Risk factors for cancer of unknown primary: a literature review.

Cancer of Unknown Primary (CUP) is metastatic cancer with an unidentifiable primary tumour origin during life. It remains difficult to study the occurrence and aetiology of CUP. Hitherto, it is unclear whether risk factors are associated with CUP, yet identifying these factors could reveal whether CUP is a specific entity or a cluster of metastasised cancers from various primary tumour origins. Epidemiological studies on possible CUP risk factors were systematically searched in PubMed and Web of Science on February 1st, 2022. Studies, published before 2022, were included if they were observational human-based, provided relative risk estimates, and investigated possible CUP risk factors. A total of 5 case-control and 14 cohort studies were included. There appears to be an increased risk for smoking in relation to CUP. However, limited suggestive evidence was found to link alcohol consumption, diabetes mellitus, and family history of cancer as increased risks for CUP. No conclusive associations could be made for anthropometry, food intake (animal or plant-based), immunity disorders, lifestyle (overall), physical activity, or socioeconomic status and CUP risk. No other CUP risk factors have been studied. This review highlights smoking, alcohol consumption, diabetes mellitus and family history of cancer as CUP risk factors. Yet, there remains insufficient epidemiological evidence to conclude that CUP has its own specific risk factor profile.

Vegetable and fruit consumption and cancer of unknown primary risk: results from the Netherlands cohort study on diet and cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cancer of Unknown Primary (CUP) is a metastatic cancer for which the primary lesion remains unidentifiable during life and little is also known about the modifiable risk factors that contribute to its development. This study investigates whether vegetables and fruits are associated with CUP risk. METHODS: We used data from the prospective Netherlands Cohort Study on Diet and Cancer which includes 120,852 participants aged between 55 and 69 years in 1986. All participants completed a self-administered questionnaire on cancer risk factors at baseline. Cancer follow-up was established through record linkage to the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the Dutch Pathology Registry. As a result, 867 incident CUP cases and 4005 subcohort members were available for case-cohort analyses after 20.3 years of follow-up. Multivariable adjusted hazard ratios were calculated using proportional hazards models. RESULTS: We observed no associations between total vegetable and fruit consumption (combined or as separate groups) and CUP risk. However, there appeared to be an inverse association between the consumption of raw leafy vegetables and CUP. With respect to individual vegetable and fruit items, we found neither vegetable nor fruit items to be associated with CUP risk. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, vegetable and fruit intake were not associated with CUP incidence within this cohort.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus and cancer of unknown primary risk: results from the Netherlands Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is a metastatic malignancy with an unidentifiable primary tumour origin. Previous studies suggest that type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and CUP risk are associated. This study examines the association in greater depth by investigating T2DM status, T2DM duration, T2DM age at diagnosis, and medication that was being used in relation to CUP. METHODS: Data were utilized from the Netherlands Cohort Study, a prospective cohort that includes 120 852 participants aged 55-69 years at baseline in 1986. All participants completed a self-administered questionnaire on cancer risk factors. CUP cases were identified through record linkage with the Netherlands Cancer Registry and Dutch Pathology Registry. After 20.3 years of follow-up, 963 incident CUP cases and 4288 subcohort members were available for case-cohort analyses. Proportional hazards models were employed to estimate multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs). RESULTS: Overall, we observed a nonsignificant positive association between T2DM status and CUP risk [HR, 1.35; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.92-1.99], which increased in women after stratification for sex (HR, 1.55; 95% CI, 0.90-2.64). For participants who were aged less than 50 years at diagnosis of T2DM, a statistically significant positive association was found in relation to CUP (HR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.26-4.65), compared with participants without T2DM. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that there is a nonsignificant positive association between T2DM and CUP risk and that the association became stronger in women in stratified analyses.

