Adjuvant Hyperthermic Intravesical Chemotherapy in Intermediate- and High-Risk Non-muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is a frequently diagnosed neoplasm, which is typically managed with transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) eventually followed by intravesical therapies. Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) is used as first-line adjuvant treatment in high- (HR) and intermediate-risk (IR) NMIBC, although, in the latter, mitomycin C (MMC) may also be used. Multiple limitations to the use of BCG encouraged the search for therapeutic alternatives. In this context, hyperthermic intravesical chemotherapy with MMC (HIVEC-MMC) emerged as a promising therapy in the adjuvant setting for NMIBC. The aim of our study was to evaluate the tolerability, compliance, and survival outcomes of HIVEC-MMC in patients with IR- and HR-NMIBC. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective analysis of IR- and HR- NMIBC patients who received HIVEC-MMC after TURBT between August 2018 and August 2022. Levels of risk stratification were defined using the European Association of Urology (EAU) criteria. The protocol consisted of four weekly HIVEC-MMC instillations (induction) followed by six monthly instillations (maintenance). The primary outcomes were to evaluate the tolerability and compliance with the HIVEC-MMC protocol and secondary outcomes were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). For the purpose of statistical analysis, methods of descriptive statistics, survival analysis (Kaplan-Meier estimation), and multivariate analysis (Cox regression, and binary logistic regression) were used. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients were enrolled with a median age of 67.9 (34.4-83.5) years old. In this cohort, 40 patients (70.2%) had primary tumors. At the time of referral for HIVEC-MMC, the majority of the patients had IR-NMIBC (n= 33, 57.9%). A total of 41 patients (71.9%) completed the HIVEC-MMC protocol. Disease recurrence and adverse events (AEs) were the most common reasons to stop the protocol. After a median follow-up of 31 months (95% CI, 5.0-54.0), 32 patients (61.4%) were disease-free, 22 (38.6%) experienced recurrent disease and six patients (10.5%) died, although only one death was directly attributable to bladder cancer. The median DFS was 42 months (95% CI, 28.0-56.0). Completion of the HIVEC-MMC maintenance phase protocol stood as a predictive factor for DFS (44 months, 95% CI 29.1-58.9 vs. 14 months, 95% CI 0.0-29.6, p < 0.001; HR 4.48, 95% CI 1.65-12.15). The median OS was not reached; the 24- and 48-month OS were 92.6% and 82.7%, respectively. EAU risk group, ECOG-PS, and completion of HIVEC protocol were found to be significant predictive factors of OS but lost their significance on multivariate analysis. However, if we exclude those who experienced recurrence during the maintenance phase protocol, treatment completion had a significant positive impact on OS (HR: 42.8, 95% CI 1.75-1045.072, p= 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that HIVEC is a secure and well-tolerated treatment with promising efficacy data, making this therapeutic approach a feasible option in IR- and HR-NMIBC patients, mainly in those who cannot tolerate or have contraindications to BCG therapy, but also as an alternative during BCG shortages.

HER2 Status in RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Portuguese Study.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second-most deadly cancer worldwide. However, there remains a scarcity of precision treatments available for this type of cancer. Amplification or overexpression of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2+) is a well-established therapeutic target in gastric and breast cancer. HER2 is positive in approximately 5% of CRC cases and has been implicated in resistance to therapy with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibodies. The aim of this study was to evaluate HER2 status in RAS and BRAF wild-type metastatic CRC (mCRC) and its correlation with survival outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-center retrospective analysis of RAS and BRAF wild-type mCRC patients undergoing systemic treatment was conducted from July 2014 to September 2020. Tissue HER2 status was determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and/or fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and/or chromogenic in situ hybridization (CISH). HER2+ was defined as IHC3 (+) or IHC2 (+) through FISH or CISH (+). RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients were included. The median age of all the included patients was 64 years (33-82). Four patients had HER2+ tumors (7%). Four patients had HER2+ tumors (7%). The majority of HER2+ mCRC cases were males (n=3) and left-sided CRC (n=3). All patients received FOLFIRI plus cetuximab as first-line treatment. At the median follow-up of 24.0 months, patients with HER2-negative mCRC presented with a median overall survival (mOS) of 39.4 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 32.7-46.0) and the four patients with HER2+ mCRC had a mOS of 20.4 months (95% CI; 9.5-31.3; p=0.07). In HER2-negative patients, the median PFS (mPFS) was 11.3 months (95% CI; 9.2-13.4) vsHER2-positive patients with a mPFS of 10.9 months (95% CI; 1.3-20.4; p=0.47). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first study reporting HER2+ in mCRC patients in a Portuguese population and the HER2+ rate was consistent with previous studies. Our study suggests that HER2+ may potentially be a marker that is able to predict poor prognosis in RAS and BRAF wild-type mCRC.

