Limiting systemic endocrine overtreatment in postmenopausal breast cancer patients with an ultralow classification of the 70-gene signature.

PURPOSE: Guidelines recommend endocrine treatment for estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancers for up to 10 years. Earlier data suggest that the 70-gene signature (MammaPrint) has potential to select patients that have an excellent survival without chemotherapy and limited or no tamoxifen treatment. The aim was to validate the 70-gene signature ultralow-risk classification for endocrine therapy decision making. METHODS: In the IKA trial, postmenopausal patients with non-metastatic breast cancer had been randomized between no or limited adjuvant tamoxifen treatment without receiving chemotherapy. For this secondary analysis, FFPE tumor material was obtained of ER+HER2- patients with 0-3 positive lymph nodes and tested for the 70-gene signature. Distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI) long-term follow-up data were collected. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate DRFI, stratified by lymph node status, for the three predefined 70-gene signature risk groups. RESULTS: A reliable 70-gene signature could be obtained for 135 patients. Of the node-negative and node-positive patients, respectively, 20% and 13% had an ultralow-risk classification. No DRFI events were observed for node-negative patients with an ultralow-risk score in the first 10 years. The 10-year DRFI was 90% and 66% in the low-risk (but not ultralow) and high-risk classified node-negative patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: These survival analyses indicate that the postmenopausal node-negative ER+HER2- patients with an ultralow-risk 70-gene signature score have an excellent 10-year DRFI after surgery with a median of 1 year of endocrine treatment. This is in line with published results of the STO-3-randomized clinical trial and supports the concept that it is possible to reduce the duration of endocrine treatment in selected patients.

Clinical benefit of systemic therapies for recurrent ovarian cancer-ESMO-MCBS scores.

BACKGROUND: Licensed systemic treatment options for platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer are platinum-based chemotherapy and maintenance treatment with bevacizumab and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. For platinum-resistant disease, several non-platinum options are available. We aimed to assess the clinical benefit of these treatments according to the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO)-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A PubMed search was carried out including all studies evaluating systemic treatment of recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer, from 1990 onwards. Randomised trials with an adequate comparator and design showing a statistically significant benefit of the study arm were independently scored by two blinded observers using the ESMO-MCBS. RESULTS: A total of 1127 papers were identified, out of which 61 reported results of randomised trials of sufficient quality. Nineteen trials showed statistically significant results and the studied treatments were graded according to ESMO-MCBS. Only three treatments showed substantial benefit (score of 4 on a scale of 1-5) according to the ESMO-MCBS: platinum-based chemotherapy with paclitaxel in the platinum-sensitive setting and the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy in the platinum-resistant setting. The WEE1 inhibitor adavosertib (not licensed) also scores a 4, based on a recent small phase II study. Assessment of quality-of-life data and toxicity using the ESMO-MCBS showed to be complex, which should be taken into account in using this score for clinical decision making. CONCLUSION: Only a few licensed systemic therapies for recurrent ovarian cancer show substantial clinical benefit based on ESMO-MCBS scores. Trials demonstrating overall survival benefit are sparse.

Adjuvant chemotherapy is superior to chemoradiation after D2 surgery for gastric cancer in the per-protocol analysis of the randomized CRITICS trial.

