Identifying the drivers of overall rating of cancer care: Insights from the second wave of the Swiss Cancer Patient Experiences study.

BACKGROUND: Patient experience surveys gather information on various aspects of care via numerous survey items. Identifying the most critical areas of patient experience to prioritize for quality care improvement can be challenging. The objective of this study was to determine which care experience items are the drivers influencing patients' overall rating of cancer care. METHODS: Data from 2750 adult patients with cancer from the second wave of the Swiss Cancer Patient Experiences study were analyzed. This cross-sectional survey was conducted in eight Swiss hospitals from September 2021 to February 2022. Stepwise logistic regression examined the relationship between overall care rating and 29 patient experience items covering different patient-centered care dimensions while adjusting for sociodemographic and health variables. RESULTS: Overall, patients rated their cancer care experience at 8.9 out of 10. Stepwise regression identified seven drivers contributing to overall care rating. The strongest drivers were "professionals worked well together" (odds ratio [OR], 4.81) and "tests were not repeated" (OR, 2.09) from the coordination and integration dimension, "offered support for symptoms during treatment" (OR, 2.11) from the physical comfort dimension, followed by "hospital staff ensured available home support" (OR, 1.99), "offered to see health professional for concerns" (OR, 1.91), "treatment options were explained" (OR, 1.75), and "involved in treatment decisions as desired" (OR, 1.68). CONCLUSIONS: This study evaluated the care experiences of patients with cancer with a comprehensive tool that identified seven key factors independently associated with overall care rating. By concentrating on these areas, hospitals can not only improve the patient care experience but also efficiently allocate resources to quality improvement initiatives.

Prevention of taxane chemotherapy-induced nail changes and peripheral neuropathy by application of extremity cooling: a prospective single-centre study with intrapatient comparison.

PURPOSE: Common side effects of taxane chemotherapy are nail toxicity and peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) causing severe impact on the quality of life. Different methods of cryotherapy to prevent these side effects have been tested. We investigated the use of machine-controlled cooling of hands and feet to reduce nail toxicity and CIPN in patients receiving taxane chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients receiving Docetaxel (planned dose ≥ 300 mg/m2) or Paclitaxel (planned dose ≥ 720 mg/m2 - ) in the adjuvant or palliative setting of different cancers were included. The dominant hand and foot were cooled to approximately 10 °C using the Hilotherapy machine. The contralateral hand and foot were used as intrapatient comparison. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of any CIPN due to paclitaxel or nail toxicity due to Docetaxel. Both the intention to treat population (ITT) and the per protocol population (PPP) were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 69 patients, 21 treated with Docetaxel and 48 with Paclitaxel, were included at our centre between 08/2020 and 08/2022. Nail toxicity due to Docetaxel was overall not significantly improved by cooling in the ITT or PPP but a significant benefit across visits was found for the ITT. CIPN due to Paclitaxel was numerically better in the ITT and significantly better in the PPP. A significant benefit of cooling on CIPN occurrence across visits was found for the ITT and the PPP. Cooling was very well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Cooling of hands and feet has a clinically meaningful impact on reducing occurrence of CIPN and nail toxicity on treatment with taxanes. Effects are more significant over time and are dose dependent. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 2020-00381. Date of registration. 24th February 2020.

Safety and anti-tumor activity of lisavanbulin administered as 48-hour infusion in patients with ovarian cancer or recurrent glioblastoma: a phase 2a study.

PURPOSE: Lisavanbulin (BAL101553) is the prodrug of avanbulin (BAL27862), a microtubule-destabilizing agent. The goal of this study (NCT02895360) was to characterize the safety, tolerability and antitumor activity of lisavanbulin administered as a 48-hour intravenous (IV) infusion at the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of 70 mg/m2. Results from the Phase 1 dose-escalation portion of the study identifying the RP2D have been previously reported. Here, we present the findings from the Phase 2a portion of this study. Methods. This multi-center, open-label study included patients with ovarian, fallopian-tube, or primary peritoneal cancer that was either platinum-resistant or refractory (11 patients), or with first recurrence of glioblastoma (12 patients). Lisavanbulin was administered as a 48-hour IV infusion on Days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. Results. Lisavanbulin was well tolerated in both patient cohorts. Thirteen patients (56.5%) developed 49 adverse events assessed as related to study treatment. The majority were mild or moderate; four were grade 3/4. Sixteen SAEs were reported in nine patients (39.1%), with none considered related to study treatment. No AEs led to permanent treatment discontinuation. Three patients in the ovarian cancer cohort had stable disease with lesion size reductions after two cycles of treatment; in the glioblastoma cohort, one patient showed partial response with a > 90% glioblastoma area reduction as best response, and one patient had stable disease after eight cycles of treatment. Conclusion. This study demonstrated a favorable safety and tolerability profile of 48-hour continuous IV infusion of lisavanbulin in patients with solid extracranial tumors or glioblastoma. Clinicaltrials.gov registration: NCT02895360.

