Cetuximab versus methotrexate in first-line treatment of older, frail patients with inoperable recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer (ELAN UNFIT): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: At present, there is no established standard treatment for frail older patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of cetuximab to those of methotrexate (the reference regimen) in this population. METHODS: This randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial was done at 20 hospitals in France. Patients aged 70 years or older, assessed as frail by the ELAN Geriatric Evaluation, with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in the first-line setting and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2 were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive cetuximab 500 mg/m2 intravenously every 2 weeks or methotrexate 40 mg/m2 intravenously every week, with minimisation by ECOG performance status, type of disease evolution, Charlson Comorbidity Index score, serum albumin concentration, and geriatrician consultation. To avoid deterministic minimisation and assure allocation concealment, patients were allocated with a probability of 0·80 to the treatment that most reduced the imbalance. Treatment was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, whichever occurred first. The primary endpoint was failure-free survival (defined as the time from randomisation to disease progression, death, discontinuation of treatment, or loss of 2 or more points on the Activities in Daily Living scale, whichever occurred first) and was analysed in the intention-to-treat population. 151 failures expected out of 164 patients were required to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0·625 with 0·05 alpha error, with 80% power. A futility interim analysis was planned when approximately 80 failures were observed, based on failure-free survival. Safety analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01884623) and was stopped for futility after the interim analysis. FINDINGS: Between Nov 7, 2013, and April 23, 2018, 82 patients were enrolled (41 to the cetuximab group and 41 to the methotrexate group); 60 (73%) were male, 37 (45%) were aged 80 years or older, 35 (43%) had an ECOG performance status of 2, and 36 (44%) had metastatic disease. Enrolment was stopped for futility at the interim analysis. At the final analysis, median follow-up was 43·3 months (IQR 30·8-52·1). At data cutoff, all 82 patients had failure; failure-free survival did not differ significantly between the groups (median 1·4 months [95% CI 1·0-2·1] in the cetuximab group vs 1·9 months [1·1-2·6] in the methotrexate group; adjusted HR 1·03 [95% CI 0·66-1·61], p=0·89). The frequency of patients who had grade 3 or worse adverse events was 63% (26 of 41) in the cetuximab group and 73% (30 of 41) in the methotrexate group. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the cetuximab group were fatigue (four [10%] of 41 patients), lung infection (four [10%]), and rash acneiform (four [10%]), and those in the methotrexate group were fatigue (nine [22%] of 41), increased gamma-glutamyltransferase (seven [17%]), natraemia disorder (four [10%]), anaemia (four [10%]), leukopenia (four [10%]), and neutropenia (four [10%]). The frequency of patients who had serious adverse events was 44% (18 of 41) in the cetuximab group and 39% (16 of 41) in the methotrexate group. Four patients presented with a fatal adverse event in the cetuximab group (sepsis, decreased level of consciousness, pulmonary oedema, and death of unknown cause) as did two patients in the methotrexate group (dyspnoea and death of unknown cause). INTERPRETATION: The study showed no improvement in failure-free survival with cetuximab versus methotrexate. Patients with an ECOG performance status of 2 did not benefit from these systemic therapies. New treatment options including immunotherapy should be explored in frail older patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, after an initial geriatric evaluation, such as the ELAN Geriatric Evaluation. FUNDING: French programme PAIR-VADS 2011 (sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, the Fondation ARC and the Ligue Contre le Cancer), GEMLUC, GEFLUC, and Merck Santé. TRANSLATION: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Is sarcopenia a missed factor in the management of patients with metastatic breast cancer?