BACKGROUND: The Intergroup 0116 and the MAGIC trials changed clinical practice for resectable gastric cancer in the Western world. In these trials, overall survival improved with post-operative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and perioperative chemotherapy (CT). Intention-to-treat analysis in the CRITICS trial of post-operative CT or post-operative CRT did not show a survival difference. The current study reports on the per-protocol (PP) analysis of the CRITICS trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The CRITICS trial was a randomized, controlled trial in which 788 patients with stage Ib-Iva resectable gastric or esophagogastric adenocarcinoma were included. Before start of preoperative CT, patients from the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark were randomly assigned to receive post-operative CT or CRT. For the current analysis, only patients who started their allocated post-operative treatment were included. Since it is uncertain that the two treatment arms are balanced in such PP analysis, adjusted proportional hazards regression analysis and inverse probability weighted analysis were used to minimize the risk of selection bias and to estimate and compare overall and event-free survival. RESULTS: Of the 788 patients, 478 started post-operative treatment according to protocol, 233 (59%) patients in the CT group and 245 (62%) patients in the CRT group. Patient and tumor characteristics between the groups before start of the post-operative treatment were not different. After a median follow-up of 6.7 years since the start of post-operative treatment, the 5-year overall survival was 57.9% (95% confidence interval: 51.4% to 64.3%) in the CT group versus 45.5% (95% confidence interval: 39.2% to 51.8%) in the CRT group (adjusted hazard ratio CRT versus CT: 1.62 (1.24-2.12), P = 0.0004). Inverse probability weighted analysis resulted in similar hazard ratios. CONCLUSION: After adjustment for all known confounding factors, the PP analysis of patients who started the allocated post-operative treatment in the CRITICS trial showed that the CT group had a significantly better 5-year overall survival than the CRT group (NCT00407186).

Effects of checkpoint inhibitors in advanced non-small cell lung cancer at population level from the National Immunotherapy Registry.

OBJECTIVE: Phase III studies of checkpoint inhibitors changed the therapeutic landscape for lung cancer. In 2015 the Dutch Society of Chest Physicians (NVALT) introduced a national immunotherapy registry for patients with lung cancer; quality standards for hospitals were implemented. At population level we studied clinical benefit in daily practice and in patients who are underrepresented in phase III trials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From the initial introduction of checkpoint inhibitors in the Netherlands patients were centrally registered. Educational programs and quality control were provided under supervision of NVALT. The largest immunotherapy providing hospitals were compared to hospitals who provided less checkpoint inhibitors as marker of experience. Patients characteristics, treatment and side effects, response rate and survival were studied. RESULTS: A total of 2676 patients were registered, 2302 with follow up data were evaluated. Between October 2015 and December 2017 a gradual increase from 12 to 30 qualified hospitals showed no major toxicity differences. Toxicity led to a hospital admission rate of 9.1 with an average duration of 10.4 days. Overall tumor response was 21.8 % and median overall survival 12.6 months. Overall survival was not significantly different for patients aged ≥ 75 years, those having brain metastases or selected auto-immune diseases before start checkpoint inhibitors compared to younger patients or those without, respectively. Survival outcomes were worse in patients with PS 2+, non-smokers, and patients who received any palliative radiotherapy (HR 2.1, 95 % CI 1.7-2.7; 1.3, 95 % CI 1.0-1.6 and 1.2, 95 % CI 1.1-1.4, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Changes in the therapeutic landscape did not lead to major differences in quality of care between hospitals. Elderly patients, those with brain metastases or selected auto-immune disease underrepresented in clinical trials did not do worse on checkpoint inhibitors, except for those with PS 2 + .

Health-related quality of life after prophylactic cranial irradiation for stage III non-small cell lung cancer patients: Results from the NVALT-11/DLCRG-02 phase III study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The NVALT-11/DLCRG-02 phase III trial (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01282437) showed that, after standard curative intent treatment, prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) decreased the incidence of symptomatic brain metastases (BM) in stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients compared to observation. In this study we assessed the impact of PCI on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). In addition, an exploratory analysis was performed to assess the impact of neurocognitive symptoms and symptomatic BM on HRQoL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Stage III NSCLC patients were randomized between PCI and observation. HRQoL was measured using the EuroQol 5D (EQ-5D-3L), EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BN20 instruments at completion of standard curative intent treatment and 4 weeks, 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months thereafter. Generalized linear mixed effects (GLM) models were used to assess the impact of PCI compared to observation over time on three HRQoL metrics: the EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status and the EQ-5D-3L utility and visual analogue scale (EQ VAS) scores. RESULTS: In total, 86 and 88 patients were included in the PCI and observation arm, with a median follow-up of 48.5 months (95% CI 39-54 months). Baseline mean HRQoL scores were comparable between the PCI and observation arm for the three HRQoL metrics. In the GLM models, none of the HRQoL metrics were clinically relevant or statistically significantly different between the PCI and the observation arm (p-values ranged between 0.641 and 0.914). CONCLUSION: No statistically significant nor a clinically relevant impact of PCI on HRQoL was observed.