A phase I trial of lurbinectedin in combination with cisplatin in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Background In vitro/in vivo data showed synergism of cisplatin and lurbinectedin in ovarian cancer cells and grafts. This phase I trial investigated the recommended phase II dose (RD) of cisplatin and lurbinectedin combination, with (Group A) or without aprepitant (Group B), in patients with advanced solid tumors. Patients and Methods All patients received 60 mg/m2 cisplatin 90-min intravenous (i.v.) infusion followed by lurbinectedin 60-min i.v. infusion at escalating doses on Day 1 every 3 weeks (q3wk). Patients in Group A additionally received orally 125 mg aprepitant one hour before cisplatin on Day 1 and 80 mg on Days 2 and 3. Toxicity was graded according to the NCI-CTCAE v.4. Results RD for Group A was cisplatin 60 mg/m2 plus lurbinectedin 1.1 mg/m2. RD for Group B was cisplatin 60 mg/m2 plus lurbinectedin 1.4 mg/m2. The most frequent grade ≥ 3 adverse events were hematological [neutropenia (41%), lymphopenia (35%), leukopenia (24%), thrombocytopenia (18%)] and fatigue (35%) in Group A (n = 17), and neutropenia (50%), leukopenia (42%), lymphopenia (29%), and fatigue (13%) and nausea (8%) in Group B (n = 24). Four patients (2 in each group) had a partial response. Disease stabilization for ≥ 4 months was observed in 4 and 10 patients, respectively. Conclusion The combination of lurbinectedin with cisplatin was not possible in meaningful therapeutic dosage due to toxicity. The addition of aprepitant in combination with cisplatin did not allow increasing the dose due to hematological toxicity, whereas omitting aprepitant increased the incidence of nausea and vomiting. Modest clinical activity was observed in general.Clinical trial registration www.ClinicalTrials.gov code: NCT01980667. Date of registration: 11 November 2013.

Population pharmacokinetic analyses of regorafenib and capecitabine in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (SAKK 41/16 RECAP).

AIMS: Locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is an area of unmet medical need with one third of patients dying from their disease. With response to neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy being a major prognostic factor, trial SAKK 41/16 assessed potential benefits of adding regorafenib to capecitabine-amplified neoadjuvant radiotherapy in LARC patients. METHODS: Patients received regorafenib at three dose levels (40/80/120 mg once daily) combined with capecitabine 825 mg/m2 bidaily and local radiotherapy. We developed population pharmacokinetic models from plasma concentrations of capecitabine and its metabolites 5'-deoxy-5-fluorocytidine and 5'-deoxy-5-fluorouridine as well as regorafenib and its metabolites M-2 and M-5 as implemented into SAKK 41/16 to assess potential drug-drug interactions (DDI). After establishing parent-metabolite base models, drug exposure parameters were tested as covariates within the respective models to investigate for potential DDI. Simulation analyses were conducted to quantify their impact. RESULTS: Plasma concentrations of capecitabine, regorafenib and metabolites were characterized by one and two compartment models and absorption was described by parallel first- and zero-order processes and transit compartments, respectively. Apparent capecitabine clearance was 286 L/h (relative standard error [RSE] 14.9%, interindividual variability [IIV] 40.1%) and was reduced by regorafenib cumulative area under the plasma concentration curve (median reduction of 45.6%) as exponential covariate (estimate -4.10 × 10-4 , RSE 17.8%). Apparent regorafenib clearance was 1.94 L/h (RSE 12.1%, IIV 38.1%). Simulation analyses revealed significantly negative associations between capecitabine clearance and regorafenib exposure. CONCLUSIONS: This work informs the clinical development of regorafenib and capecitabine combination treatment and underlines the importance of studying potential DDI with new anticancer drug combinations.

