Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma-its history, clinical features, molecular biology and current therapy.

Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) is a remarkably rare tumor arising from endothelial cells that is classified as a vascular tumor in the WHO classification. The tumor is predominantly characterized by the presence of fusion genes, such as WWTR1-CAMTA1 or YAP1-TFE3, with a minority of cases exhibiting other rare fusion genes. EHE exhibits a broad age of onset, typically presenting at ~50 years, but it is not uncommon in pediatric populations. It manifests in a variety of organs, including the liver, lung, soft tissue and bone. Initial multiple-organ involvement is also observed. The tumor's biological behavior and prognosis vary substantially based on the primary site of manifestation. From a therapeutic perspective, initial active surveillance might be considered in selected cases, although surgical intervention remains the mainstay of treatment, especially for localized single-organ involvement. Chemotherapy is administered to patients with progressive unresectable tumors. Recent advances in the biological analysis of EHE fusion genes have elucidated their diverse functions. Additionally, next-generation sequencing has facilitated the identification of other mutations beyond the fusion genes. These continuous efforts to understand the biology of the fusion genes themselves and/or the dysregulated signaling by fusion genes are expected to lead to the development of novel therapeutic strategies for EHE. This article aims to provide a comprehensive review of EHE, encompassing its historical context, clinical manifestations, molecular biology and the current state of treatment.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF during chemotherapy for invasive breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis from Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy for breast cancer can cause neutropenia, increasing the risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) and serious infections. The use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) as primary prophylaxis has been explored to mitigate these risks. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of primary G-CSF prophylaxis in patients with invasive breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted according to the "Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development" using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies assessing using G-CSF as primary prophylaxis in invasive breast cancer were included. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and FN incidence. Meta-analyses were performed for outcomes with sufficient data. RESULTS: Eight RCTs were included in the qualitative analysis, and five RCTs were meta-analyzed for FN incidence. The meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in FN incidence with primary G-CSF prophylaxis (risk difference [RD] = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.01-0.43, p = 0.04). Evidence for improvement in OS with G-CSF was inconclusive. Four RCTs suggested a tendency for increased pain with G-CSF, but statistical significance was not reported. CONCLUSIONS: Primary prophylactic use of G-CSF is strongly recommended for breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, as it has been shown to reduce the incidence of FN. While the impact on OS is unclear, the benefits of reducing FN are considered to outweigh the potential harm of increased pain.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF for patients with Ewing sarcomas: a systematic review for the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Multidrug chemotherapy for Ewing sarcoma can lead to severe myelosuppression. We proposed two clinical questions (CQ): CQ #1, "Does primary prophylaxis with G-CSF benefit chemotherapy for Ewing sarcoma?" and CQ #2, "Does G-CSF-based intensified chemotherapy improve Ewing sarcoma treatment outcomes?". METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi web databases, including English and Japanese articles published from 1990 to 2019. Two reviewers assessed the extracted papers and analyzed overall survival (OS), febrile neutropenia (FN) incidence, infection-related mortality, quality of life (QOL), and pain. RESULTS: Twenty-five English and five Japanese articles were identified for CQ #1. After screening, a cohort study of vincristine, ifosfamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide chemotherapy with 851 patients was selected. Incidence of FN was 60.8% with G-CSF and 65.8% without; statistical tests were not conducted. Data on OS, infection-related mortality, QOL, or pain was unavailable. Consequently, CQ #1 was redefined as a future research question. As for CQ #2, we found two English and five Japanese papers, of which one high-quality randomized controlled trial on G-CSF use in intensified chemotherapy was included. This trial showed trends toward lower mortality and a significant increase in event-free survival for 2-week interval regimen with the G-CSF primary prophylactic use compared with 3-week interval. CONCLUSION: This review indicated that G-CSF's efficacy as primary prophylaxis in Ewing sarcoma, except in children, is uncertain despite its common use. This review tentatively endorses intensified chemotherapy with G-CSF primary prophylaxis for Ewing sarcoma.

