Baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio as a predictive and prognostic biomarker in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide in the CARD study.

BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence that a high neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is associated with poor overall survival (OS) for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). In the CARD study (NCT02485691), cabazitaxel significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and OS versus abiraterone or enzalutamide in patients with mCRPC previously treated with docetaxel and the alternative androgen-receptor-targeted agent (ARTA). Here, we investigated NLR as a biomarker. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CARD was a multicenter, open-label study that randomized patients with mCRPC to receive cabazitaxel (25 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) versus abiraterone (1000 mg/day) or enzalutamide (160 mg/day). The relationships between baseline NLR [< versus ≥ median (3.38)] and rPFS, OS, time to prostate-specific antigen progression, and prostate-specific antigen response to cabazitaxel versus ARTA were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Multivariable Cox regression with stepwise selection of covariates was used to investigate the prognostic association between baseline NLR and OS. RESULTS: The rPFS benefit with cabazitaxel versus ARTA was particularly marked in patients with high NLR {8.5 versus 2.8 months, respectively; hazard ratio (HR) 0.43 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27-0.67]; P < 0.0001}, compared with low NLR [7.5 versus 5.1 months, respectively; HR 0.69 (95% CI 0.45-1.06); P = 0.0860]. Higher NLR (continuous covariate, per 1 unit increase) independently associated with poor OS [HR 1.05 (95% CI 1.02-1.08); P = 0.0003]. For cabazitaxel, there was no OS difference between patients with high versus low NLR (15.3 versus 12.9 months, respectively; P = 0.7465). Patients receiving an ARTA with high NLR, however, had a worse OS versus those with low NLR (9.5 versus 13.3 months, respectively; P = 0.0608). CONCLUSIONS: High baseline NLR predicts poor outcomes with an ARTA in patients with mCRPC previously treated with docetaxel and the alternative ARTA. Conversely, the activity of cabazitaxel is retained irrespective of NLR.

SAUL, a single-arm study of atezolizumab for chemotherapy-pretreated locally advanced or metastatic carcinoma of the urinary tract: outcomes by key baseline factors, PD-L1 expression and prior platinum therapy.

BACKGROUND: The impact of pretreatment factors on immune checkpoint inhibition in platinum-refractory advanced urothelial cancer (aUC) deserves further evaluation. The aim was to study the association of Bellmunt risk factors, time from last chemotherapy (TFLC), previous therapy and PD-L1 expression with atezolizumab efficacy in platinum-refractory aUC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis of patients who had received prior cisplatin or carboplatin in the prospective, single-arm, phase IIIb SAUL study (NCT02928406). Patients were treated with 3-weekly atezolizumab 1200 mg intravenously. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Relationships were analysed using Cox regression and long-rank test. RESULTS: Of 997 patients in SAUL, 969 were eligible for this analysis. The number of Bellmunt risk factors was associated with OS (P < 0.001); median OS (mOS) for 0, 1 and 2-3 risk factors was 17.9, 8.9 and 3.3 months, respectively. Significant associations were also observed between OS and TFLC (P < 0.001), programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression (P = 0.002), and prior perioperative chemotherapy (P = 0.013); mOS was 6.97 versus 11.63 months for TFLC ≤6 versus >6 months, 7.75 versus 11.6 months for PD-L1 expression on <1% of tumour-infiltrating immune cells (ICs) (IC0)/expression on 1% to <5% of tumour-infiltrating ICs (IC1) versus expression on ≥5% of tumour-infiltrating ICs (IC2/3) and 10.2 versus 7.8 months for prior versus no prior perioperative chemotherapy, respectively. The type of platinum compound and number of previous treatment lines were not associated with outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Post-platinum atezolizumab is active in aUC, irrespective of previous platinum compound and lines of therapy. Bellmunt risk stratification, PD-L1 expression, TFLC and perioperative chemotherapy were identified as prognostic factors for OS with second-line atezolizumab, indicating the need for novel prognostic signatures for immunotherapy-treated patients with aUC.

Demographic and clinical features of critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Greece: The burden of diabetes and obesity.