Quality of life and pain in patients with metastatic bone disease from solid tumors treated with bone-targeted agents- a real-world cross-sectional study from Switzerland (SAKK 95/16).

BACKGROUND: Bone-targeted agents (BTAs) are widely used in the management of patients with bone metastases from solid tumors. Knowledge of the impact of their routine care use on patient-reported pain and bone pain-related quality of life (QoL) is limited. METHODS: This real world, cross-sectional study enrolled patients over a 3-month period through oncologists across Switzerland. Patients were ≥ 18 years, had solid tumors and at least one bone metastasis, and received routine care for bone metastases. Physicians provided data on BTA-related practices, risk of bone complications and BTA regimen. Patients completed questionnaires about pain (BPI-SF), general and bone pain-related QoL (FACT-G, FACT-BP) and treatment satisfaction (FACIT-TS-G). RESULTS: Eighteen sites recruited 417 patients. Based on the FACT-BP, 42% of the patients indicated not having bone pain. According to the BPI-SF, 28% reported no, 43% mild, 14% moderate, and 15% severe pain, respectively. Patients not treated with a BTA had better overall QoL (FACT-G: p = 0.031) and bone pain-related QoL (FACT-BP, p = 0.007) than those treated with a BTA. All pain and other QoL scales did not differ between groups. Patients perceived at 'low risk of bone complications' by their physician not receiving a BTA reported less pain and better QoL than those considered at 'low risk' but receiving BTA treatment or those considered at 'high risk' regardless of BTA treatment. Overall satisfaction with the treatment was good; almost 50% of patients reporting that they were completely satisfied. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, pain and QoL did not differ according to BTA treatment or physicians' risk perception. Patient with low risks not receiving BTA treatment reported least pain and highest QoL scores. These results may suggest that treating physicians assess bone complication risk appropriately and treat patients accordingly, but they need to be confirmed by objective determination of longitudinal skeletal complication risk.

A Phase 1 study of BAL101553, a novel tumor checkpoint controller targeting microtubules, administered as 48-h infusion in adult patients with advanced solid tumors.

Purpose BAL101553, the prodrug of the microtubule-destabilizer BAL27862, previously showed signs of antitumor activity when administered as a 2-h infusion, but its use was limited by vascular toxicity. We investigated an alternative dosing strategy aimed at improving the safety profile of BAL101553. Methods This multicenter, open-label, Phase 1 dose-escalation study used a 3 + 3 design to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of BAL101553 administered as a 48-h IV infusion on Days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. Patients received oral BAL101553 on Days 15-21 of cycle 2 to assess oral bioavailability. Results BAL101553 was well tolerated at doses up to ≤70 mg/m2. Three grade 3 DLTs occurred: hypotension (70 mg/m2), hyponatremia and neutropenia (both 90 mg/m2). The MTD for 48-h IV BAL101553 was 70 mg/m2. At this dose level, the AUC for BAL27862 was 8580 ng.h/mL and the Cmax was 144 ng/mL. No apparent dose-related effects on blood pressure were observed with 48-h BAL101553 IV infusion. BAL27862 oral bioavailability was >80%. Conclusions Continuous 48-h IV BAL101553 infusion achieved higher exposure of the BAL27862 active metabolite than a 2-h infusion at the RP2D and did not cause vascular toxicity. Clinicaltrials.gov registration: NCT02895360.

Long-term responders to trastuzumab monotherapy in first-line HER-2+ advanced breast cancer: characteristics and survival data.

