[Organ preservation in oropharyngeal cancers treatment: What arguments for radiotherapy?] / Préservation d'organe dans la prise en charge des cancers de l'oropharynx : quels arguments en faveur de la radiothérapie ?

Management of oropharyngeal cancer depends on several factors. Immediate surgery or radiotherapy may be considered. If the patient is operable, the choice depends on the extent of the disease, the contributing factors, and the expected functional results. For HPV-positive cancers, studies show comparable efficacy between surgery and radiotherapy. For early-stage cancers, unimodal treatment should be preferred. For HPV-negative cancers, the results of retrospective and observational studies are in favor of surgery. These studies have some limitations. In observational and/or retrospective studies, reclassification biases and the applicability of propensity scores weaken the validity of studies showing differences in management. Tumor and patient comparability are others majors interpretation biases. It is precipitate to conclude that surgery is superior for HPV-negative oropharyngeal cancers. Toxicity, therefore, becomes a criterion of choice for treatment. Unimodal management by surgery allows limited toxicity for the early stages. Surgery has less impact on salivation. Radiotherapy is rather less deleterious for swallowing in the early stages. For the advanced stages of HPV-induced tumors, the non-superiority of surgery should lead to the choice of radiochemotherapy. For oropharyngeal cancers, the possible benefit of surgery in HPV-negative oropharyngeal cancers must be confirmed in randomized studies. For the early stages of oropharyngeal cancer with unimodal treatment, management could be decided by shared decision making.

Evolution of bone metastases in patients receiving at least three months of checkpoint inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the evolution of bone metastases in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). METHODS: A single-center retrospective study included cancer patients with bone metastases treated with ICI at our institution between January 2014 and September 2019. Clinical and biological data were collected from medical records and independent expert review of imaging was performed. Target and non-target lesions were identified and followed up to 1 year. Patients were then classified as bone responder or non-responder. Comparisons between groups were performed with Student's t test or Mann-Whitney test. RESULTS: Among 1108 patients screened, 192 patients had bone metastases and 48 patients were included in the final analysis, with lung cancer, renal carcinoma and melanoma as most represented cancer type. Half of the patients experienced stability, condensation or peripheral sclerosis of bone lesions. Initial progression before stabilization with or without sclerosis of bone lesion occurred for 19% of patients (pseudoprogression). There was an association between bone response and global oncological outcomes. Bone responder patients had a significant decrease in morphine and co-analgesic prescription as well as a significant decrease in alkaline phosphatases compared to non-responder patients. CONCLUSION: Bone response was observed in half of patients with available imaging and follow-up after 3 months of ICI treatment, with sclerosis observed in one-third of bone lesions at month 3, in all tumor types. Up to 20% of patients experienced a pseudoprogression of bone lesions such as previously described in primary tumor and other metastatic sites. Bone response was associated with improvement of pain and survival.

Durvalumab with or without tremelimumab in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: EAGLE, a randomized, open-label phase III study.

BACKGROUND: Targeting the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) axis has demonstrated clinical benefit in recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC). Combining immunotherapies targeting PD-L1 and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) has shown evidence of additive activity in several tumor types. This phase III study evaluated the efficacy of durvalumab (an anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody) or durvalumab plus tremelimumab (an anti-CTLA-4 monoclonal antibody) versus standard of care (SoC) in R/M HNSCC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive 1 : 1 : 1 durvalumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks [q2w]), durvalumab plus tremelimumab (durvalumab 20 mg/kg q4w plus tremelimumab 1 mg/kg q4w × 4, then durvalumab 10 mg/kg q2w), or SoC (cetuximab, a taxane, methotrexate, or a fluoropyrimidine). The primary end points were overall survival (OS) for durvalumab versus SoC, and OS for durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus SoC. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and duration of response. RESULTS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive durvalumab (n = 240), durvalumab plus tremelimumab (n = 247), or SoC (n = 249). No statistically significant improvements in OS were observed for durvalumab versus SoC [hazard ratio (HR): 0.88; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.72-1.08; P = 0.20] or durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus SoC (HR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.85-1.26; P = 0.76). The 12-month survival rates (95% CI) were 37.0% (30.9-43.1), 30.4% (24.7-36.3), and 30.5% (24.7-36.4) for durvalumab, durvalumab plus tremelimumab, and SoC, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) were consistent with previous reports. The most common trAEs (any grade) were hypothyroidism for durvalumab and durvalumab plus tremelimumab (11.4% and 12.2%, respectively), and anemia (17.5%) for SoC. Grade ≥3 trAE rates were 10.1%, 16.3%, and 24.2% for durvalumab, durvalumab plus tremelimumab, and SoC, respectively. CONCLUSION: There were no statistically significant differences in OS for durvalumab or durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus SoC. However, higher survival rates at 12 to 24 months and response rates demonstrate clinical activity for durvalumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02369874.

Diagnóstico prenatal ecográfico de gemelos siameses.A propósito de un caso / Prenatal ultrasonographic diagnosis of conjoined twins. A case report

Se presenta un caso de diagnóstico prenatal ecográfico de gemelos siameses tóraco-onfalópagos.Se comenta el mecanismo de ocurrencia, incidencia, clasificación, malformaciones asociadas y guías para el diagnóstico. (AU)