Adherence to the World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Research lifestyle recommendations for cancer prevention and Cancer of Unknown Primary risk.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) and American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR) updated their cancer prevention recommendations in 2018. Adherence to these recommendations has been associated with lower cancer risk and mortality. However, adherence in relation to Cancer of Unknown Primary (CUP) risk has not been studied. This study investigates whether adherence to the WCRF/AICR recommendations is associated with CUP risk. METHODS: Data from the prospective Netherlands Cohort Study on diet and cancer was used to measure adherence to the recommendations in relation to CUP risk. The cohort includes 120 852 participants (aged 55-69 years), who completed a self-administered questionnaire on cancer risk factors at baseline. Adherence was investigated with respect to body fatness, physical activity, plant foods, meat consumption and alcohol. Incident CUP cases were identified through record linkage to the Netherlands Cancer Registry and Dutch Pathology Registry. A follow-up of 20.3 years, resulted in 856 incident CUP cases and 3911 subcohort members with complete information available for case-cohort analyses. Multivariable adjusted hazard ratios were estimated using proportional hazards models and were adjusted for age at baseline, sex, cigarette smoking (status, frequency, and duration) and total energy intake. RESULTS: Highest adherence appeared to be associated with decreased CUP risk in the age-sex adjusted model (HR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.62-0.92). After additional adjustment for cigarette smoking (status, frequency, and duration), the association attenuated and was no longer statistically significant. No multiplicative interactions were observed between sex nor smoking status and overall adherence in relation to CUP. CONCLUSION: Within this cohort, highest adherence to the WCRF/AICR recommendations is not statistically significantly associated with decreased CUP risk after multivariable adjustment.

Family history of cancer in first degree relatives and risk of cancer of unknown primary.

OBJECTIVE: Cancer of Unknown Primary (CUP) refers to the presence of metastatic lesions, with no identifiable primary site during the patient's lifetime. Poor survival and lack of available treatment highlight the need to identify potential CUP risk factors. We investigated whether a family history of cancer is associated with increased CUP risk. METHODS: We performed a case cohort analysis using data from the Netherlands Cohort Study, which included a total of 963 CUP cases and 4,288 subcohort members. A Cox Proportional Hazards Regression was used to compare CUP risk in participants who reported to have a family member with cancer to those who did not, whilst adjusting for confounders. RESULTS: In general, we observed no increased CUP risk in those who reported a family history of cancer. CUP risk appeared slightly increased in those who reported cancer in a sibling (HR: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.97-1.38), especially in those with a sister with cancer compared with those without (HR: 1.23, 95% CI: 0.99-1.53), although these findings are not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Having a family history of cancer is not an independent risk factor of CUP.

Meat consumption and cancer of unknown primary (CUP) risk: results from The Netherlands cohort study on diet and cancer.

PURPOSE: Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is a metastasised cancer for which no primary lesion could be identified during life. Research into CUP aetiology with respect to dietary factors is particularly scarce. This study investigates whether meat consumption is associated with CUP risk. METHODS: Data was utilised from the prospective Netherlands cohort study that includes 1,20,852 participants aged 55-69 years. All participants completed a self-administered questionnaire on diet and other cancer risk factors at baseline. Cancer follow-up was established through record linkage to the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the Dutch Pathology Registry. A total of 899 CUP cases and 4111 subcohort members with complete and consistent dietary data were available for case-cohort analyses after 20.3 years of follow-up. Multivariable adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using proportional hazards models. RESULTS: We found a statistically significant positive association with beef and processed meat consumption and CUP risk in women (multivariable adjusted HR Q4 vs. Q1 1.47, 95% CI 1.04-2.07, Ptrend = 0.004 and Q4 vs. Q1 1.53, 95% CI 1.08-2.16, Ptrend = 0.001, respectively), and a non-significant positive association with processed meat consumption and CUP risk in men (multivariable adjusted HR Q4 vs. Q1 1.33, 95% CI 0.99-1.79, Ptrend = 0.15). No associations were observed between red meat (overall), poultry or fish consumption and CUP risk. CONCLUSION: In this cohort, beef and processed meat consumption were positively associated with increased CUP risk in women, whereas a non-significant positive association was observed between processed meat consumption and CUP risk in men.

Alcohol consumption, cigarette smoking and cancer of unknown primary risk: Results from the Netherlands Cohort Study.