Effectiveness and safety of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor priming regimen for acute myeloid leukemia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Clinical Practice Guideline for the use of G-CSF 2022 from the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes of relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remain poor. Although the concomitant use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and anti-chemotherapeutic agents has been investigated to improve the antileukemic effect on AML, its usefulness remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate the effects of G-CSF priming as a remission induction therapy or salvage chemotherapy. METHODS: We performed a thorough literature search for studies related to the priming effect of G-CSF using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library. A qualitative analysis of the pooled data was performed, and risk ratios (RRs) with confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and summarized. RESULTS: Two reviewers independently extracted and accessed the 278 records identified during the initial screening, and 62 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility in second screening. Eleven studies were included in the qualitative analysis and 10 in the meta-analysis. A systematic review revealed that priming with G-CSF did not correlate with an improvement in response rate and overall survival (OS). The result of the meta-analysis revealed the tendency for lower relapse rate in the G-CSF priming groups without inter-study heterogeneity [RR, 0.91 (95% CI 0.82-1.01), p = 0.08; I2 = 4%, p = 0.35]. In specific populations, including patients with intermediate cytogenetic risk and those receiving high-dose cytarabine, the G-CSF priming regimen prolonged OS. CONCLUSIONS: G-CSF priming in combination with intensive remission induction treatment is not universally effective in patients with AML. Further studies are required to identify the patient cohort for which G-CSF priming is recommended.

Primary prophylaxis with G-CSF for patients with non-round cell soft tissue sarcomas: a systematic review for the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is an essential supportive agent for chemotherapy-induced severe myelosuppression. We proposed two clinical questions (CQ): CQ #1, "Does primary prophylaxis with G-CSF benefit chemotherapy for non-round cell soft tissue sarcoma (NRC-STS)?" and CQ #2, "Does G-CSF-based intensified chemotherapy improve NRC-STS treatment outcomes?" for the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology. METHODS: A literature search was performed on the primary prophylactic use of G-CSF for NRC-STSs. Two reviewers assessed the extracted papers and analyzed overall survival, incidence of febrile neutropenia, infection-related mortality, quality of life, and pain. RESULTS: Eighty-one and 154 articles were extracted from the literature search for CQs #1 and #2, respectively. After the first and second screening, one and two articles were included in the final evaluation, respectively. Only some studies have addressed these two clinical questions through a literature review. CONCLUSION: The clinical questions were converted to future research questions because of insufficient available data. The statements were proposed: "The benefit of primary G-CSF prophylaxis is not clear in NRC-STS" and "The benefit of intensified chemotherapy with primary G-CSF prophylaxis is not clear in NRC-STSs." G-CSF is often administered as primary prophylaxis when chemotherapy with severe myelosuppression is administered. However, its effectiveness and safety are yet to be scientifically proven.

Effectiveness of G-CSF in chemotherapy for digestive system tumors: a systematic review of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 delineated by the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) reportedly reduces the risk of neutropenia and subsequent infections caused by cancer chemotherapy. Although several guidelines recommend using G-CSF in primary prophylaxis according to the incidence rate of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN), the effectiveness of G-CSF in digestive system tumor chemotherapy remains unclear. To address these clinical questions, we conducted a systematic review as part of revising the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 published by the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology. METHODS: This systematic review addressed two main clinical questions (CQ): CQ1: "Is primary prophylaxis with G-CSF effective in chemotherapy?", and CQ2: "Is increasing the intensity of chemotherapy with G-CSF effective?" We reviewed different types of digestive system tumors, including esophageal, gastric, pancreatic, biliary tract, colorectal, and neuroendocrine carcinomas. PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web databases were searched for information sources. Independent systematic reviewers conducted two rounds of screening and selected relevant records for each CQ. Finally, the working group members synthesized the strength of evidence and recommendations. RESULTS: After two rounds of screening, 5/0/3/0/2/0 records were extracted for CQ1 of esophageal/gastric/pancreatic/biliary tract/colorectal/ and neuroendocrine carcinoma, respectively. Additionally, a total of 2/6/1 records were extracted for CQ2 of esophageal/pancreatic/colorectal cancer, respectively. The strength of evidence and recommendations were evaluated for CQ1 of colorectal cancer; however, we could not synthesize recommendations for other CQs owing to the lack of records. CONCLUSION: The use of G-CSF for primary prophylaxis in chemotherapy for colorectal cancer is inappropriate.

Comparison between a single dose of PEG G-CSF and multiple doses of non-PEG G-CSF: a systematic review and meta-analysis from Clinical Practice Guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

BACKGROUD: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is widely used for the primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia (FN). Two types of G-CSF are available in Japan, namely G-CSF chemically bound to polyethylene glycol (PEG G-CSF), which provides long-lasting effects with a single dose, and non-polyethylene glycol-bound G-CSF (non-PEG G-CSF), which must be sequentially administrated for several days. METHODS: This current study investigated the utility of these treatments for the primary prophylaxis of FN through a systematic review of the literature. A detailed literature search for related studies was performed using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library. Data were independently extracted and assessed by two reviewers. A qualitative analysis or meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate six outcomes. RESULTS: Through the first and second screenings, 23 and 18 articles were extracted for qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis, respectively. The incidence of FN was significantly lower in the PEG G-CSF group than in the non-PEG G-CSF group with a strong quality/certainty of evidence. The differences in other outcomes, such as overall survival, infection-related mortality, the duration of neutropenia (less than 500/µL), quality of life, and pain, were not apparent. CONCLUSIONS: A single dose of PEG G-CSF is strongly recommended over multiple-dose non-PEG G-CSF therapy for the primary prophylaxis of FN.