Prognostic significance of age in 5631 patients with Wilms tumour prospectively registered in International Society of Paediatric Oncology (SIOP) 93-01 and 2001.

BACKGROUND: To enhance risk stratification for Wilms tumour (WT) in a pre-operative chemotherapy setting, we explored the prognostic significance and optimal age cutoffs in patients treated according to International Society of Paediatric Oncology Renal Tumour Study Group (SIOP-RTSG) protocols. METHODS: Patients(6 months-18 years) with unilateral WT were selected from prospective SIOP 93-01 and 2001 studies(1993-2016). Martingale residual analysis was used to explore optimal age cutoffs. Outcome according to age was analyzed by uni- and multivariable analysis, adjusted for sex, biopsy(yes/no), stage, histology and tumour volume at surgery. RESULTS: 5631 patients were included; median age was 3.4 years(IQR: 2-5.1). Estimated 5-year event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were 85%(95%CI 83.5-85.5) and 93%(95%CI 92.0-93.4). Martingale residual plots detected no optimal age cutoffs. Multivariable analysis showed lower EFS with increasing age(linear trend P<0.001). Using previously described age categories, EFS was lower for patients aged 2-4(HR 1.34, P = 0.02), 4-10(HR 1.83, P<0.0001) and 10-18 years(HR 1.74, P = 0.01) as compared to patients aged 6 months-2 years. OS was lower for patients 4-10 years(HR 1.67, P = 0.01) and 10-18 years(HR 1.87, P = 0.04), but not for 2-4 years(HR 1.29, P = 0.23). Higher stage, histological risk group and tumour volume were independent adverse prognostic factors. CONCLUSION: Although optimal age cutoffs could not be identified, we demonstrated the prognostic significance of age as well as previously described cutoffs for EFS (2 and 4 years) and OS (4 years) in children with WT treated with pre-operative chemotherapy. These findings encourage the consideration of age in the design of future SIOP-RTSG protocols.

Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy versus palliative systemic chemotherapy in stomach cancer patients with peritoneal dissemination, the study protocol of a multicentre randomised controlled trial (PERISCOPE II).

BACKGROUND: At present, palliative systemic chemotherapy is the standard treatment in the Netherlands for gastric cancer patients with peritoneal dissemination. In contrast to lymphatic and haematogenous dissemination, peritoneal dissemination may be regarded as locoregional spread of disease. Administering cytotoxic drugs directly into the peritoneal cavity has an advantage over systemic chemotherapy since high concentrations can be delivered directly into the peritoneal cavity with limited systemic toxicity. The combination of a radical gastrectomy with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has shown promising results in patients with gastric cancer in Asia. However, the results obtained in Asian patients cannot be extrapolated to Western patients. The aim of this study is to compare the overall survival between patients with gastric cancer with limited peritoneal dissemination and/or tumour positive peritoneal cytology treated with palliative systemic chemotherapy, and those treated with gastrectomy, CRS and HIPEC after neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy. METHODS: In this multicentre randomised controlled two-armed phase III trial, 106 patients will be randomised (1:1) between palliative systemic chemotherapy only (standard treatment) and gastrectomy, CRS and HIPEC (experimental treatment) after 3-4 cycles of systemic chemotherapy.Patients with gastric cancer are eligible for inclusion if (1) the primary cT3-cT4 gastric tumour including regional lymph nodes is considered to be resectable, (2) limited peritoneal dissemination (Peritoneal Cancer Index < 7) and/or tumour positive peritoneal cytology are confirmed by laparoscopy or laparotomy, and (3) systemic chemotherapy was given (prior to inclusion) without disease progression. DISCUSSION: The PERISCOPE II study will determine whether gastric cancer patients with limited peritoneal dissemination and/or tumour positive peritoneal cytology treated with systemic chemotherapy, gastrectomy, CRS and HIPEC have a survival benefit over patients treated with palliative systemic chemotherapy only. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT03348150 ; registration date November 2017; first enrolment November 2017; expected end date December 2022; trial status: Ongoing.