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is a metastasised malignancy with no identifiable primary tumour origin. Despite the frequent occurrence and bleak prognosis of CUP, research into its aetiology is scarce. Our study investigates alcohol consumption, tobacco smoking and CUP risk. We used data from the Netherlands Cohort Study, a cohort that includes 120 852 participants aged 55 to 69 years, who completed a self-administered questionnaire on cancer risk factors at baseline. Cancer follow-up was established through record linkage to the Netherlands Cancer Registry and Dutch Pathology Registry. After 20.3 years of follow-up, 963 CUP cases and 4288 subcohort members were available for case-cohort analyses. Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using proportional hazard models. In general, CUP risk increased with higher levels of alcohol intake (Ptrend = .02). The association was more pronounced in participants who drank ≥30 g of ethanol per day (HR: 1.57, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.20-2.05) compared to abstainers. Current smokers were at an increased CUP risk (HR: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.29-1.97) compared to never smokers. We observed that the more the cigarettes or the longer a participant smoked, the higher the CUP risk was (Ptrend = .003 and Ptrend = .02, respectively). Interaction on additive scale was found for participants with the highest exposure categories of alcohol consumption and cigarette smoking frequency and CUP risk. Our findings demonstrate that alcohol consumption and cigarette smoking are associated with increased CUP risk. Lifestyle recommendations for cancer prevention regarding not drinking alcohol and avoiding exposure to smoking are therefore also valid for CUP.

Anthropometry, physical activity and cancer of unknown primary (CUP) risk: Results from the Netherlands cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer of Unknown Primary (CUP) is a metastatic disease for which the primary tumour origin could not be identified during life. Few studies have investigated the risk factors associated with this disease. This study investigates anthropometry, physical activity and CUP risk. METHODS: Data is used from the Netherlands Cohort Study, which includes 120,852 participants aged 55-69 years. All cohort members completed a self-administered questionnaire on cancer risk factors at baseline in 1986. Cancer follow-up was established through record linkage to the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the Dutch Pathology Registry. After a follow-up of 20.3 years, 926 incident CUP cases and 4099 subcohort members were available for case-cohort analyses. Proportional hazards models were used to compute multivariable adjusted hazard ratios (HRs). RESULTS: We found no associations between height, body mass index (BMI) at baseline, BMI at age 20 years, change in BMI since age 20 years, clothing size (trouser/skirt size), or non-occupational physical activity and CUP risk. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that neither anthropometry nor physical activity are associated with the development of CUP.

[Favourable course of cancer of unknown primary]. / Gunstig beloop bij een onbekende primaire tumor.

Favourable course of cancer of unknown primary Background Most patients with cancer of unknown primary have a very poor prognosis. Case description A 61-year-old woman was diagnosed with a cancer of unknown primary that had metastasised to the lymph nodes in the right axilla and the peritoneum. Because she could not be allocated to a treatable sub-group, she was eligible for treatment as part of a clinical trial. Prior to commencing treatment, molecular testing was conducted, the result of which suggested the primary tumour was a melanoma. We subsequently treated the patient with ipilimumab. Four years after diagnosis, there is no evidence of active disease and the patient remains in an excellent state of health. Conclusion Molecular and genetic testing can improve diagnosis and treatment options in patients with CUP. In the near future, PET-CT diagnostics and whole genome sequencing will probably suffice to identify the primary tumour.

A cost analysis of upfront DPYD genotype-guided dose individualisation in fluoropyrimidine-based anticancer therapy.

BACKGROUND: Fluoropyrimidine therapy including capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil can result in severe treatment-related toxicity in up to 30% of patients. Toxicity is often related to reduced activity of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase, the main metabolic fluoropyrimidine enzyme, primarily caused by genetic DPYD polymorphisms. In a large prospective study, it was concluded that upfront DPYD-guided dose individualisation is able to improve safety of fluoropyrimidine-based therapy. In our current analysis, we evaluated whether this strategy is cost saving. METHODS: A cost-minimisation analysis from a health-care payer perspective was performed as part of the prospective clinical trial (NCT02324452) in which patients prior to start of fluoropyrimidine-based therapy were screened for the DPYD variants DPYD*2A, c.2846A>T, c.1679T>G and c.1236G>A and received an initial dose reduction of 25% (c.2846A>T, c.1236G>A) or 50% (DPYD*2A, c.1679T>G). Data on treatment, toxicity, hospitalisation and other toxicity-related interventions were collected. The model compared prospective screening for these DPYD variants with no DPYD screening. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were also performed. RESULTS: Expected total costs of the screening strategy were €2599 per patient compared with €2650 for non-screening, resulting in a net cost saving of €51 per patient. Results of the probabilistic sensitivity and one-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the screening strategy was very likely to be cost saving or worst case cost-neutral. CONCLUSIONS: Upfront DPYD-guided dose individualisation, improving patient safety, is cost saving or cost-neutral but is not expected to yield additional costs. These results endorse implementing DPYD screening before start of fluoropyrimidine treatment as standard of care.