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia has emerged as an important parameter to predict outcomes and treatment toxicity. However, limited data are available to assess sarcopenia prevalence in metastatic breast cancer and to evaluate its management. METHODS: The SCAN study was a cross-sectional multicenter French study that aimed to estimate sarcopenia prevalence in a real-life sample of metastatic cancer patients. Sarcopenia was identified by low muscle mass (estimated from the skeletal muscle index at the third lumbar, via computed tomography) and low muscle strength (defined by handgrip strength). Three populations were distinguished based on EWGSOP criteria: a sarcopenic group with low muscle mass AND strength, a pre-sarcopenic group with low muscle mass OR strength and a normal group with high muscle mass AND strength. RESULTS: Among 766 included patients, 139 patients with breast cancer and median age of 61.2 years (29.9-97.8 years) were evaluable; 29.5% were sarcopenic and 41.0% were pre-sarcopenic. Sarcopenic patients were older (P < 0.01), had a worse PS-score (P < 0.05), and a higher number of metastatic sites (P < 0.01), the majority being hepatic and bone. A moderate agreement between the oncologist's diagnosis and sarcopenia evaluation by muscle mass and strength was recognized (Cohen's kappa = 0.45). No associations were found between sarcopenia and adverse event occurrence in the 12 patients for whom these were reported. Sarcopenic patients were underdiagnosed and nutritional care and physical activity were less proposed. CONCLUSION: It is necessary to evaluate sarcopenia due to its impact on patient prognosis, and its utility in guiding patient management in metastatic breast cancer.

Avelumab for platinum-ineligible/refractory recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: phase Ib results from the JAVELIN Solid Tumor trial.

BACKGROUND: Recurrent and/or metastatic (R/M) disease develops in approximately 65% of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) and is associated with a poor prognosis. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have proven effective in multiple tumor types, including R/M SCCHN. We report the efficacy and safety of avelumab (antiprogrammed death ligand 1 antibody) in an expansion cohort of patients with platinum-refractory/ineligible R/M SCCHN enrolled in the phase I JAVELIN Solid Tumor trial (NCT01772004). METHODS: Eligible patients with R/M SCCHN were aged ≥18 years and had received ≥1 line of platinum-based chemotherapy with disease progression or recurrence within 6 months of the last dose or were ineligible for platinum-based chemotherapy. All patients received avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Tumor assessments were carried out by a blinded independent review committee (IRC) and investigators according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1 (RECIST 1.1). Key endpoints included best overall response, duration of response (DOR) and progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by IRC and investigator per RECIST 1.1, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: Between April 24, 2015, and November 13, 2015, 153 patients were enrolled. Patients had a median of two prior lines of therapy for metastatic or locally advanced disease (range 0-6); 12 patients (7.8%) were not eligible for platinum-based chemotherapy. At data cut-off (December 31, 2017), the confirmed objective response rate was 9.2% (95% CI 5.1% to 14.9%) assessed by IRC and 13.1% (95% CI 8.2% to 19.5%) assessed by investigator. Median DOR was not reached (95% CI 4.2 to not estimable) based on IRC assessment. Median PFS was 1.4 months (95% CI 1.4 to 2.6) assessed by IRC and 1.8 months (95% CI 1.4 to 2.7) assessed by investigator; median OS was 8.0 months (95% CI 6.5 to 10.2). Any-grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 83 patients (54.2%) and were grade ≥3 in 10 patients (6.5%). The most common TRAEs were fatigue (n=19, 12.4%), fever (n=14, 9.2%), pruritus (n=12, 7.8%), and chills (n=11, 7.2%), and there were no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSION: Avelumab showed clinical activity and was associated with a low rate of grade ≥3 TRAEs in heavily pretreated patients with platinum-refractory/ineligible R/M SCCHN.

Phase I trial of copanlisib, a selective PI3K inhibitor, in combination with cetuximab in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