AIMS: The aim of the study was to investigate the association between type-2 diabetes mellitus, other underlying diseases and obesity with the outcomes of critically ill Covid-19 patients in Greece. METHODS: In this retrospective observational multi-centre study, data and outcomes of 90 RNA 2109-nCoV confirmed critically ill patients from 8 hospitals throughout Greece, were analysed. All reported information stand through April 13th 2020. RESULTS: The median age of the patients was 65.5 (IQR 56-73), majority were male (80%) and obesity was present in 34.4% of patients most prevalent to younger than 55 years. Hypertension was the prevailing comorbidity (50%), followed by cardiovascular diseases (21.1%) and type-2 diabetes (18.9%). At admission, common symptoms duration had a median of 8 (IQR 5-11) days. A 13.3% of the patients were discharged, 53.4% were still in the ICUs and 28.9% deceased who were hospitalised for fewer days than the survivors [6 (IQR 3-9) vs. 9 (IQR 7-14.5) respectively]. Aging was not a risk factor but diabetes deteriorates the outcomes. Obesity poses a suggestive burden as it was more notable in deceased versus survivors. CONCLUSIONS: Type 2 diabetes and obesity may have contributed to disease severity and mortality in COVID-19 critically ill patients in Greece.

Axitinib as a third or further line of treatment in renal cancer: a single institution experience.

BACKGROUND: Kidney cancer is a lethal neoplasm that affects several thousands of people every year. Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the most common histologic type. Recent developments in the therapeutic approach include antiangiogenic targeted approaches and Immunotherapy. Thus, the therapeutic algorithm of RCC patients and the survival outcomes have changed dramatically. METHODS: Herein we present a retrospective study of the patients treated in our Department with an antiangiogenic agent -Axitinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor- as a third or further line treatment. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS, including the available clinicopathological data of the patients included. RESULTS: Axitinib was found to be active in patients who received this treatment beyond second line. The toxicity profile of this regimen did not reveal any unknown adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Our real world data reflect that axitinib is a safe and effective option, even beyond the second line.

EAU-ESMO consensus statements on the management of advanced and variant bladder cancer-an international collaborative multi-stakeholder effort: under the auspices of the EAU and ESMO Guidelines Committees†.

BACKGROUND: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management. DESIGN: A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts before voting during a consensus conference. SETTING: Online Delphi survey and consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS: The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these, 33 (28%) statements achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) statements achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease. CONCLUSIONS: These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time where further evidence is available to guide our approach.

Inhibition of the Hedgehog pathway in lung cancer.

Inhibitors of the hedgehog pathway are effective in patients with basal cell carcinoma and a subgroup of patients with medulloblastoma with active hedgehog signaling. Despite preclinical work suggesting otherwise, clinical trials in solid tumors of epithelial origin have not shown added benefit with these drugs. Here, we review the preclinical and clinical data of hedgehog pathway inhibition in the most common histologic types of lung cancer. We focus on highlighting areas of uncertainty, where further research might define a niche for hedgehog pathway inhibition in patients with lung cancer.

Cutaneous toxicities of antineoplastic agents: data from a large cohort of Greek patients.

PURPOSE: Cutaneous toxicities from novel anticancer treatments are an emerging problem in dermato-oncology. However, the prevalence of those toxicities and necessity of skin consultations are currently unknown. The purpose of our study was to perform an epidemiologic analysis of cutaneous toxicities that were referred to our cutaneous toxicity clinic in Athens, Greece. METHODS: All patients examined at the oncodermatology department over a 42-month period were included. Gender, age, type of cancer, type of antineoplastic treatment, and type of toxicity were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: Four hundred fifty-nine patients (182 males, 277 females) with mean age (SD) 60.6 years (13.05) were included in the analysis. Six hundred seventy-two cutaneous toxicities were recorded. Chemotherapy-induced toxicities were the most commonly recorded incidents, with taxanes being the most commonly involved agent. Immune-related adverse events (IRAEs) have steadily increased over the past 3 years. Treatment modifications due to skin toxicities were more common in patients treated with targeted agents and immune checkpoint inhibitors than in those treated with chemotherapy. The toxicities that led to the most treatment modifications were acneiform eruptions and perionychias. The most common IRAEs recorded were psoriasis in 11 patients, followed by pruritus, macular rash, and lichenoid-type eruptions. In addition, 4 interesting cases of IRAEs are discussed. CONCLUSION: Antineoplastic treatments can lead to a wide range of cutaneous toxicities. Our study underlines the need for a multidisciplinary approach in oncologic patients. The dermatologists' role is crucial in effectively managing those reactions and preventing antineoplastic drug dose adjustments or discontinuation of treatment.