DPYD genotype-guided dose individualisation of fluoropyrimidine therapy in patients with cancer: a prospective safety analysis.

BACKGROUND: Fluoropyrimidine treatment can result in severe toxicity in up to 30% of patients and is often the result of reduced activity of the key metabolic enzyme dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), mostly caused by genetic variants in the gene encoding DPD (DPYD). We assessed the effect of prospective screening for the four most relevant DPYD variants (DPYD*2A [rs3918290, c.1905+1G>A, IVS14+1G>A], c.2846A>T [rs67376798, D949V], c.1679T>G [rs55886062, DPYD*13, I560S], and c.1236G>A [rs56038477, E412E, in haplotype B3]) on patient safety and subsequent DPYD genotype-guided dose individualisation in daily clinical care. METHODS: In this prospective, multicentre, safety analysis in 17 hospitals in the Netherlands, the study population consisted of adult patients (≥18 years) with cancer who were intended to start on a fluoropyrimidine-based anticancer therapy (capecitabine or fluorouracil as single agent or in combination with other chemotherapeutic agents or radiotherapy). Patients with all tumour types for which fluoropyrimidine-based therapy was considered in their best interest were eligible. We did prospective genotyping for DPYD*2A, c.2846A>T, c.1679T>G, and c.1236G>A. Heterozygous DPYD variant allele carriers received an initial dose reduction of 25% (c.2846A>T and c.1236G>A) or 50% (DPYD*2A and c.1679T>G), and DPYD wild-type patients were treated according to the current standard of care. The primary endpoint of the study was the frequency of severe (National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03 grade ≥3) overall fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity across the entire treatment duration. We compared toxicity incidence between DPYD variant allele carriers and DPYD wild-type patients on an intention-to-treat basis, and relative risks (RRs) for severe toxicity were compared between the current study and a historical cohort of DPYD variant allele carriers treated with full dose fluoropyrimidine-based therapy (derived from a previously published meta-analysis). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02324452, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between April 30, 2015, and Dec 21, 2017, we enrolled 1181 patients. 78 patients were considered non-evaluable, because they were retrospectively identified as not meeting inclusion criteria, did not start fluoropyrimidine-based treatment, or were homozygous or compound heterozygous DPYD variant allele carriers. Of 1103 evaluable patients, 85 (8%) were heterozygous DPYD variant allele carriers, and 1018 (92%) were DPYD wild-type patients. Overall, fluoropyrimidine-related severe toxicity was higher in DPYD variant carriers (33 [39%] of 85 patients) than in wild-type patients (231 [23%] of 1018 patients; p=0·0013). The RR for severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity was 1·31 (95% CI 0·63-2·73) for genotype-guided dosing compared with 2·87 (2·14-3·86) in the historical cohort for DPYD*2A carriers, no toxicity compared with 4·30 (2·10-8·80) in c.1679T>G carriers, 2·00 (1·19-3·34) compared with 3·11 (2·25-4·28) for c.2846A>T carriers, and 1·69 (1·18-2·42) compared with 1·72 (1·22-2·42) for c.1236G>A carriers. INTERPRETATION: Prospective DPYD genotyping was feasible in routine clinical practice, and DPYD genotype-based dose reductions improved patient safety of fluoropyrimidine treatment. For DPYD*2A and c.1679T>G carriers, a 50% initial dose reduction was adequate. For c.1236G>A and c.2846A>T carriers, a larger dose reduction of 50% (instead of 25%) requires investigation. Since fluoropyrimidines are among the most commonly used anticancer agents, these findings suggest that implementation of DPYD genotype-guided individualised dosing should be a new standard of care. FUNDING: Dutch Cancer Society.