BACKGROUND: The impact of HER2-targeted therapy alone followed by the addition of chemotherapy at disease progression (PD) versus upfront combination was investigated by the SAKK 22/99 trial. The aim of this exploratory analysis of the SAKK 22/99 trial was to characterize the specific subset of patients deriving long-term benefit from trastuzumab monotherapy alone and to identify potential predictive factors of long-term response. METHODS: This is an unplanned post-hoc analysis of patients randomized to Arm A (trastuzumab monotherapy). Patients were divided in two groups: patients with durable clinical benefit from trastuzumab monotherapy and short-term responders without durable clinical benefit from trastuzumab monotherapy Univariate and multivariate analyses of clinical characteristics correlating with response duration was performed. RESULTS: Eighty six patients were randomized in arm A, 24 patients (28%) were long-term responders and 62 (72%) were short-term responders with a 5y-overall survival (OS) of 54% (95% CI 31-72) and of 18% (95%CI 10-30), respectively. Absence of ER expression, absence of PgR expression and presence of visceral disease emerged as possible negative predictive factors for durable clinical benefit. CONCLUSION: Durable clinical benefit can be achieved with trastuzumab monotherapy in a subgroup of HER2-positive patients with advanced disease and it is predictive for longer OS. Further investigations of predictive biomarkers are necessary to better characterize this subgroup of patients and develop further de-escalating strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00004935 ; first posted 27.01.2003, retrospectively registered.

Long-term outcome of dasatinib first-line treatment in gastrointestinal stromal tumor: A multicenter, 2-stage phase 2 trial (Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research 56/07).

BACKGROUND: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have improved the outcome of patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), but most patients eventually develop resistance and progress. Dasatinib is a potent inhibitor of BCR-ABL, KIT, and SRC family kinases as well as imatinib-resistant cells. In GISTs, response evaluation is routinely done using computed tomography (CT) and 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography coupled to CT (FDG-PET/CT) for early response assessment and outcome prediction. METHODS: This was a 2-stage, phase 2 trial investigating dasatinib 2 × 70 mg per day in patients with histologically proven, TKI-naïve, FDG-PET/CT-positive GIST. The primary endpoint was FDG-PET/CT response. RESULTS: Of 52 planned patients, 47 were enrolled from January 2008 to November 2011, when the trial was terminated because of slow accrual. In total, 42 patients were eligible. The median patient age was 61 years, 24 patients were men, and 18 were women. Performance status was 0 in 29 patients and 1 in 13 patients. The median follow-up was 67.2 months. Patients went off trial for elective surgery (n = 8), after 26 cycles as per protocol (n = 5), for disease progression (n = 14), for toxicity (n = 7), and for other reasons (n = 5); and 3 patients died (2 had discontinued drug and 1 was still receiving drug). Toxicity was grade 4 in 5% and grade 3 in 48% of patients and was most often gastrointestinal or pulmonary. Dose was interrupted or reduced in 25% of cycles. The FDG-PET/CT response rate (complete plus partial responses) at 4 weeks was 74% (95% confidence interval, 56%-85%; 14 patients had a complete response, 17 had a partial response, 6 had stable disease, 3 had progressive disease, and 2 were not evaluable). The median progression-free survival was 13.6 months, and the median overall survival was not reached. CONCLUSIONS: Dasatinib produced high metabolic response rates in TKI-naive patients with FDG-PET/CT-positive GIST. Cancer 2018;124:1449-54. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Tumor Treating Fields in combination with paclitaxel in recurrent ovarian carcinoma: Results of the INNOVATE pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) are an anti-mitotic therapy comprising continuous delivery of low-intensity alternating electric fields at intermediate frequencies to the tumor region by a home-use medical device. METHODS: The INNOVATE (EF-22) Study was a phase 2, single arm clinical trial, which tested the safety and efficacy of TTFields (200 kHz) in combination with weekly paclitaxel (weekly for 8 weeks and then on days 1, 8, 15 of each subsequent 28 day-cycle; starting dose 80 mg/m2) in 31 patients with recurrent, platinum-resistant ovarian carcinoma. The primary endpoint was safety and secondary endpoints included OS, PFS and RR. RESULTS: Median age was 60 (range: 45-77), 24 patients (77%) had serous histology, 16 patients (52%) ECOG score 0 and 15 (48%) ECOG 1, the median number of prior chemotherapy lines was 4 (range: 1-11). All patients received prior platinum-based chemotherapy and 30 (97%) received prior taxanes. No serious adverse events related to TTFields were reported. There was no increase in grade 3-4 adverse events compared to the frequency of such events reported in the literature with single agent weekly paclitaxel. Twenty-six patients (84%) had the expected TTFields-related dermatitis but only one patient permanently discontinued TTFields due to dermatitis. The median PFS was 8.9 months, 7 patients (25%) had partial response and the clinical benefit rate was 71%. The median overall survival was not reached: the one-year survival rate was 61%. CONCLUSION: TTFields combined with weekly paclitaxel were safe in platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer and warrants evaluation in a randomized phase 3 trial.