Impact of contemporary patterns of chemotherapy utilization on survival in patients with advanced cancer of the urinary tract: a Retrospective International Study of Invasive/Advanced Cancer of the Urothelium (RISC).

Background: Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy is the standard treatment of advanced urinary tract cancer (aUTC), but 50% of patients are ineligible for cisplatin according to recently published criteria. We used a multinational database to study patterns of chemotherapy utilization in patients with aUTC and determine their impact on survival. Patients and methods: This was a retrospective study of patients with: UTC (bladder, renal pelvis, ureter or urethra); advanced disease (stages T4b and/or N+ and/or M+); urothelial, squamous or adenocarcinoma histology. Primary objective was overall survival (OS). Eligibility-for-cisplatin was defined by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 1, creatinine clearance ≥ 60 ml/min, no hearing loss, no neuropathy and no heart failure. Cox regression multivariate analyses were used to establish independent associations of cisplatin versus noncisplatin-based chemotherapy on OS. Results: 1794 patients treated between 2000 and 2013 at 29 centers were analyzed. Median follow-up was 29.1 months. About 1333 patients (74%) received first-line chemotherapy: the use of first-line chemotherapy was associated with longer OS: [hazard ratio (HR): 1.91, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.67-2.20]. Type of first-line chemotherapy received was: cisplatin-based 669 (50%), carboplatin-based 399 (30%) and other 265 (20%). Cisplatin use was an independent favorable prognostic factor (HR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.35-1.77). This benefit was independent of baseline characteristics or comorbidities but was associated with eligibility-for-cisplatin: eligible patients treated with cisplatin lived longer than those who were not (HR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.36-2.21), while such benefit was not observed among ineligible patients. About 26% of patients who did not receive cisplatin were eligible for this agent. Median OS of ineligible patients was poor irrespective of the chemotherapy used. Conclusions: The importance of applying published criteria of eligibility-for-cisplatin was confirmed in a multinational, real-world setting in aUTC. The reasons for deviations from these criteria set targets to improve adherence. Effective therapies for cisplatin-ineligible patients are needed.

Bevacizumab with or after chemotherapy for platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer: exploratory analyses of the AURELIA trial.

BACKGROUND: In the open-label randomized phase III AURELIA trial, adding bevacizumab to chemotherapy for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC) significantly improved progression-free survival and response rate versus chemotherapy alone, but not overall survival (OS). We explored the effect of bevacizumab use after disease progression (PD) in patients randomized to chemotherapy alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In AURELIA, 361 women with PROC were randomized to chemotherapy alone or with bevacizumab. Patients initially randomized to chemotherapy were offered bevacizumab after PD. Post hoc analyses assessed efficacy and safety in three subgroups: chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy followed by bevacizumab after PD, and chemotherapy plus bevacizumab at randomization. RESULTS: Of the 182 patients randomized to chemotherapy alone, 72 (40%) received bevacizumab after PD and 110 (60%) never received bevacizumab. There were no significant differences in patient and disease characteristics between these subgroups at baseline or the time of PD. Compared with patients never receiving bevacizumab, the risk of death was significantly reduced in patients receiving bevacizumab either upfront with chemotherapy [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-0.90] or after PD (HR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.43-0.86). The tolerability of bevacizumab was similar with administration upfront or after PD. CONCLUSIONS: Post-PD bevacizumab use may have confounded OS results in AURELIA. In these exploratory analyses of non-randomized subgroups, bevacizumab use, either with chemotherapy or after PD on chemotherapy alone, improved OS compared with no bevacizumab. Combining bevacizumab with chemotherapy at first appearance of platinum resistance maximises the likelihood of patients receiving this active treatment for PROC. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00976911.