Use of Systemic Therapy Concurrent With Cranial Radiotherapy for Cerebral Metastases of Solid Tumors.

The incidence of brain metastases of solid tumors is increasing. Local treatment of brain metastases is generally straightforward: cranial radiotherapy (e.g., whole-brain radiotherapy or stereotactic radiosurgery) or resection when feasible. However, treatment becomes more complex when brain metastases occur while other metastases, outside of the central nervous system, are being controlled with systemic therapy (chemotherapeutics, molecular targeted agents, or monoclonal antibodies). It is known that some anticancer agents can increase the risk for neurotoxicity when used concurrently with radiotherapy. Increased neurotoxicity decreases quality of life, which is undesirable in this predominantly palliative patient group. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to identify the compounds that should be temporarily discontinued when cranial radiotherapy is needed.This review summarizes the (neuro)toxicity data for combining systemic therapy (chemotherapeutics, molecular targeted agents, or monoclonal antibodies) with concurrent radiotherapy of brain metastases. Because only a limited amount of high-level data has been published, a risk assessment of each agent was done, taking into account the characteristics of each compound (e.g., lipophilicity) and the microenvironment of brain metastasis. The available trials suggest that only gemcitabine, erlotinib, and vemurafenib induce significant neurotoxicity when used concurrently with cranial radiotherapy. We conclude that for most systemic therapies, the currently available literature does not show an increase in neurotoxicity when these therapies are used concurrently with cranial radiotherapy. However, further studies are needed to confirm safety because there is no high-level evidence to permit definitive conclusions. The Oncologist 2017;22:222-235Implications for Practice: The treatment of symptomatic brain metastases diagnosed while patients are receiving systemic therapy continues to pose a dilemma to clinicians. Will concurrent treatment with cranial radiotherapy and systemic therapy (chemotherapeutics, molecular targeted agents, and monoclonal antibodies), used to control intra- and extracranial tumor load, increase the risk for neurotoxicity? This review addresses this clinically relevant question and evaluates the toxicity of combining systemic therapies with cranial radiotherapy, based on currently available literature, in order to determine the need to and interval to interrupt systemic treatment.

Herpes Encephalitis: A Mortal Complication in a Patient Treated with Immunosuppressive Drugs because of Immune-Related Adverse Events after Ipilimumab Treatment.

Until a few years ago, metastatic melanoma had a poor prognosis with limited treatment options. These therapeutics options and thereby median survival have increased obviously over 5 years with the arrival of immunotherapeutic drugs like ipilimumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab. Nowadays, ipilimumab is often used in patients with metastatic melanoma. In this paper, we report a case of a 68-year-old man who developed, and eventually died of, herpes encephalitis after introducing ipilimumab as treatment for metastatic melanoma. To our knowledge, this is the first report in which herpes encephalitis as a complication after ipilimumab and infliximab treatment is described and we would like to make physicians aware of this possible serious neurological complication, especially when a patient has a history of herpes simplex infection.

Severe fluoropyrimidine toxicity due to novel and rare DPYD missense mutations, deletion and genomic amplification affecting DPD activity and mRNA splicing.

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) is the initial and rate-limiting enzyme in the catabolism of 5-fluorouracil (5FU). Genetic variations in DPD have emerged as predictive risk factors for severe fluoropyrimidine toxicity. Here, we report novel and rare genetic variants underlying DPD deficiency in 9 cancer patients presenting with severe fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity. All patients possessed a strongly reduced DPD activity, ranging from 9 to 53% of controls. Analysis of the DPD gene (DPYD) showed the presence of 21 variable sites including 4 novel and 4 very rare aberrations: 3 missense mutations, 2 splice-site mutations, 1 intronic mutation, a deletion of 21 nucleotides and a genomic amplification of exons 9-12. Two novel/rare variants (c.2843T>C, c.321+1G>A) were present in multiple, unrelated patients. Functional analysis of recombinantly-expressed DPD mutants carrying the p.I948T and p.G284V mutation showed residual DPD activities of 30% and 0.5%, respectively. Analysis of a DPD homology model indicated that the p.I948T and p.G284V mutations may affect electron transfer and the binding of FAD, respectively. cDNA analysis showed that the c.321+1G>A mutation in DPYD leads to skipping of exon 4 immediately upstream of the mutated splice-donor site in the process of DPD pre-mRNA splicing. A lethal toxicity in two DPD patients suggests that fluoropyrimidines combined with other therapies such as radiotherapy might be particularly toxic for DPD deficient patients. Our study advocates a more comprehensive genotyping approach combined with phenotyping strategies for upfront screening for DPD deficiency to ensure the safe administration of fluoropyrimidines.