Hypocalcaemia in patients with prostate cancer treated with a bisphosphonate or denosumab: prevention supports treatment completion.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with advanced prostate cancer develop bone metastases, which often result in painful and debilitating skeletal-related events. Inhibitors of bone resorption, such as bisphosphonates and denosumab, can each reduce the incidence of skeletal-related events and delay the progression of bone pain. However, these agents are associated with an increased risk of hypocalcaemia, which, although often mild and transient, can be serious and life-threatening. Here we provide practical advice on managing the risk of hypocalcaemia in patients with advanced prostate cancer who are receiving treatment with bone resorption inhibitors. Relevant references for this review were identified through searches of PubMed with the search terms 'prostate cancer', 'bone-targeted agents', 'anti-resorptive agents', 'bisphosphonates', 'zoledronic acid', 'denosumab', 'hypocalcaemia', and 'hypocalcemia'. Additional references were suggested by the authors. MAIN TEXT: Among patients with advanced cancer receiving a bisphosphonate or denosumab, hypocalcaemia occurs most frequently in those with prostate cancer, although it can occur in patients with any tumour type. Consistent with its greater ability to inhibit bone resorption, denosumab has shown superiority in the prevention of skeletal-related events in patients with bone metastases from solid tumours. Consequently, denosumab is more likely to induce hypocalcaemia than the bisphosphonates. Likewise, various bisphosphonates have differing potencies for the inhibition of bone resorption, and thus the risk of hypocalcaemia varies between different bisphosphonates. Other risk factors for the development of hypocalcaemia include the presence of osteoblastic metastases, vitamin D deficiency, and renal insufficiency. Hypocalcaemia can lead to treatment interruption, but it is both preventable and manageable. Serum calcium concentrations should be measured, and any pre-existing hypocalcaemia should be corrected, before starting treatment with inhibitors of bone resorption. Once treatment has started, concomitant administration of calcium and vitamin D supplements is essential. Calcium concentrations should be monitored during treatment with bisphosphonates or denosumab, particularly in patients at high risk of hypocalcaemia. If hypocalcaemia is diagnosed, patients should receive treatment with calcium and vitamin D. CONCLUSION: With preventative strategies and treatment, patients with prostate cancer who are at risk of, or who develop, hypocalcaemia should be able to continue to benefit from treatment with bisphosphonates or denosumab.

Physicians' preferences for bone metastases treatments in France, Germany and the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Several bone-targeted agents (BTAs) are available for preventing skeletal-related events (SREs), but they vary in terms of efficacy, safety and mode of administration. This study assessed data on European physicians' treatment preferences for preventing SREs in patients with bone metastases from solid tumours. METHODS: Physicians completed a web-based discrete-choice experiment survey of 10 choices between pairs of profiles of hypothetical BTAs for a putative patient. Each profile included five attributes within a pre-defined range (primarily based on existing BTAs' prescribing information): time (months) until the first SRE; time (months) until worsening of pain; annual risk of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ); annual risk of renal impairment; and mode of administration. Choice questions were developed using an experimental design with known statistical properties. A separate main-effects random parameters logit model was estimated for each country and provided the relative preference for the treatment attributes in the study. RESULTS: A total of 191 physicians in France, 192 physicians in Germany, and 197 physicians in the United Kingdom completed the survey. In France and the United Kingdom, time until the first SRE and risk of renal impairment were the most important attributes; in Germany, time until the first SRE and delay in worsening of pain were the most important. In all countries, a 120-min infusion every 4 weeks was the least preferred mode of administration (p < 0.05) and the annual risk of ONJ was judged to be the least important attribute. CONCLUSIONS: When making treatment decisions regarding the choice of BTA, delaying the onset of SREs/worsening of pain and reducing the risk of renal impairment are the primary objectives for physicians.

Bendamustine, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (BRd) has high activity as 2nd -line therapy for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma - a phase II trial.