Immune Response to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Cancer Patients: A Prospective Study.

Introduction Cancer patients on active treatment are at increased risk of developing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), making effective immunization of the utmost importance. However, the effectiveness of vaccination in this population is still unclear. This study aims to evaluate the response against COVID-19 in a cohort of patients with active cancer under immunosuppressive therapy. Methods This was a prospective, cross-sectional, single-center study that included patients with cancer under immunosuppressive therapy vaccinated against COVID-19 between April and September 2021. Exclusion criteria were: previous known severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, single-dose vaccine or incomplete vaccination scheme. Immunoglobulin G (IgG) anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels were assessed using 35.2 binding antibody units (BAU)/mL as the positive cut-off. Assessments were performed 14-31 days after the first and second dose and three months after the second dose. Results A total of 103 patients were included. The median age was 60 years. Most patients were being treated for gastrointestinal cancer (n=38, 36.9%), breast cancer (n=33, 32%) or head and neck cancer (n=18, 17.5%). At evaluation, 72 patients (69.9%) were being treated with palliative intent. The majority were being treated with chemotherapy (CT) alone (57.3%). At the first assessment, levels of circulating SARS-CoV-2 IgG consistent with seroconversion were present in 49 patients (47.6%). At the time of the second assessment, 91% (n=100) achieved seroconversion. Three months after the second dose, 83% (n=70) maintained levels of circulating SARS-CoV-2 IgG consistent with seroconversion. In this study, no SARS-CoV-2 infection was reported in the study population. Conclusions Our findings suggest that this group of patients had a satisfactory COVID-19 immunization response. Although promising, this study should be replicated on a wider scale in order to validate these findings.

The effect of prognostic factors at baseline on the efficacy of trifluridine/tipiracil in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: A Portuguese exploratory analysis.

BACKGROUND: The RECOURSE trial supported trifluridine/tipiracil as a treatment option in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Subsequent analysis demonstrated that low tumour burden and indolent disease are good prognosis factors improving progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). This study aimed to evaluate the impact of prognosis group in the OS, PFS and safety of trifluridine/tipiracil in patients with mCRC. METHODS: Single-centre, retrospective, and observational study of patients with mCRC who started trifluridine/tipiracil between February 2018 and July 2019. Patients were divided into good prognosis characteristics (GPC) [low tumour burden (less than 3 metastasis site) and indolent disease (≥18 months from first metastasis diagnosis)] and poor prognostic characteristics (PPC) group [high tumour burden (3 or more metastasis sites) and/or aggressive disease (<18 months since the first metastasis diagnosis)]. RESULTS: Median age was 67 years (48-82), 67.3% of the patients were male, and 65.3% had stage IV disease at baseline. Overall, median OS was 7.5 months (95%CI:5.7-9.3). Twenty-two patients (44.9%) presented GPC and 29 (59.1%) had PPC. GPC patients had longer median OS [11.4 (95%CI:6.2-16.7)] versus 3.9 months [(95%CI: 3.3-4.6),p < 0.0001] and PFS [4.9 (95%CI:3.0-6.9) versus 2.6 months (95%CI:2.2-2.8),p < 0.0001]. These differences were more pronounced in GPC patients with no liver metastasis. Grade ≥3 adverse events incidence didn't vary between GPC and PPC subgroups. CONCLUSION: Our study validates the improved trifluridine/tipiracil efficacy in patients with GPC in comparison with PPC while maintaining a well-tolerated safety profile. Indolent disease, low tumour burden and the absence of liver metastasis were shown to be good prognosis factors influencing sustained response to trifluridine/tipiracil.

Five-year review of an international clinical research-training program.

The exponential increase in clinical research has profoundly changed medical sciences. Evidence that has accumulated in the past three decades from clinical trials has led to the proposal that clinical care should not be based solely on clinical expertise and patient values, and should integrate robust data from systematic research. As a consequence, clinical research has become more complex and methods have become more rigorous, and evidence is usually not easily translated into clinical practice. Therefore, the instruction of clinical research methods for scientists and clinicians must adapt to this new reality. To address this challenge, a global distance-learning clinical research-training program was developed, based on collaborative learning, the pedagogical goal of which was to develop critical thinking skills in clinical research. We describe and analyze the challenges and possible solutions of this course after 5 years of experience (2008-2012) with this program. Through evaluation by students and faculty, we identified and reviewed the following challenges of our program: 1) student engagement and motivation, 2) impact of heterogeneous audience on learning, 3) learning in large groups, 4) enhancing group learning, 5) enhancing social presence, 6) dropouts, 7) quality control, and 8) course management. We discuss these issues and potential alternatives with regard to our research and background.