A phase I-II study on the combination of rapamycin and short course radiotherapy in rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: This phase I/II study sought to determine the safety and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination of rapamycin, an mTOR inhibitor, with short-course radiotherapy in rectal cancer patients. Antitumor activity, changes in metabolic activity and perfusion on imaging, and changes in phosphorylation status of the mTOR pathway were also assessed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with primary resectable rectal cancer were treated with short-course hypofractionated radiotherapy (5×5 Gy) combined with oral rapamycin 1 week before and during radiotherapy, followed by surgical resection. RESULTS: Thirteen patients were entered in phase I. One patient developed a dose-limiting toxicity, consisting of a grade 4 leak and grade 4 bleeding. Because of an unexpected high rate of grade 3 postoperative toxicity, it was decided to treat patients with delayed surgery in phase II. Primary endpoint for phase II was tumor blood flow (K(trans)) assessed by perfusion CT. Thirty-one patients were treated with the MTD of 6 mg rapamycin daily. One patient (3%) developed a pathological complete response (pCR) and 3 patients (10%) had a ypT1N0 tumor at the time of resection. No change in tumor perfusion was observed on perfusion CT, but a significant decrease of metabolic activity was found on PET-scan. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of short-course radiotherapy and rapamycin turned out to be feasible, provided that the interval between neo-adjuvant treatment and surgical resection is at least 6 weeks. Although from this cohort no clear increase in pCR could be observed, a clear metabolic response after rapamycin run-in was observed, indicating a biological activity of this drug in rectal cancer.

Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone in high-risk patients with resectable colorectal liver metastases: the CHARISMA randomized multicenter clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Efforts to improve the outcome of liver surgery by combining curative resection with chemotherapy have failed to demonstrate definite overall survival benefit. This may partly be due to the fact that these studies often involve strict inclusion criteria. Consequently, patients with a high risk profile as characterized by Fong's Clinical Risk Score (CRS) are often underrepresented in these studies. Conceptually, this group of patients might benefit the most from chemotherapy. The present study evaluates the impact of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk patients with primary resectable colorectal liver metastases, without extrahepatic disease. Our hypothesis is that adding neo-adjuvant chemotherapy to surgery will provide an improvement in overall survival (OS) in patients with a high-risk profile. METHODS/DESIGN: CHARISMA is a multicenter, randomized, phase III clinical trial. Patients will be randomized to either surgery alone (standard treatment, arm A) or to 6 cycles of neo-adjuvant oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy, followed by surgery (arm B). Patients must be ≥ 18 years of age with liver metastases of histologically confirmed primary colorectal carcinoma. Patients with extrahepatic metastases are excluded. Liver metastases must be deemed primarily resectable. Only patients with a CRS of 3-5 are eligible. The primary study endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints are progression free survival (PFS), quality of life, morbidity of resection, treatment response on neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, and whether CEA levels can predict treatment response. DISCUSSION: CHARISMA is a multicenter, randomized, phase III clinical trial that will provide an answer to the question if adding neo-adjuvant chemotherapy to surgery will improve OS in a well-defined high-risk patient group with colorectal liver metastases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The CHARISMA is registered at European Union Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT), number: 2013-004952-39 , and in the "Netherlands national Trial Register (NTR), number: 4893.

Maintenance treatment with capecitabine and bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer (CAIRO3): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group.