Health-related quality of life in women with recurrent ovarian cancer receiving paclitaxel plus trebananib or placebo (TRINOVA-1).

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the influence of treatment on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in 919 women with recurrent ovarian cancer enrolled in the TRINOVA-1 study, a randomized, placebo-controlled phase III study that demonstrated that trebananib 15 mg/kg QW plus weekly paclitaxel significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo plus weekly paclitaxel (7.2 versus 5.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval 0.57-0.77; P < 0.001). PATIENTS AND METHODS: HRQoL was assessed with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovary [FACT-O; comprising FACT-G and the ovarian cancer-specific subscale (OCS)] and EuroQOL EQ-5D instruments before treatment on day 1 of weeks 1, 5, 9, 13, 17, and every 8 weeks thereafter and at the safety follow-up visit. A pattern-mixture model was used to evaluate the influence of patient dropout on FACT-O and OCS scores over time. RESULTS: Of 919 randomized patients, 834 (91%) had a baseline and ≥1 post-baseline HRQoL assessment. At baseline, scores for all instruments were similar for both arms. At 25 weeks, mean ± SD changes from baseline were negligible, with mean ± SD changes typically <1 unit from baseline: -2.4 ± 16.6 in the trebananib arm and -1.6 ± 15.2 in the placebo arm for FACT-O, -0.71 ± 5.5 in the trebananib arm and -0.86 ± 4.9 in the placebo arm for OCS, and -0.02 ± 0.22 in the trebananib arm and 0.02 ± 0.19 in the placebo arm for EQ-5D. Distribution of scores was similar between treatment arms at baseline and over the course of the study. In pattern-mixture models, there was no evidence that patient dropout affected differences in mean FACT-O or OCS scores. Edema had limited effect on either FACT-O or OCS scores in patients with grade ≥2 edema or those with grade 1 or no edema. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that the improvement in PFS among patients in the trebananib arm in the TRINOVA-1 study was achieved without compromising HRQoL. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01204749.

Current clinical practice guidelines on chemotherapy and radiotherapy for the treatment of non-metastatic muscle-invasive urothelial cancer: a systematic review and critical evaluation by the Hellenic Genito-Urinary Cancer Group (HGUCG).

Radical cystectomy is the treatment of choice in localized muscle-invasive urothelial cancer. Nevertheless, relapses are frequent and systemic chemotherapy has been employed in order to reduce this risk. In addition, bladder preservation strategies are appealing. During the last decade, there has been a difficulty in conducting and completing large-scale trials in urothelial cancer. This has resulted in relatively few changes in the existing guidelines. Recent studies have created renewed interest in certain fields, such as the role of chemo-radiotherapy and management of unfit patients. In addition, application of certain guidelines has been limited in everyday practice. We conducted a systematic review of the existing guidelines and recent randomized trials not included in these guidelines, and developed a treatment algorithm, regarding non-surgical therapies for non-metastatic, muscle-invasive urothelial cancer based predominantly on patients' fitness for the available therapeutic modalities.

Outcomes from second-line therapy in long-term responders to first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitor in clear-cell metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Although sequential targeted therapy is standard in patients with metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (m-ccRCC), the choice of drugs and optimal administration sequence have yet to be established. The objective of this study was to explore whether it is preferable to rechallenge a long-term responder to a first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) with a TKI or whether to switch to a mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor (mTORi); to determine whether second-line treatment response depends on duration of first-line response (TD1). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective multicenter study (2004-2011) of 241 consecutive mRCC patients (clear-cell histology) who received a first-line TKI for ≥6 months followed by a second-line TKI (n = 118) or mTORi (n = 123). END POINTS: Progression-free survival (PFS) and time-to-treatment failure (TTF) on second-line therapy. Multivariable full-model: second-line drug, TD1, ECOG-PS before first- and second-line, best objective response (first-line), Fuhrman grade, number of metastatic sites, and presence of bone metastases. Adjustment covariable: International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk score. Multiple propensity score and missing data methods were used. Any correlation between first-line and second-line PFS was investigated using censored quantile regression models (CQRM). RESULTS: Sequence effect in the overall cohort was in favor of the TKI-TKI sequence over the TKI-mTORi sequence on using TD1 as continuous covariable (HR ≈ 0.75 for PFS and TTF). TKI-TKI superiority was attributed in large part to the 11-22 month (TD1) subgroup of patients which displayed significantly better outcomes [HR ≈ 0.5; median PFS (months): 9.4 (5.9-12.2) versus 3.9 (3.0-5.5), P = 0.003; TTF(months): 8.0 (5.5-11.0) versus 3.6 (3.0-4.6), P = 0.009]. Upon full CQRM, long-term second-line responders were more likely to have received a second TKI than an mTORi and to have been long-term responders to first-line TKI. CONCLUSIONS: m-ccRCC patients who remained on first-line TKI between 11 and 22 months benefited from a TKI rechallenge rather than from second-line mTORi.