Background The phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase pathway is often altered in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), and is involved in the resistance to EGFR inhibitors. Objective We investigated the dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), maximum tolerated dose, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy of the combination of copanlisib, an intravenous, pan-class I PI3K inhibitor, with the anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody cetuximab in recurrent and/or metastatic HNSCC patients in a phase I dose-escalation trial. Patients and methods Copanlisib was given intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of 28-day cycles at the dose of 45 mg and 30 mg, in combination with standard doses of weekly cetuximab (400 mg/m2 loading dose followed by 250 mg/m2 on days 8, 15, and 22, and weekly thereafter). Results Three patients received copanlisib 45 mg, of whom two experienced grade 3 hyperglycemia during Cycle 1 that met the DLT criteria. Eight patients were then treated with copanlisib at the dose of 30 mg. Because of the occurrence of hyperglycemia, a premedication with metformine was introduced on the day of the injections. No DLTs were reported at this dose level. The trial was stopped early because of the unfavourable toxicity profile of the combination. Among eight evaluable patients for response, four patients (50%) had disease stabilization according to RECIST1.1 as best response. Conclusion Copanlisib combined with cetuximab demonstrated unfavorable toxicity and limited efficacy in heavily pretreated recurrent and/or metastatic HNSCC patients.Trial registration NCT02822482, Date of registration: June 2016.

[An updated synthesis of the international recommendations about the use of non-pharmacological interventions in the treatment of fatigue]. / Synthèse actualisée des recommandations internationales sur le traitement de la fatigue par des interventions non pharmacologiques.

INTRODUCTION: Fatigue is a frequent and disturbing symptom in oncology but remains undertreated. Given the absence of effective drug treatment, non-pharmacological interventions have a prominent place in the treatment of fatigue. However, they are relatively unknown by professionals who lack of clear points of reference to refer patients with confidence. This article aims to improve the knowledge about this therapeutic field through an updated synthesis of the levels of recommendations and available evidence. METHODS: A three-step approach was conducted, including (1) a synthesis of international guidelines on non-pharmacological interventions in the treatment of fatigue among adults in oncology, (2) a systematic review of recent data in the literature, (3) a comparison between the synthesis of guidelines and the systematic review with the aim of updating the levels of evidence. RESULTS: Five guidelines were synthesized; 111 systematic reviews were analyzed. Their comparison mainly showed: (1) a convergence in favor of the use of physical activity, educational interventions and cognitive-behavioral therapies, with levels of evidence ranging from moderate to high; (2) a consolidation of short-term efficacy evidence to support the use of mindfulness-based approaches and yoga; 3) the persistence of a lack of sufficiently reliable data to establish the efficacy of other types of intervention. DISCUSSION: Supported by international guidelines and recent data, the use of non-pharmacological interventions in the treatment of fatigue is critical and has to become better known.

Cetuximab, docetaxel, and cisplatin versus platinum, fluorouracil, and cetuximab as first-line treatment in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma (GORTEC 2014-01 TPExtreme): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Results from a phase 2 trial of the TPEx chemotherapy regimen (docetaxel-platinum-cetuximab) showed promising results, with a median overall survival of 14·0 months in first-line recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma (HNSCC). We therefore aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the TPEx regimen with the standard of care EXTREME regimen (platinum-fluorouracil-cetuximab) in this setting. METHODS: This was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial, done in 68 centres (cancer centres, university and general hospitals, and private clinics) in France, Spain, and Germany. Eligible patients were aged 18-70 years with histologically confirmed recurrent or metastatic HNSCC unsuitable for curative treatment; had at least one measurable lesion according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1; and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 1 or less. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using the TenAlea website by investigators or delegated clinical research associates to the TPEx regimen or the EXTREME regimen, with minimisation by ECOG performance status, type of disease evolution, previous cetuximab treatment, and country. The TPEx regimen consisted of docetaxel 75 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2, both intravenously on day 1, and cetuximab on days 1, 8, and 15 (intravenously 400 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1 and 250 mg/m2 weekly subsequently). Four cycles were repeated every 21 days with systematic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) support at each cycle. In case of disease control after four cycles, intravenous cetuximab 500 mg/m2 was continued every 2 weeks as maintenance therapy until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The EXTREME regimen consisted of fluorouracil 4000 mg/m2 on day 1-4, cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 1, and cetuximab on days 1, 8, and 15 (400 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1 and 250 mg/m2 weekly subsequently) all delivered intravenously. Six cycles were delivered every 21 days followed by weekly 250 mg/m2 cetuximab as maintenance therapy in case of disease control. G-CSF support was not mandatory per the protocol in the EXTREME regimen. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population; safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of chemotherapy or cetuximab. Enrolment is closed and this is the final analysis. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02268695. FINDINGS: Between Oct 10, 2014, and Nov 29, 2017, 541 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment regimens (271 to TPEx, 270 to EXTREME). Two patients in the TPEx group had major deviations in consent forms and were not included in the final analysis. Median follow-up was 34·4 months (IQR 26·6-44·8) in the TPEx group and 30·2 months (25·5-45·3) in the EXTREME group. At data cutoff, 209 patients had died in the TPEx group and 218 had died in the EXTREME group. Overall survival did not differ significantly between the groups (median 14·5 months [95% CI 12·5-15·7] in the TPEx group and 13·4 months [12·2-15·4] in the EXTREME group; hazard ratio 0·89 [95% CI 0·74-1·08]; p=0·23). 214 (81%) of 263 patients in the TPEx group versus 246 (93%) of 265 patients in the EXTREME group had grade 3 or worse adverse events during chemotherapy (p<0·0001). In the TPEx group, 118 (45%) of 263 patients had at least one serious adverse event versus 143 (54%) of 265 patients in the EXTREME group. 16 patients in the TPEx group and 21 in the EXTREME group died in association with adverse events, including seven patients in each group who had fatal infections (including febrile neutropenia). Eight deaths in the TPEx group and 11 deaths in the EXTREME group were assessed as treatment related, most frequently sepsis or septic shock (four in each treatment group). INTERPRETATION: Although the trial did not meet its primary endpoint, with no significant improvement in overall survival with TPEx versus EXTREME, the TPEx regimen had a favourable safety profile. The TPEx regimen could provide an alternative to standard of care with the EXTREME regimen in the first-line treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC, especially for those who might not be good candidates for up-front pembrolizumab treatment. FUNDING: Merck Santé and Chugai Pharma.