BACKGROUND: The optimum duration of first-line treatment with chemotherapy in combination with bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer is unknown. The CAIRO3 study was designed to determine the efficacy of maintenance treatment with capecitabine plus bevacizumab versus observation. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial, we recruited patients in 64 hospitals in the Netherlands. We included patients older than 18 years with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer, with stable disease or better after induction treatment with six 3-weekly cycles of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab (CAPOX-B), WHO performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate bone marrow, liver, and renal function. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either maintenance treatment with capecitabine and bevacizumab (maintenance group) or observation (observation group). Randomisation was done centrally by minimisation, with stratification according to previous adjuvant chemotherapy, response to induction treatment, WHO performance status, serum lactate dehydrogenase concentration, and treatment centre. Both patients and investigators were aware of treatment assignment. We assessed disease status every 9 weeks. On first progression (defined as PFS1), patients in both groups were to receive the induction regimen of CAPOX-B until second progression (PFS2), which was the study's primary endpoint. All endpoints were calculated from the time of randomisation. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00442637. FINDINGS: Between May 30, 2007, and Oct 15, 2012, we randomly assigned 558 patients to either the maintenance group (n=279) or the observation group (n=279). Median follow-up was 48 months (IQR 36-57). The primary endpoint of median PFS2 was significantly improved in patients on maintenance treatment, and was 8·5 months in the observation group and 11·7 months in the maintenance group (HR 0·67, 95% CI 0·56-0·81, p<0·0001). This difference remained significant when any treatment after PFS1 was considered. Maintenance treatment was well tolerated, although the incidence of hand-foot syndrome was increased (64 [23%] patients with hand-foot skin reaction during maintenance). The global quality of life did not deteriorate during maintenance treatment and was clinically not different between treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: Maintenance treatment with capecitabine plus bevacizumab after six cycles of CAPOX-B in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer is effective and does not compromise quality of life. FUNDING: Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG). The DCCG received financial support for the study from the Commissie Klinische Studies (CKS) of the Dutch Cancer Foundation (KWF), Roche, and Sanofi-Aventis.

Single-agent bevacizumab or lomustine versus a combination of bevacizumab plus lomustine in patients with recurrent glioblastoma (BELOB trial): a randomised controlled phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for recurrent glioblastoma are scarce, with second-line chemotherapy showing only modest activity against the tumour. Despite the absence of well controlled trials, bevacizumab is widely used in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma. Nonetheless, whether the high response rates reported after treatment with this drug translate into an overall survival benefit remains unclear. We report the results of the first randomised controlled phase 2 trial of bevacizumab in recurrent glioblastoma. METHODS: The BELOB trial was an open-label, three-group, multicentre phase 2 study undertaken in 14 hospitals in the Netherlands. Adult patients (≥18 years of age) with a first recurrence of a glioblastoma after temozolomide chemoradiotherapy were randomly allocated by a web-based program to treatment with oral lomustine 110 mg/m(2) once every 6 weeks, intravenous bevacizumab 10 mg/kg once every 2 weeks, or combination treatment with lomustine 110 mg/m(2) every 6 weeks and bevacizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Randomisation of patients was stratified with a minimisation procedure, in which the stratification factors were centre, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and age. The primary outcome was overall survival at 9 months, analysed by intention to treat. A safety analysis was planned after the first ten patients completed two cycles of 6 weeks in the combination treatment group. This trial is registered with the Nederlands Trial Register (www.trialregister.nl, number NTR1929). FINDINGS: Between Dec 11, 2009, and Nov 10, 2011, 153 patients were enrolled. The preplanned safety analysis was done after eight patients had been treated, because of haematological adverse events (three patients had grade 3 thrombocytopenia and two had grade 4 thrombocytopenia) which reduced bevacizumab dose intensity; the lomustine dose in the combination treatment group was thereafter reduced to 90 mg/m(2). Thus, in addition to the eight patients who were randomly assigned to receive bevacizumab plus lomustine 110 mg/m(2), 51 patients were assigned to receive bevacizumab alone, 47 to receive lomustine alone, and 47 to receive bevacizumab plus lomustine 90 mg/m(2). Of these patients, 50 in the bevacizumab alone group, 46 in the lomustine alone group, and 44 in the bevacizumab and lomustine 90 mg/m(2) group were eligible for analyses. 9-month overall survival was 43% (95% CI 29-57) in the lomustine group, 38% (25-51) in the bevacizumab group, 59% (43-72) in the bevacizumab and lomustine 90 mg/m(2) group, 87% (39-98) in the bevacizumab and lomustine 110 mg/m(2) group, and 63% (49-75) for the combined bevacizumab and lomustine groups. After the reduction in lomustine dose in the combination group, the combined treatment was well tolerated. The most frequent grade 3 or worse toxicities were hypertension (13 [26%] of 50 patients in the bevacizumab group, three [7%] of 46 in the lomustine group, and 11 [25%] of 44 in the bevacizumab and lomustine 90 mg/m(2) group), fatigue (two [4%], four [9%], and eight [18%]), and infections (three [6%], two [4%], and five [11%]). At the time of this analysis, 144/148 (97%) of patients had died and three (2%) were still on treatment. INTERPRETATION: The combination of bevacizumab and lomustine met prespecified criteria for assessment of this treatment in further phase 3 studies. However, the results in the bevacizumab alone group do not justify further studies of this treatment. FUNDING: Roche Nederland and KWF Kankerbestrijding.