First-, second-, third-line therapy for mRCC: benchmarks for trial design from the IMDC.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist on outcomes for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with multiple lines of therapy. Benchmarks for survival are required for patient counselling and clinical trial design. METHODS: Outcomes of mRCC patients from the International mRCC Database Consortium database treated with 1, 2, or 3+ lines of targeted therapy (TT) were compared by proportional hazards regression. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated using different population inclusion criteria. RESULTS: In total, 2705 patients were treated with TT of which 57% received only first-line TT, 27% received two lines of TT, and 16% received 3+ lines of TT. Overall survival of patients who received 1, 2, or 3+ lines of TT were 14.9, 21.0, and 39.2 months, respectively, from first-line TT (P<0.0001). On multivariable analysis, 2 lines and 3+ lines of therapy were each associated with better OS (HR=0.738 and 0.626, P<0.0001). Survival outcomes for the subgroups were as follows: for all patients, OS 20.9 months and PFS 7.2 months; for those similar to eligible patients in the first-line ADAPT trial, OS 14.7 months and PFS 5.6 months; for those similar to patients in first-line TIVO-1 trial, OS 24.8 months and PFS 8.2 months; for those similar to patients in second-line INTORSECT trial, OS 13.0 months and PFS 3.9 months; and for those similar to patients in the third-line GOLD trial, OS 18.0 months and PFS 4.4 months. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who are able to receive more lines of TT live longer. Survival benchmarks provide context and perspective when interpreting and designing clinical trials.

Development and validation of a prognostic model in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with sunitinib: a European collaboration.

BACKGROUND: Accurate prediction of outcome for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients receiving targeted therapy is essential. Most of the available models have been developed in patients treated with cytokines, while most of them are fairly complex, including at least five factors. We developed and externally validated a simple model for overall survival (OS) in mRCC. We also studied the recently validated International Database Consortium (IDC) model in our data sets. METHODS: The development cohort included 170 mRCC patients treated with sunitinib. The final prognostic model was selected by uni- and multivariate Cox regression analyses. Risk groups were defined by the number of risk factors and by the 25th and 75th percentiles of the model's prognostic index distribution. The model was validated using an independent data set of 266 mRCC patients (validation cohort) treated with the same agent. RESULTS: Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS), time from diagnosis of RCC and number of metastatic sites were included in the final model. Median OS of patients with 1, 2 and 3 risk factors were: 24.7, 12.8 and 5.9 months, respectively, whereas median OS was not reached for patients with 0 risk factors. Concordance (C) index for internal validation was 0.712, whereas C-index for external validation was 0.634, due to differences in survival especially in poor-risk populations between the two cohorts. Predictive performance of the model was improved after recalibration. Application of the mRCC International Database Consortium (IDC) model resulted in a C-index of 0.574 in the development and 0.576 in the validation cohorts (lower than those recently reported for this model). Predictive ability was also improved after recalibration in this analysis. Risk stratification according to IDC model showed more similar outcomes across the development and validation cohorts compared with our model. CONCLUSION: Our model provides a simple prognostic tool in mRCC patients treated with a targeted agent. It had similar performance with the IDC model, which, however, produced more consistent survival results across the development and validation cohorts. The predictive ability of both models was lower than that suggested by internal validation (our model) or recent published data (IDC model), due to differences between observed and predicted survival among intermediate and poor-risk patients. Our results highlight the importance of external validation and the need for further refinement of existing prognostic models.