Therapeutic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with febrile neutropenia: a comprehensive systematic review for clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022 from the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Febrile neutropenia represents a critical oncologic emergency, and its management is pivotal in cancer therapy. In several guidelines, the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia is not routinely recommended except in high-risk cases. The Japan Society of Clinical Oncology has updated its clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF, incorporating a systematic review to address this clinical question. METHODS: The systematic review was conducted by performing a comprehensive literature search across PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web, focusing on publications from January 1990 to December 2019. Selected studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, and cohort and case-control studies. Evaluated outcomes included overall survival, infection-related mortality, hospitalization duration, quality of life, and pain. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 332 records. Following two rounds of screening, two records were selected for both qualitative and quantitative synthesis including meta-analysis. Regarding infection-related mortality, the event to case ratio was 5:134 (3.73%) in the G-CSF group versus 6:129 (4.65%) in the non-G-CSF group, resulting in a relative risk of 0.83 (95% confidence interval, 0.27-2.58; p = 0.54), which was not statistically significant. Only median values for hospitalization duration were available from the two RCTs, precluding a meta-analysis. For overall survival, quality of life, and pain, no suitable studies were found for analysis, rendering their assessment unfeasible. CONCLUSION: A weak recommendation is made that G-CSF treatment not be administered to patients with febrile neutropenia during cancer chemotherapy. G-CSF treatment can be considered for patients at high risk.

Optimal timing of prophylactic pegylated G-CSF after chemotherapy administration for patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis from Clinical Practice Guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

INTRODUCTION: The timing of prophylactic pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) administration during cancer chemotherapy varies, with Day 2 and Days 3-5 being the most common schedules. Optimal timing remains uncertain, affecting efficacy and adverse events. This systematic review sought to evaluate the available evidence on the timing of prophylactic pegylated G-CSF administration. METHODS: Based on the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development, we searched the PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and Cochrane Library databases for literature published from January 1990 to December 2019. The inclusion criteria included studies among the adult population using pegfilgrastim. The search strategy focused on timing-related keywords. Two reviewers independently extracted and assessed the data. RESULTS: Among 300 initial search results, only four articles met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis for febrile neutropenia incidence suggested a potential higher incidence when pegylated G-CSF was administered on Days 3-5 than on Day 2 (odds ratio: 1.27, 95% CI 0.66-2.46, p = 0.47), with a moderate certainty of evidence. No significant difference in overall survival or mortality due to infections was observed. The trend of severe adverse events was lower on Days 3-5, without statistical significance (odds ratio: 0.72, 95% CI 0.14-3.67, p = 0.69) and with a moderate certainty of evidence. Data on pain were inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: Both Day 2 and Days 3-5 were weakly recommended for pegylated G-CSF administration post-chemotherapy in patients with cancer. The limited evidence highlights the need for further research to refine recommendations.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF for lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis to develop clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is commonly administered to cancer patients undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy, especially when incidence rate of febrile neutropenia (FN) surpasses 20%. While primary prophylaxis with G-CSF has been proven effective in preventing FN in patients with cancer, there is limited evidence regarding its efficacy in specifically, lung cancer. Our systematic review focused on the efficacy of G-CSF primary prophylaxis in lung cancer. METHODS: We extracted studies on non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) using the PubMed, Ichushi Web, and Cochrane Library databases. Two reviewers assessed the extracted studies for each type of lung cancer and conducted quantitative and meta-analyses of preplanned outcomes, including overall survival, FN incidence, infection-related mortality, quality of life, and musculoskeletal pain. RESULTS: A limited number of studies were extracted: two on NSCLC and six on SCLC. A meta-analysis was not conducted owing to insufficient data on NSCLC. Two case-control studies explored the efficacy of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF in patients with NSCLC (on docetaxel and ramucirumab therapy) and indicated a lower FN frequency with G-CSF. For SCLC, meta-analysis of five studies showed no significant reduction in FN incidence, with an odds ratio of 0.38 (95% confidence interval 0.03-5.56, P = 0.48). Outcomes other than FN incidence could not be evaluated due to low data availability. CONCLUSION: Limited data are available on G-CSF prophylaxis in lung cancer. Primary prophylaxis with G-CSF may be weakly recommended in Japanese patients with NSCLC undergoing docetaxel and ramucirumab combination therapy.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF after induction therapy for acute myeloid leukemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022 from the Japan society of clinical oncology.