The combination of lenalidomide (Revlimid® , R) and dexamethasone (d) is a standard regimen for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (rrMM). With this regimen, only a small fraction of patients will achieve high quality responses [≥ very good partial response (VGPR)]. The combination of bendamustine (B), lenalidomide and dexamethasone (BRd) has shown high efficacy in patients with advanced rrMM. However, dose-limiting haematotoxicity restricted its use in extensively pre-treated patient populations. This prospective, multicentre Phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of BRd in rrMM patients with one prior line of therapy. Fifty patients were enrolled (median age 68·5 years [range 46-83]) and were treated with B 75 mg/m2  days 1, 2; R 25 mg days 1-21 and d (40/20 mg) days 1, 8, 15 and 22, for 6 28-day induction cycles, followed by 12 cycles with Rd alone. Pegfilgrastim was administered according to protocol-defined criteria. The study aimed to demonstrate a complete response (CR)/VGPR rate of >40% after induction therapy. Of 45 evaluable patients, 23 (51%) achieved a CR/VGPR. Grade 4 neutropenia or thrombocytopenia occurred in 17 (34%) and 8 (16%) of patients, respectively. BRd is a safe and efficacious regimen as a second line treatment for rrMM, leading to high quality responses in a considerable proportion of patients.

Adjuvant treatment recommendations for patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative early breast cancer by Swiss tumor boards using the 21-gene recurrence score (SAKK 26/10).

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effect of Recurrence Score® results (RS; Oncotype DX® multigene assay ODX) on treatment recommendations by Swiss multidisciplinary tumor boards (TB). METHODS: SAKK 26/10 is a multicenter, prospective cohort study of early breast cancer patients: Eligibility: R0-resection, ≥10% ER+ malignant cells, HER2-, pN0/pN1a. Patients were stratified into low-risk (LR) and non-low-risk (NLR) groups based on involved nodes (0 vs 1-3) and five additional predefined risk factors. Recommendations were classified as hormonal therapy (HT) or chemotherapy plus HT (CT + HT). Investigators were blinded to the statistical analysis plan. A 5%/10% rate of recommendation change in LR/NLR groups, respectively, was assumed independently of RS (null hypotheses). RESULTS: Two hundred twenty two evaluable patients from 18 centers had TB recommendations before and after consideration of the RS result. A recommendation change occurred in 45 patients (23/154 (15%, 95% CI 10-22%) in the LR group and 22/68 (32%, 95% CI 22-45%) in the NLR group). In both groups the null hypothesis could be rejected (both p < 0.001). Specifically, in the LR group, only 5/113 (4%, 95% CI 1-10%) with HT had a recommendation change to CT + HT after consideration of the RS, while 18/41 (44%, 95% CI 28-60%) of patients initially recommended CT + HT were subsequently recommended only HT. In the NLR group, 3/19 (16%, 95% CI 3-40%) patients were changed from HT to CT + HT, while 19/48 (40%, 95% CI 26-55%) were changed from CT + HT to HT. CONCLUSION: There was a significant impact of using the RS in the LR and the NLR group but only 4% of LR patients initially considered for HT had a recommendation change (RC); therefore these patients could forgo ODX testing. A RC was more likely for NLR patients considered for HT. Patients considered for HT + CT have the highest likelihood of a RC based on RS.

Vemurafenib in combination with cobimetinib in relapsed and refractory extramedullary multiple myeloma harboring the BRAF V600E mutation.

BRAF mutations are present in a variety of cancers and cause constitutive activation of the Ras-Raf-MEK-ERK signaling pathway. In cutaneous malignant melanoma, combined treatment with BRAF and MEK inhibitors is associated with high response rates and has been shown to improve progression free as well as overall survival compared to BRAF inhibition alone. In multiple myeloma, BRAF mutations are detectable only in a minority of patients. Only few data are available regarding the clinical activity of BRAF inhibitors in BRAF-positive multiple myeloma patients, including some anecdotal reports on remarkable responses in individuals being resistant to all other available anti-myeloma treatment approaches. We here present the first report on the combination of vemurafenib and cobimetinib in a young patient with highly resistant and rapidly progressing multiple myeloma harboring the BRAF V600E mutation who achieved a rapid and sustained response to this combination therapy.

