Prognosticators of survival in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer and ascites.

BACKGROUND: Identification of factors associated with survival after ascites diagnosis in metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) patients may guide treatment decisions and help to maintain quality of life in this highly symptomatic patient collective. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients treated for mPC at the Medical University of Vienna between 2010 and 2019 developing ascites throughout their course of disease were identified by retrospective chart review. General risk factors, metastatic sites, systemic inflammation and liver function parameters, as well as type of treatment after ascites diagnosis were investigated for associations with survival. RESULTS: One hundred and seventeen mPC patients with ascites were included in this study. Median time from mPC to ascites diagnosis was 8.9 months (range 0-99 months) and median overall survival (OS) after ascites diagnosis was 27.4 days (range 21.3-42.6 days). Identified prognostic factors at ascites diagnosis independently associated with an impaired OS were presence of liver metastases [hazard ratio (HR): 2.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13-3.79, P = 0.018), peritoneal carcinomatosis (HR: 1.74, 95% CI 1.11-2.71, P = 0.015), and portal vein obstruction (HR: 2.52, 95% CI 1.29-4.90, P = 0.007). Compared with best supportive care, continuation of systemic therapy after ascites diagnosis was independently associated with survival (HR: 0.35, 95% CI 0.20-0.61, P < 0.001) with a median OS of 62 days (95% CI 51-129 days, P < 0.001) versus 16 days (95% CI 11-24 days), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Liver and peritoneal metastases as well as portal vein obstruction were found to be prognostic factors after ascites diagnosis in mPC patients. Continuation of systemic therapy after ascites diagnosis was associated with a longer OS, which needs to be evaluated in larger clinical trials including quality-of-life assessment.

Clinical risk factors for ascites in metastatic pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Malignant ascites is common in metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) and its management still remains a clinical challenge. Early identification of patients at risk for ascites development may support and guide treatment decisions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data of patients treated for mPC at the Medical University of Vienna between 2010 and 2019 were collected by retrospective chart review. Ascites was defined as clinically relevant accumulation of intraperitoneal fluid diagnosed by ultrasound or computer tomography scan of the abdomen. We investigated the association between general risk factors, metastatic sites, liver function, systemic inflammation as well as portal vein obstruction (PVO) and ascites development. RESULTS: Among 581 patients with mPC included in this study, 122 (21.0%) developed ascites after a median of 8.7 months after diagnosis of metastatic disease. The occurrence of ascites led to an 8.9-fold increased risk of death [confidence interval (CI) 7.2-11, P < 0.001] with a median overall survival of 1 month thereafter. Clinical risk factors for ascites were male sex [hazard ratio (HR) 1.71, CI 1.00-2.90, P = 0.048], peritoneal carcinomatosis (HR 6.79, CI 4.09-11.3, P < 0.001), liver metastases (HR 2.16, CI 1.19-3.91, P = 0.011), an albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) score grade 3 (HR 6.79, CI 2.11-21.8, P = 0.001), PVO (HR 2.28, CI 1.15-4.52, P = 0.019), and an elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) (HR 4.19, CI 1.58-11.1, P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Survival after diagnosis of ascites is very limited in mPC patients. Male sex, liver and peritoneal metastases, impaired liver function, PVO, as well as systemic inflammation were identified as independent risk factors for ascites development in this uniquely large real-life patient cohort.

Development of an alarm symptom-based risk prediction score for localized oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma (VIOLA score).

BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma is a major contributor to global disease burden with poor prognosis even in resectable, regionally limited stages. Feasible prognostic tools are crucial to improve patient management, yet scarce. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Disease-related symptoms, patient, tumour, treatment as well as laboratory parameters at initial diagnosis and overall survival (OS) of patients with stage II and III gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, who were treated between 1990 and 2020 at the Medical University of Vienna, were evaluated in a cross-validation model to develop a feasible risk prediction score. RESULTS: In total, 628 patients were included in this single-centre analysis. The final score ranked from 0 to 10 and included the factors sex (female +1), age, years (30-59 +1, >60 +2), underweight classified by body mass index (+2), location of the tumour (stomach +1), stage (III +2), stenosis in endoscopy (+1) and weight loss (+1). The score was grouped into low- (0-3), medium- (4-6) and high-risk (7+) subgroups. The median OS were 70.3 [95% confidence interval (CI) 51.2-111.8], 23.4 (95% CI 21.2-26.7) and 12.6 (7.0-16.1) months, respectively. The 1-year survival probabilities were 0.88 (95% CI 0.83-0.93), 0.75 (95% CI 0.70-0.79) and 0.54 (95% CI 0.39-0.74), whereas the 5-year survival probabilities were 0.57 (95% CI 0.49-0.66), 0.24 (95% CI 0.20-0.28) and 0.09 (95% CI 0.03-0.28), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The VIennese risk prediction score for Oesophagogastric Localized Adenocarcinoma (VIOLA) risk prediction score poses a feasible tool for the estimation of OS in patients with regionally limited gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma and, thus, may improve patient management in clinical routine. Prospective analyses should be carried out to confirm our findings.

Characteristics of heterosexually-acquired compared to homosexually-acquired HIV and implications for clinical practice: results from the Australian HIV Observational Database.

Heterosexuals living with HIV report feeling additional HIV stigma compared to homosexual men, which may affect clinical outcomes. Yet, beyond routinely collected surveillance data, little is known about the characteristics of individuals who acquire HIV heterosexually and clinical outcomes by mode of sexual acquisition have not been directly compared. Using data from the Australian HIV Observational Database, we compared clinical characteristics of those with heterosexually-acquired (Het-HIV) to homosexually-acquired HIV (Hom-HIV) to investigate any differences and their implications for clinical management. 513 Het-HIV and 1467 Hom-HIV patients were included and contributed 3,127 and 9,457 person-years of follow-up, respectively. Compared with Hom-HIV, Het-HIV were more often born outside Australia (62.5% vs 39.9%, p<0.001), less likely to have Hepatitis C (4.8% vs 7.8%, p=0.029) and had lower median CD4 counts at diagnosis (292 vs 450 cells/µL, p<0.001) and cART initiation (270 vs 340 cells/µL, p<0.001). Despite these lower CD4 counts, there were no significant differences between groups for time to the major clinical endpoints of cART initiation, viral suppression, virological failure or all-cause mortality. Het-HIV had a lower risk of loss-to-follow-up than Hom-HIV (aHR 0.78; 95% CI 0.64-0.95). Further studies examining factors associated with, and interventions to inform retention in care are required.

Cardiovascular disease and diabetes in HIV-positive and HIV-negative gay and bisexual men over the age of 55 years in Australia: insights from the Australian Positive & Peers Longevity Evaluation Study.

OBJECTIVES: As HIV-positive people age, diagnosis and management of comorbidities associated with ageing are of increasing concern. In this study, we aimed to compare the self-reported prevalences of heart disease, stroke, thrombosis and diabetes in older Australian HIV-positive and HIV-negative gay and bisexual men (GBM). METHODS: We analysed data from the Australian Positive & Peers Longevity Evaluation Study (APPLES), a study of a prospectively recruited cross-sectional sample of 228 (51.1%) HIV-positive and 218 (48.9%) HIV-negative GBM, aged ≥ 55 years. Regression methods were used to assess the association of HIV status with self-reported comorbidities. RESULTS: Of 446 patients, 389 [200 (51.4%) HIV-positive] reported their disease history. The reported prevalence of comorbidities was higher in the HIV-positive group than in the HIV-negative group: heart disease, 19.5 versus 12.2%; stroke, 7.5 versus 4.2%; thrombosis, 10.5 versus 4.2%; and diabetes, 15.0 versus 9.0%, respectively. In adjusted analyses, HIV-positive GBM had significantly increased odds of reporting heart disease [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.99; P = 0.03] and thrombosis (aOR 2.87; P = 0.01). In our analysis, HIV status was not significantly associated with either age at diagnosis of heart disease (median 53 years for HIV-positive GBM versus 55 years for HIV-negative GBM; P = 0.64) or 5-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk estimated using the Framingham risk score. CONCLUSIONS: HIV-positive GBM more commonly reported heart disease and thrombosis compared with their HIV-negative peers. These results further highlight the need to understand the impact of HIV on age-related comorbidities in GBM, to guide optimal screening and treatment strategies to reduce the risk of these comorbidities among the HIV-positive population.