Adjuvant dose-dense doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide versus docetaxel-doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide for high-risk breast cancer: First results of the randomised MATADOR trial (BOOG 2004-04).

BACKGROUND: Dose-dense administration of chemotherapy and the addition of taxanes to anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy have improved breast cancer survival substantially. However, clinical trials directly comparing the additive value of taxanes with dose-dense anthracycline-based chemotherapy are lacking. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the multicentre, randomised, biomarker discovery Microarray Analysis in breast cancer to Tailor Adjuvant Drugs Or Regimens (MATADOR) trial, patients with pT1-3, pN0-3 breast cancer were randomised (1:1) between six adjuvant cycles of doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 every 2 weeks (ddAC) and six cycles of docetaxel 75 mg/m2, doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 every 3 weeks (TAC). The primary objective was to discover a predictive gene expression profile for ddAC and TAC benefit. Here we report the preplanned secondary end-point recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2012, 664 patients were randomised. At 5 years, RFS was 87% (95% confidence interval [CI] 83%-91%) in the ddAC-treated patients and 88% (84-92%) in the TAC-treated subgroup (hazard ratio [HR] 0.89, 95% CI 0.62-1.28, P = 0.53). OS at 5 years was 93% (90%-96%) in the ddAC-treated and 94% (91%-97%) in the TAC-treated patients (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.57-1.39, P = 0.61). Anaemia was more frequent in ddAC-treated patients (62/327 patients [18.9%] versus 15/319 patients [4.7%], P < 0.001) and diarrhoea (21 [6.4%] versus 53 [16.6%], P<0.001) and peripheral neuropathy (15 [4.6%] versus 46 [14.4%], P < 0.001) were observed more often in TAC-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: With a median follow-up of 7 years, no significant differences in RFS and OS were observed between six adjuvant cycles of ddAC and TAC in high-risk breast cancer patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: ISRCTN61893718 and BOOG 2004-04.

Clinical benefit of controversial first line systemic therapies for advanced stage ovarian cancer - ESMO-MCBS scores.

BACKGROUND: The magnitude of clinical benefit scale (MCBS) was introduced by the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) to quantify the clinical benefit of therapeutic regimens and to prioritise therapies. It distinguishes curative from palliative treatments and ranks their benefit based on overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), quality of life (QoL) and toxicity. Objective of this study on the first line treatment of ovarian cancer was to evaluate the evidence for the current standard of care using the ESMO-MCBSv1.1 with an emphasis on controversial therapeutic options: intraperitoneal chemotherapy, dose-dense paclitaxel and bevacizumab. METHODS: Phase III trials, published since 1992, investigating first line systemic treatment of Fédération Internationale de Gynécologie et d'Obstétrique (FIGO) stage IIB-IV epithelial ovarian cancer were included. Since most studies included patients with FIGO stage IV disease or incomplete debulking, all treatments were judged to be palliative. Treatments were graded 5 to 1 on the ESMO-MCBSv1.1, where grades 5 and 4 represent a high level of clinical benefit. RESULTS: 55 studies met the inclusion criteria. ESMO-MCBS scores were calculated for eleven studies that showed a statistically significant benefit of the experimental treatment. Intraperitoneal (ip) cisplatin scored a 4 and 3, but two other studies were negative and therefore not scored on the ESMO-MCBS. Dose-dense paclitaxel showed substantial clinical benefit in one study (score 4), but three studies were negative. Addition of bevacizumab also scored a 4 in one study subgroup including high-risk patients but a 2 in another trial with a larger study population. CONCLUSION: Based on ESMO-MCBS scores, dose-dense paclitaxel and intraperitoneal chemotherapy cannot be recommended as standard treatment. Bevacizumab should be considered only in the high-risk population. The ESMO-MCBSv1.1. helps to summarise reported studies on controversial treatment regimens, and identifies their weaknesses.