Prognostic factors of colorectal cancer patients with brain metastases.

INTRODUCTION: Brain metastases (BMs) from colorectal cancer (CRC) are rare (≈2%) but are increasing with the improvement of CRC prognosis. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the prognostic factors of BM from CRC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study included all consecutive patients with BM from CRC diagnosed between 2000 and 2017. THEORY/CALCULATION: Prognostic factors of OS were evaluated in univariate (log-rank test) and multivariate analyses (Cox regression model). These prognostic factors could help the management of patients with BM from CRC. RESULTS: A total of 358 patients were included with a median age of 65.5 years. Primary tumors were mostly located in the rectum (42.4%) or left colon (37.2%) and frequently KRAS-mutated (56.9%). The median time from metastatic CRC diagnosis to BM diagnosis was 18.5 ± 2.5 months. BMs were predominantly single (56.9%) and only supratentorial (54.4%). BM resection was performed in 33.0% of the cases and 73.2% of patients had brain radiotherapy alone or after surgery. Median OS was 5.1 ± 0.3 months. In multivariate analysis, age under 65 years, ECOG performance status 0-1, single BM and less than 3 chemotherapy lines before BM diagnosis were associated with better OS. Prognostic scores, i.e. recursive partitioning analysis (RPA), Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA), Disease Specific-Graded Prognostic Assessment (DS-GPA), Gastro-Intestinal-Graded Prognostic Assessment (GI-GPA) and the nomogram were statistically significantly associated with OS but the most relevant prognosis criteria seemed the ECOG performance status 0-1. CONCLUSIONS: ECOG performance status, number of BM and number of chemotherapy lines are the most relevant factors in the management of patients with BM from CRC.

Nutrition and physical activity: French intergroup clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up (SNFGE, FFCD, GERCOR, UNICANCER, SFCD, SFED, SFRO, ACHBT, AFC, SFP-APA, SFNCM, AFSOS).