Lactate dehydrogenase as a selection criterion for ipilimumab treatment in metastatic melanoma.

INTRODUCTION: Ipilimumab, a cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 blocking antibody, has improved overall survival (OS) in metastatic melanoma in phase III trials. However, about 80 % of patients fail to respond, and no predictive markers for benefit from therapy have been identified. We analysed a 'real world' population of patients treated with ipilimumab to identify markers for treatment benefit. METHODS: Patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma were treated in the Netherlands (NL) and the United Kingdom (UK) with ipilimumab at 3 mg/kg. Baseline characteristics and peripheral blood parameters were assessed, and patients were monitored for the occurrence of adverse events and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 166 patients were treated in the Netherlands. Best overall response and disease control rates were 17 and 35 %, respectively. Median follow-up was 17.9 months, with a median progression-free survival of 2.9 months. Median OS was 7.5 months, and OS at 1 year was 37.8 % and at 2 years was 22.9 %. In a multivariate model, baseline serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) was demonstrated to be the strongest predictive factor for OS. These findings were validated in an independent cohort of 64 patients from the UK. CONCLUSION: In both the NL and UK cohorts, long-term benefit of ipilimumab treatment was unlikely for patients with baseline serum LDH greater than twice the upper limit of normal. In the absence of prospective data, clinicians treating melanoma may wish to consider the data presented here to guide patient selection for ipilimumab therapy.

Outcomes of extended versus limited indications for patients undergoing a liver resection for colorectal cancer liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Currently, resection criteria for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRCLM) are only limited by remnant liver function. Morbidity and survival after a partial hepatectomy with limited or extended indication criteria were compared. METHODS/DESIGN: Between 1991 and 2010, patients undergoing a liver resection for CRCLM with limited (n = 169) or extended indication criteria (n = 129) were retrospectively identified in a prospectively collected single-centre database. Limited indication criteria were defined as less than three unilateral, not centrally located liver metastases in the absence of extra hepatic metastases. The extended criteria were only limited by predicted remnant liver volume and patients fitness. Data on co-morbidity, resection margin, short- and long-term morbidity, disease-free (DFS) and overall survival were compared. RESULTS: Patients with limited indications had less major complications (19.5% vs. 33.1%, P < 0.01), longer overall survival of 68.8 months [confidence interval (CI) 46.5-91.1] vs. 41.4 months (CI 33.4-49.0, P ≤ 0.001) and longer median DFS of 22.0 months [confidence interval (CI) 15.8-28.2] vs 10.2 months (CI 8.4-11.9, P < 0.001) compared with the extended indication group. Cure rates, defined as 10-year DFS, were 35.5% and 15.8%, respectively. Fewer patients in the extended indication group underwent an R0 resection (92.9% vs. 77.5%, P < 0.001). Only 17% of all R1 resected patients had recurrences at the transection plane. CONCLUSION: A partial hepatectomy for CRCLM with extended indications seems justified but is associated with higher complication rates, earlier recurrence and lower overall survival compared with limited indications. However, the median 5-year survival was substantial and a cure was achieved in 15.8% of patients.