Maintenance treatment with capecitabine and bevacizumab versus observation in metastatic colorectal cancer: updated results and molecular subgroup analyses of the phase 3 CAIRO3 study.

BACKGROUND: The phase 3 CAIRO3 study showed that capecitabine plus bevacizumab (CAP-B) maintenance treatment after six cycles capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab (CAPOX-B) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients is effective, without compromising quality of life. In this post hoc analysis with updated follow-up and data regarding sidedness, we defined subgroups according to RAS/BRAF mutation status and mismatch repair (MMR) status, and investigated their influence on treatment efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 558 patients with previously untreated mCRC and stable disease or better after six cycles CAPOX-B induction treatment were randomised to either CAP-B maintenance treatment (n = 279) or observation (n = 279). Upon first progression, patients were to receive CAPOX-B reintroduction until second progression (PFS2, primary end point). We centrally assessed RAS/BRAF mutation status and MMR status, or used local results if central assessment was not possible. Intention-to-treat stratified Cox models adjusted for baseline covariables were used to examine whether treatment efficacy was modified by RAS/BRAF mutation status. RESULTS: RAS, BRAF mutations, and MMR deficiency were detected in 240/420 (58%), 36/381 (9%), and 4/279 (1%) patients, respectively. At a median follow-up of 87 months (IQR 69-97), all mutational subgroups showed significant improvement from maintenance treatment for the primary end point PFS2 [RAS/BRAF wild-type: hazard ratio (HR) 0.57 (95% CI 0.39-0.84); RAS-mutant: HR 0.74 (0.55-0.98); V600EBRAF-mutant: HR 0.28 (0.12-0.64)] and secondary end points, except for the RAS-mutant subgroup regarding overall survival. Adjustment for sidedness instead of primary tumour location yielded comparable results. Although right-sided tumours were associated with inferior prognosis, both patients with right- and left-sided tumours showed significant benefit from maintenance treatment. CONCLUSIONS: CAP-B maintenance treatment after six cycles CAPOX-B is effective in first-line treatment of mCRC across all mutational subgroups. The benefit of maintenance treatment was most pronounced in patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type and V600EBRAF-mutant tumours. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV NUMBER: NCT00442637.

Cost-effectiveness of capecitabine and bevacizumab maintenance treatment after first-line induction treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer.

AIM: Capecitabine and bevacizumab (CAP-B) maintenance therapy has shown to be more effective compared with observation in metastatic colorectal cancer patients achieving stable disease or better after six cycles of first-line capecitabine, oxaliplatin, bevacizumab treatment in terms of progression-free survival. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of CAP-B maintenance treatment. METHODS: Decision analysis with Markov modelling to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CAP-B maintenance compared with observation was performed based on CAIRO3 study results (n = 558). An additional analysis was performed in patients with complete or partial response. The primary outcomes were the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) defined as the additional cost per life year (LY) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained, calculated from EQ-5D questionnaires and literature and LYs gained. Univariable sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the influence of input parameters on the ICER, and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis represents uncertainty in model parameters. RESULTS: CAP-B maintenance compared with observation resulted in 0.21 QALYs (0.18LYs) gained at a mean cost increase of €36,845, yielding an ICER of €175,452 per QALY (€204,694 per LY). Varying the difference in health-related quality of life between CAP-B maintenance and observation influenced the ICER most. For patients achieving complete or partial response on capecitabine, oxaliplatin, bevacizumab induction treatment, an ICER of €149,300 per QALY was calculated. CONCLUSION: CAP-B maintenance results in improved health outcomes measured in QALYs and LYs compared with observation, but also in a relevant increase in costs. Despite the fact that there is no consensus on cost-effectiveness thresholds in cancer treatment, CAP-B maintenance may not be considered cost-effective.