PET-CT guided SIB-IMRT combined with concurrent 5-FU/MMC for the treatment of anal cancer.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate local control (LC), survival and toxicity in anal cancer patients treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and concurrent chemotherapy at a single institution. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From August 2010 to May 2015, 26 patients were treated at our institution with IMRT and concurrent 5-fluorouracil/mitomycin-C (5-FU/MMC) for localized squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal (SCCAC). Radiotherapy (RT) with 50.4-60 Gy was delivered with a sequential boost in 31%, and a simultaneous-integrated boost (SIB-IMRT) in 69% of cases. Initial staging was based on PET-CT and MRI. Clinical measures of interest were the influence of PET-CT on staging and treatment planning, LC, disease free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), colostomy free survival (CFS) and toxicities. RESULTS: Median age was 61 years, 22 patients (85%) were female, and no patient was HIV-positive. The proportion of patients with stage I, II, IIIA and IIIB disease was 15%, 35%, 23% and 27%, respectively. PET-CT modified the extent of nodal disease in 9/23 cases (39%) and lead to major changes in treatment planning in 4/23 patients (17%). MRI was more accurate at identifying T4 disease. RT was delivered at full dose in 26 patients (100%) and chemotherapy in 22/26 patients (85%). Two patients (7.7%) required RT breaks. Median follow-up was 35 months [IQR: 19-52]. The 2-year LC, DFS, OS and CFS were 100%, 100%, 100% and 92%. Acute grade ≥3 dermatitis and diarrhea occurred in 73% and 8% of cases, respectively. Grade 3-4 neutropenia was seen in 10/23 patients (43%). Four patients (15%) developed chronic grade 2 GI toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: PET-CT provided additional information leading to major changes in treatment planning for 17% of patients. Considering our excellent outcomes, routine use of PET-CT as standard staging modality and IMRT planning procedure appears justified for patients with SCCAC.

Treatment with the HIV protease inhibitor nelfinavir triggers the unfolded protein response and may overcome proteasome inhibitor resistance of multiple myeloma in combination with bortezomib: a phase I trial (SAKK 65/08).

Downregulation of the unfolded protein response mediates proteasome inhibitor resistance in multiple myeloma. The Human Immunodeficieny Virus protease inhibitor nelfinavir activates the unfolded protein response in vitro. We determined dose-limiting toxicity and recommended dose for phase II of nelfinavir in combination with the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib. Twelve patients with advanced hematologic malignancies were treated with nelfinavir (2500-5000 mg/day p.o., days 1-14, 3+3 dose escalation) and bortezomib (1.3 mg/m(2), days 1, 4, 8, 11; 21-day cycles). A run in phase with nelfinavir monotherapy allowed pharmakokinetic/pharmakodynamic assessment of nelfinavir in the presence or absence of concomittant bortezomib. End points included dose-limiting toxicity, activation of the unfolded protein response, proteasome activity, toxicity and response to trial treatment. Nelfinavir 2×2500 mg was the recommended phase II dose identified. Nelfinavir alone significantly up-regulated expression of proteins related to the unfolded protein response in peripheral blood mononuclear cells and inhibited proteasome activity. Of 10 evaluable patients in the dose escalation cohort, 3 achieved a partial response, 4 stable disease for 2 cycles or more, while 3 had progressive disease as best response. In an exploratory extension cohort with 6 relapsed, bortezomib-refractory, lenalidomide-resistant myeloma patients treated at the recommended phase II dose, 3 reached a partial response, 2 a minor response, and one progressive disease. The combination of nelfinavir with bortezomib is safe and shows promising activity in advanced, bortezomib-refractory multiple myeloma. Induction of the unfolded protein response by nelfinavir may overcome the biological features of proteasome inhibitor resistance. (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: 01164709).

