetuximab and irinotecan after failure of cetuximab and irinotecan in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of concurrent administration of irinotecan with the two monoclonal antibodies cetuximab and bevacizumab as fourth line therapy in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer were evaluated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who had progressed on therapy with 5-FU, oxaliplatin and irinotecan in the first and second line setting and on the combination of irinotecan and cetuximab in third line setting independent of their KRAS mutation status, were treated with irinotecan and cetuximab combined with bevacizumab in a dosage of 5 mg/kg. All drugs were administered every second week. RESULTS: From January 2007 to November 2008 27 patients were treated with cetuximab, irinotecan and bevacizumab. The triple-combination was well tolerated. Progression free survival (PFS) was 8.3 months and median overall survival (mOS) was 12.0 months. Two patients without KRAS mutation (7%) obtained a partial response and 17 (63%) had stable disease for at least two months. A retrospective KRAS mutation analysis revealed that there was a trend toward longer PFS and mOS in patients without KRAS mutations compared to patients with KRAS mutations with a PFS of 8.9 vs. 5.1 months and a mOS of 12.7 vs. 9.0 months. CONCLUSION: Bevacizumab is safe to add to irinotecan and cetuximab with a toxicity profile that seems to be similar to what would be expected from the agents alone. The results indicate that adding bevacizumab to irinotecan and cetuximab in a fourth line setting may induce a high rate of disease control in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.