Vemurafenib for BRAF V600 mutated advanced melanoma: results of treatment beyond progression.

BACKGROUND: Selective BRAF inhibition (BRAFi) by vemurafenib or dabrafenib has become approved standard treatment in BRAF V600 mutated advanced stage melanoma. While the response rate is high, the response duration is limited with a progression-free survival (PFS) of 5-6months. Our observation of accelerated disease progression within some patients after stopping vemurafenib treatment has fostered the idea of treatment beyond progression (BRAFi TBP). METHOD: In this retrospective study, we analysed 70 metastatic melanoma patients, treated at our institute, who experienced progression after prior objective response upon treatment with vemurafenib. Thirty-five patients that continued treatment beyond progression are compared with 35 patients who stopped BRAFi treatment at disease progression. RESULTS: Median overall survival beyond documented progression was found to be 5.2months versus 1.4months (95% confidence interval (CI): 3.8-7.4 versus 0.6-3.4; Log-Rank p=0.002) in favour of BRAFi TBP. In the multivariate survival analysis, stopping treatment at disease progression was significantly associated with shorter survival (hazard ratio: 1.92; 95% CI: 1.04-3.55; p=0.04). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that continuing vemurafenib treatment beyond progression may be beneficial in advanced melanoma patients, who prior to progression responded to vemurafenib.

Outcome of localised blastemal-type Wilms tumour patients treated according to intensified treatment in the SIOP WT 2001 protocol, a report of the SIOP Renal Tumour Study Group (SIOP-RTSG).

Blastemal-type Wilms tumour (BT-WT) has been identified as a high risk histological subgroup in WT assessed after pre-nephrectomy chemotherapy in trials of the International Society of Paediatric Oncology (SIOP) Renal Tumour Study Group. Therefore, in SIOPWT2001, post-operative chemotherapy for BT-WT was intensified aiming to improve survival. Survival analysis of all unilateral BT-WT patients (SIOPWT2001) (n=238), was compared with historical BT-WT controls (SIOP93-01) (n=113). 351/4061 (8.6%) unilateral non-metastatic BT-WT patients (SIOP93-01/SIOPWT2001) were studied. Median age at diagnosis was 43 months (Inter Quartile Range (IQR) 24-68 months), stages: I (n=140, 40%), II (n=106, 30%), III (n=105, 30%). BT-WTs were higher staged, showed greater volume decrease after pre-operative chemotherapy and were diagnosed at an older median age compared to other WT patients. Patient characteristics did not differ substantially between SIOP93-01 and SIOPWT2001. Univariate analysis showed a 5-year event-free survival (EFS) of 80% (95% confidence interval (CI): 75-86%) (SIOPWT2001) compared to 67% in SIOP93-01 (95% CI: 59-76%; p=0.006) and overall survival (OS) of 88% (95% CI: 83-93%) (SIOPWT2001) compared to 84% (95% CI: 77-91%; p=0.4) in SIOP93-01. 95% of relapses were distant metastases (SIOP93-01/SIOPWT2001). Treatment protocol, age at diagnosis, tumour stage (III versus I/II) and volume (at surgery), were prognostic variables for EFS (uni- and multivariate Cox regression analysis). Independent prognosticators for OS were age at diagnosis, tumour stage and volume (at surgery). The most significant survival benefit of intensified treatment, was observed in Stage I (EFS 96% in SIOPWT2001 (OS 100%), 71% in SIOP93-01 (OS 90%)). BT-WT derived benefits from more intensive chemotherapy as reflected by a reduction in relapse risk. However, the benefit of the more intensive chemotherapy to improve OS was only observed in stage I BT-WTs, by adding doxorubicin.