Prospective, open-label, randomized, phase III study of two dose-dense regimens MVAC versus gemcitabine/cisplatin in patients with inoperable, metastatic or relapsed urothelial cancer: a Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group study (HE 16/03).

BACKGROUND: The combinations of methotrexate, vinblastine, Adriamycin, cisplatin (Pharmanell, Athens, Greece) (MVAC) or gemcitabine, cisplatin (GC) represent the standard treatment of advanced urothelial cancer (UC). Dose-dense (DD)-MVAC has achieved longer progression-free survival (PFS) than the conventional MVAC. However, the role of GC intensification has not been studied. We conducted a randomized, phase III study comparing a DD-GC regimen with DD-MVAC in advanced UC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and thirty patients were randomly assigned between DD-MVAC: 66 (M 30 mg/m(2), V 3 mg/m(2), A 30 mg/m(2), C 70 mg/m(2) q 2 weeks) and DD-GC 64 (G 2500 mg/m(2), C 70 mg/m(2) q 2 weeks). The median follow-up was 52.1 months (89 events). RESULTS: The median overall survival (OS) and PFS were 19 and 8.5 months for DD-MVAC and 18 and 7.8 months for DD-GC (P = 0.98 and 0.36, respectively). Neutropenic infections were less frequent for DD-GC than for DD-MVAC (0% versus 8%). More patients on DD-GC received at least six cycles of treatment (85% versus 63%, P = 0.011) and the discontinuation rate was lower for DD-GC (3% versus 13%). CONCLUSIONS: Although DD-GC was not superior to DD-MVAC, it was better tolerated. DD-GC could be considered as a reasonable therapeutic option for further study in this patient population. Clinical Trial Number ACTRN12610000845033, www.anzctr.org.au.

Multidisciplinary treatment of early stage endometrial cancer.

Endometrial cancer is a highly curable malignancy when it presents as uterine-confined disease, but the prognosis for metastatic or recurrent endometrial cancer is poor. For those patients which are diagnosed at an early stage, surgery alone may be adequate for cure and clinical outcome is often favorable, with approximately 80 % of cases surviving at 5 years. However, after primary diagnosis and treatment, roughly 20-30% of patients are expected to recur within the following 5 years. Adjuvant treatment for endometrial cancer is not yet clearly defined. FIGO Stage I-III endometrial cancer patients, usually undergo surgery and some of them are offered adjuvant treatment based on risk assessment. Grade, age, stage are considered all independent risk factors for recurrence. Radiotherapy (RT) has been considered the adjuvant treatment of choice for decades, being able to reduce local recurrence rate and improving progression free survival, but without any impact on overall survival. In the last two decades, a shift toward the use of systemic chemotherapy (CT) in addition or instead of radiation has occurred, although few prospective studies have been performed in this field.

VEGF directly suppresses activation of T cells from ascites secondary to ovarian cancer via VEGF receptor type 2.

BACKGROUND: Vascular endothelial growth factor action in tumour angiogenesis is well characterised; nevertheless, it functions as a key element in the promotion of the immune system's evasion by tumours. We sought to investigate the possible direct effect of VEGF on T-cell activation and through which type of VEGF receptor it exerts this effect on cells isolated from ovarian cancer patients' ascites. METHODS: T cells isolated from the ascites of ovarian cancer patients were cultured with anti-CD3 and IL-2, with or without VEGF for 14 days and the number of viable T cells was counted. Cytotoxic activity of cultured T cells and expression of VEGF receptor-2 (VEGFR-2), was assayed. RESULTS: The addition of VEGF in cultures significantly reduced the number and proliferation rate of T cells in a dose-dependent manner and CD3(+) T cells expressed VEGFR-2 on their surface upon activation. Experiments with specific anti-VEGFR-2 antibodies revealed that the direct suppressive effect of VEGF on T-cell proliferation is mediated by VEGFR-2. We also showed that VEGF significantly reduced the cytotoxic activity of T cells. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that ascites-derived T cells secrete VEGF and express VEGFR-2 upon activation. Vascular endothelial growth factor directly suppresses T-cell activation via VEGFR-2.