This document is a summary of the French intergroup guidelines regarding the nutrition and physical activity (PA) management in digestive oncology. This collaborative work was produced under the auspices of all French medical and surgical societies involved in digestive oncology, nutrition and supportive care. It is based on published guidelines, recent literature review and expert opinions. Recommendations are graded according to the level of evidence. Malnutrition affects more than half of patients with digestive cancers and is often underdiagnosed. It has multiple negative consequences on survival, quality of life and risk of treatment complications. Consequently, in addition to anticancer treatments, supportive care including nutritional support and PA plays a central role in the management of digestive cancers. It is crucial to detect malnutrition (diagnostic criteria updated in 2019) early, to prevent it and to act against it at all stages of the cancer and at all times of the care pathway. In this context, we proposed recommendations for the evaluation and management in nutrition and PA in digestive oncology for each stage of the disease (perioperative setting, during radiation therapy, during systemic treatments, at the palliative phase, after cancer). Guidelines for nutrition and PA management aim at increasing awareness about malnutrition in oncology. They are continuously evolving and need to be regularly updated.

NutriCancer: A French observational multicentre cross-sectional study of malnutrition in elderly patients with cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the prevalence of malnutrition and nutritional management between elderly (≥70years old) and younger patients (<70years) with cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of NutriCancer 2012 study; a one-day cross-sectional nationwide survey conducted to assess malnutrition in adult patients with cancer in France. Patients diagnosed with cancer at the study date in both inpatient and outpatient settings were included. Data collection was performed by means of questionnaires completed by the physician, the patient and the caregiver. RESULTS: This post-hoc analysis compared 578 elderly patients (27.6%) vs. 1517 younger patients (72.4%). There were significant differences in cancer localization between the groups particularly in gastrointestinal cancer (27% in younger patients vs. 42% in elderly), breast cancer (17% vs 8% in elderly) and oropharyngeal (15% vs. 9% in elderly). Weight loss was significantly more reported in the elderly than in younger patients (73.6% vs. 67.6%, p=0.009). Elderly patients were more frequently malnourished than younger patients (44.9% vs. 36.7%, p=0.0006). Food intake was comparable between the groups; however, physicians overestimated the food intake, particularly in the elderly. The malnutrition management was more frequently proposed in elderly, as dietary advice and oral nutritional supplements, than in younger patients; however, enteral nutrition was significantly less undertaken in the elderly. CONCLUSION: Malnutrition is prevalent in elderly patients with cancer, and more frequent than in younger patients. There is a need for an early integration of the nutritional counselling in patients with cancer, and particularly in the elderly.

Leptin and adiponectin as new markers of undernutrition in cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate leptin and adiponectin as markers of undernutrition in cancer patients, and compare their performances with those of other biomarkers. DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a prospective and observational study of 132 patients with various types of cancer. Following the recommended professional criteria, we diagnosed undernutrition at the time of blood sampling for the biological analysis of leptin, adiponectin, paraoxonase (hydrolysis rate of three substrates: paraoxon (PON), phenylacetate (ARE) and thiolactone (LAC)), and the calculation of the Prognostic Inflammatory and Nutritional Index (PINI). Patients were monitored for one year to establish the mortality rate of the group. Relationships between biological variables and undernutrition were evaluated using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. The Kaplan Meier method was used to analyse survival curves. Hazard ratios for death were calculated according to the quartiles of each biological variable. RESULTS: In the case of undernutrition, a decrease was observed in levels of leptin and in the lactonase activity (LAC) of paraoxonase, while adiponectin levels increased. Besides PINI, leptin was the only parameter that was independently related to undernutrition. While no relation was found between survival and leptin or adiponectin levels, evidence was found that PINI, LAC and ARE were associated with survival, even in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Leptin and PINI are good markers of installed undernutrition, and PINI and ARE or LAC are reliable markers of the risk of death in patients suffering from cancer.

[Cancers and pesticides: current data]. / Cancers et pesticides: données actuelles.

Pesticides are numerous. The occupational exposure to pesticide increases the risk of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and hairy cells leukaemia. Numerous studies suggest an increasing of incidence of children cancer in connection with parental pesticide exposure. But, most of epidemiological studies are not conclusive but of the difficulty to measure the exposure to pesticides. The future epidemiological studies may include toxicological analysis in order to measure the exposure.