SAKK 24/09: safety and tolerability of bevacizumab plus paclitaxel vs. bevacizumab plus metronomic cyclophosphamide and capecitabine as first-line therapy in patients with HER2-negative advanced stage breast cancer - a multicenter, randomized phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Adding bevacizumab to chemotherapy improves response rates and progression-free survival (PFS) in metastatic breast cancer (mBC). We aimed to demonstrate decreased toxicity with metronomic chemotherapy/bevacizumab compared with paclitaxel/bevacizumab. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized phase III trial compared bevacizumab with either paclitaxel (arm A) or daily oral capecitabine-cyclophosphamide (arm B) as first-line treatment in patients with HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. The primary endpoint was the incidence of selected grade 3-5 adverse events (AE) including: febrile neutropenia, infection, sensory/motor neuropathy, and mucositis. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate, disease control rate, PFS, overall survival (OS), quality of life (QoL), and pharmacoeconomics. The study was registered prospectively with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01131195 on May 25, 2010. RESULTS: Between September 2010 and December 2012, 147 patients were included at 22 centers. The incidence of primary endpoint-defining AEs was similar in arm A (25 % [18/71]; 95 % CI 15-35 %) and arm B (24 % [16/68]; 95 % CI 13-34 %; P = 0.96). Objective response rates were 58 % (42/73; 95 % CI 0.46-0.69) and 50 % (37/74; 95 % CI 0.39-0.61) in arms A and B, respectively (P = 0.45). Median PFS was 10.3 months (95 % CI 8.7-11.3) in arm A and 8.5 months (95 % CI 6.5-11.9) in arm B (P = 0.90). Other secondary efficacy endpoints were not significantly different between study arms. The only statistically significant differences in QoL were less hair loss and less numbness in arm B. Treatment costs between the two arms were equivalent. CONCLUSION: This trial failed to meet its primary endpoint of a reduced rate of prespecified grade 3-5 AEs with metronomic bevacizumab, cyclophosphamide and capecitabine.

Weekly carboplatin in combination with weekly paclitaxel in the treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: a single center 10-year experience.

PURPOSE: The primary objective of this retrospective analysis is to assess efficacy and toxicity of a chemotherapeutic regimen using weekly carboplatin in combination with weekly paclitaxel as first-line therapy for advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: All patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC treated with weekly carboplatin AUC (area under the curve) 3 days 1, 8, 15, q4w in combination with weekly paclitaxel 75 mg/m(2) days 1, 8, 15, q4w as first-line therapy at the Kantonsspital Graubuenden between August 2004 and May 2014 were retrospectively analyzed by medical record review. RESULTS: A total of 90 patients were treated. Median age was 66 years (range 39-88). A total of 229 chemotherapy cycles were administered. Hematological and non-hematological toxicity were acceptable allowing for a median relative dose intensity for all planned treatment cycles of 76 %. Overall response rate was 34 %. Median overall and progression free survival was 6.3 (95 % CI, 4.9-8.7) and 3.4 (95 % CI, 2.3-5.1) months, respectively. Patients with an ECOG performance score (PS) of 0 or 1 had a significantly better OS compared to patients with a PS of ≥2. No statistically significant difference was observed in patients younger or older than 70 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: Weekly carboplatin in combination with weekly paclitaxel results in good response rates and acceptable toxicity in patients with advanced and metastatic NSCLC including patients with poor risk features (brain metastases, older age, and impaired PS). Nonetheless, selecting the right patient for a platinum-based combination treatment remains an important task in clinical practice.

Burden of symptoms associated with development of metastatic bone disease in patients with breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Women with breast cancer frequently develop painful bone metastases. This retrospective study was designed to longitudinally characterize patterns of patient-reported symptoms among patients with breast cancer relative to the diagnosis of bone metastases. METHODS: Patient records were identified from the Oncology Services Comprehensive Electronic Records (OSCER) database which includes outpatient oncology practices across the USA. Symptom burden was assessed by Patient Care Monitor (PCM) assessments, which are administered as part of routine care in a subset of these practices. Eligible patients were women diagnosed with breast cancer (ICD-9-CM 174.xx) who developed bone metastases (ICD-9-CM 198.5) and had ≥1 PCM assessment between January 2007 and December 2012. The pre-specified endpoint was the occurrence of moderate to severe symptom burden, defined as PCM score ≥4 (0-10 scale). RESULTS: One thousand one hundred five women (median age, 61) met the eligibility criteria. Worsening of symptoms, particularly fatigue and pain, occurred in the months leading up to the diagnosis of bone metastases. After bone metastases diagnosis, the rate of increase in the proportion of patients experiencing moderate/severe symptoms slowed, but continued to climb during follow-up. Median time to moderate/severe symptoms was 0.9 month for fatigue, 1 month for pain, 2.9 months for trouble sleeping, and 7.7 months for numbness/tingling. Half of the patients received bone-targeted agents after diagnosis of bone metastases. CONCLUSIONS: Symptom burden, especially pain and fatigue, increased both before and after the diagnosis of bone metastases, highlighting the need for proactive monitoring and management of symptoms in breast cancer patients.