Treatment of relapsed Wilms tumour (WT) patients: experience with topotecan. A report from the SIOP Renal Tumour Study Group (RTSG).

BACKGROUND: Topotecan has been variably incorporated in the treatment of patients with relapsed Wilms tumour (WT) who failed initial treatment with three or more effective drugs. Our objective was to describe outcome and to retrospectively investigate the potential role of topotecan in relapsed WT patients. METHODS: Children who were treated with topotecan as part of their chemotherapeutic regimens for relapsed WT were identified and included in our retrospective study. Patient charts were reviewed for general patient characteristics, histology and stage at initial diagnosis, number and type of relapse, salvage treatment schedules, toxicity, response to treatment and outcome. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2012, 30 children (median age at relapse 5.5 years, range 1.6-14.5 years) were identified to have received topotecan as part of their salvage regimens (primary progressive disease n = 3, first, second and third relapse n = 13, 9 and 2 respectively, partial response n = 3). Topotecan was administered as a single agent (12 patients) or in combination with other drugs (18 patients). Sixteen patients had high-risk histology according to the SIOP classification, 15 died within 12 months because of progressive disease. Fourteen patients had SIOP intermediate-risk histology of which four patients displayed objective responses to topotecan. Overall, 6 out of 14 intermediate-risk patients survived (median follow up of 6 years), however, three of whom (stage V) had bilateral nephrectomy after topotecan treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Topotecan does not seem to show effectiveness in the treatment of relapsed WT patients with initial high-risk histology. In patients with intermediate-risk histology, the role of topotecan might deserve further attention, to prove its efficacy.

Paclitaxel and bevacizumab with or without capecitabine as first-line treatment for HER2-negative locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The addition of bevacizumab to paclitaxel or capecitabine has demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) as compared with chemotherapy alone in patients with HER2-negative locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer (LR/MBC). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of first-line therapy of paclitaxel and bevacizumab with or without capecitabine in patients with HER2-negative LR/MBC. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, randomised phase II trial, women with HER2-negative LR/MBC were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to paclitaxel (90 mg/m2 intravenously [IV] on days 1, 8, and 15) and bevacizumab (10 mg/kg IV on days 1 and 15) every 4 weeks for six cycles, followed by bevacizumab (15 mg/kg IV on day 1) every 3 weeks (AT) or to paclitaxel (90 mg/m2 IV on days 1 and 8), bevacizumab (15 mg/kg IV on day 1) and capecitabine (825 mg/m2 orally twice daily on days 1­14) every 3 weeks for eight cycles, followed by bevacizumab and capecitabine at the same doses every 3 weeks (ATX). The primary end-point was investigator-assessed PFS. Secondary end-points included ORR, duration of response, overall survival (OS) and safety. Exploratory analyses were conducted to evaluate the impact of capecitabine on OS and to validate a novel prognostic model. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2006-006058-83. FINDINGS: Median PFS was significantly longer in ATX as compared with AT (11.2 months versus 8.4 months; stratified hazard ratio (HR), 0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.41­0.67; p < 0.0001). The ORR in ATX patients with measurable disease (n = 268) was higher than that in AT (69% versus 51%; p = 0.01). The median duration of response was 6.8 versus 5.4 months for, respectively, ATX and AT (p < 0.0001). Median OS was 24.2 months for ATX and 23.1 months for AT (p = 0.53). The increased rate of grade 3­4 adverse events related to the addition of capecitabine, being hand-foot syndrome (34% versus 0% for AT) and neutropenia (20% versus 12% for AT), generally did not preclude continuation of treatment. Exploratory analyses indicated that (1) patients receiving capecitabine at some line for treatment have significantly improved OS and (2) a prognostic model can classify patients into three risk groups associated with OS. INTERPRETATION: In patients with HER2-negative LR/MBC, addition of capecitabine to paclitaxel and bevacizumab significantly improved PFS, ORR and response duration. This combination was reasonably well tolerated and may be considered of use as first-line treatment in rapidly progressive disease. FUNDING: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, the Netherlands.

Chemoradiotherapy with capecitabine for locally advanced anal carcinoma: an alternative treatment option.

BACKGROUND: Capecitabine is an established treatment alternative to intravenous 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) for patients with rectal cancer receiving chemoradiotherapy. Its place in the treatment of locally advanced anal carcinoma (AC), however, remains undetermined. We investigated whether capecitabine is as effective as 5-FU in the treatment of patients with locally advanced AC. METHODS: One hundred and five patients with squamous cell AC stage T2-4 (T2>4 cm), N0-1, M0 or T1-4, N2-3, M0, were included in this retrospective study. Forty-seven patients were treated with continuous 5-FU (750 mg m(-2)) on days 1-5 and 29-33, mitomycin C (MMC, 10 mg m(-2)) on day 1, and radiotherapy; 58 patients were treated with capecitabine (825 mg m(-2) b.i.d. on weekdays), MMC (10 mg m(-2)) on day 1, and radiotherapy. The primary end points of the study were: clinical complete response rate, locoregional control (LRC) and overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were: colostomy-free survival (CFS), toxicity and associations of genetic polymorphisms (GSTT1, GSTM1, GSTP1 and TYMS) with outcome and toxicity. RESULTS: Clinical complete response was achieved in 41/46 patients (89.1%) with 5-FU and in 52/58 patients (89.7%) with capecitabine. Three-year LRC was 76% and 79% (P=0.690, log-rank test), 3-year OS was 78% and 86% (P=0.364, log-rank test) and CFS was 65% and 79% (P=0.115, log-rank test) for 5-FU and capecitabine, respectively. GSTT1 and TYMS genotypes were associated with severe (grade 3-4) toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Capecitabine combined with MMC and radiotherapy was equally effective as 5-FU-based chemoradiotherapy. This study shows that capecitabine can be used as an acceptable alternative to 5-FU for the treatment of AC.

Treatment and outcome of patients with relapsed clear cell sarcoma of the kidney: a combined SIOP and AIEOP study.

BACKGROUND: Clear cell sarcoma of the kidney (CCSK) is an uncommon paediatric renal tumour. Relapses occur in about 15% of the patients. Since detailed clinical information on relapsed CCSK is scarce, the current study aims to describe outcome of patients with relapsed CCSK treated according to recent European protocols. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analysed prospectively collected data of all CCSK patients who developed a relapse after complete remission at the end of primary treatment, entered onto SIOP and AIEOP trials between 1992 and 2012. RESULTS: Thirty-seven of 237 CCSK patients (16%) treated according to SIOP and AIEOP protocols developed a relapse. Median time from initial diagnosis to relapse was 17 months (range, 5.5 months - 6.6 years). Thirt-five out of thirty-seven relapses (95%) were metastatic; the most common sites of relapse were the brain (n=13), lungs (n=7) and bone (n=5). Relapse treatment consisted of chemotherapy (n=30), surgery (n=19) and/or radiotherapy (n=18), followed by high-dose chemotherapy and autologous bone marrow transplantation (ABMT) in 14 patients. Twenty-two out of thirty-seven patients (59%) achieved a second complete remission (CR); 15 of whom (68%) developed a second relapse. Five-year event-free survival (EFS) after relapse was 18% (95% CI: 4%-32%), and 5-year overall survival (OS) was 26% (95% CI: 10%-42%). CONCLUSIONS: In this largest series of relapsed CCSK patients ever described, overall outcome is poor. Most relapses are metastatic and brain relapses are more common than previously recognised. Intensive treatment aiming for local control, followed by high dose chemotherapy and ABMT, seems to be of benefit to enhance survival. Novel development of targeted therapy is urgently required.