Although granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) reduces the incidence, duration, and severity of neutropenia, its prophylactic use for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remains controversial due to a theoretically increased risk of relapse. The present study investigated the effects of G-CSF as primary prophylaxis for AML with remission induction therapy. A detailed literature search for related studies was performed using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library. Data were independently extracted and assessed by two reviewers. A qualitative analysis of pooled data was conducted, and the risk ratio with corresponding confidence intervals was calculated in the meta-analysis and summarized. Sixteen studies were included in the qualitative analysis, nine of which were examined in the meta-analysis. Although G-CSF significantly shortened the duration of neutropenia, primary prophylaxis with G-CSF did not correlate with infection-related mortality. Moreover, primary prophylaxis with G-CSF did not affect disease progression/recurrence, overall survival, or adverse events, such as musculoskeletal pain. However, evidence to support or discourage the use of G-CSF as primary prophylaxis for adult AML patients with induction therapy remains limited. Therefore, the use of G-CSF as primary prophylaxis can be considered for adult AML patients with remission induction therapy who are at a high risk of infectious complications.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor during dose-dense chemotherapy for urothelial cancer: Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022.

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) decreases the incidence, duration, and severity of febrile neutropenia (FN); however, dose reduction or withdrawal is often preferred in the management of adverse events in the treatment of urothelial cancer. It is also important to maintain therapeutic intensity in order to control disease progression and thereby relieve symptoms, such as hematuria, infection, bleeding, and pain, as well as to prolong the survival. In this clinical question, we compared treatment with primary prophylactic administration of G-CSF to maintain therapeutic intensity with conventional standard therapy without G-CSF and examined the benefits and risks as major outcomes. A detailed literature search for relevant studies was performed using PubMed, Ichu-shi Web, and Cochrane Library. Data were extracted and evaluated independently by two reviewers. A qualitative analysis of the pooled data was performed, and the risk ratios with corresponding confidence intervals were calculated and summarized in a meta-analysis. Seven studies were included in the qualitative analysis, two of which were reviewed in the meta-analysis of dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) therapy, and one randomized controlled study showed a reduction in the incidence of FN. Primary prophylactic administration of G-CSF may be beneficial, as shown in a randomized controlled study of dose-dense MVAC therapy. However, there are no studies on other regimens, and we made a "weak recommendation to perform" with an annotation of the relevant regimen (dose-dense MVAC).

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis of G-CSF during chemotherapy for prostate cancer, Japanese clinical guideline for appropriate use of G-CSF: clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

BACKGROUND: Docetaxel (DTX) is commonly used as a primary chemotherapy, and cabazitaxel (CBZ) has shown efficacy in patients who are DTX resistant. Primary prophylactic granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) therapy is currently used with CBZ treatment in routine clinical care in Japan. METHODS: In this study, we performed a systematic review following the Minds guidelines to investigate the effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF during chemotherapy for prostate cancer and to construct G-CSF guidelines for primary prophylaxis use during chemotherapy. A comprehensive literature search of various electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi) was performed on January 10, 2020, to identify studies published between January 1990 and December 31, 2019 that investigate the impact of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF during CBZ administration on clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Ultimately, nine articles were included in the qualitative systematic review. Primary G-CSF prophylaxis during CBZ administration for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer was difficult to assess in terms of correlation with overall survival, mortality from infection, and patients' quality of life. These difficulties were owing to the lack of randomized controlled trials comparing patients with and without primary prophylaxis of G-CSF during CBZ administration. However, some retrospective studies have suggested that it may reduce the incidence of febrile neutropenia. CONCLUSION: G-CSF may be beneficial as primary prophylaxis during CBZ administration for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer, and we made a "weak recommendation to perform" with an annotation of the relevant regimen.

RHAMM marks proliferative subpopulation of human colorectal cancer stem cells.

The cancer stem cell (CSC) theory features typically rare self-renewing subpopulations that reconstitute the heterogeneous tumor. Identification of molecules that characterize the features of CSCs is a key imperative for further understanding tumor heterogeneity and for the development of novel therapeutic strategies. However, the use of conventional markers of CSCs is still insufficient for the isolation of bona fide CSCs. We investigated organoids that are miniature forms of tumor tissues by reconstructing cellular diversity to identify specific markers to characterize CSCs in heterogeneous tumors. Here, we report that the receptor for hyaluronan-mediated motility (RHAMM) expresses in a subpopulation of CD44+ conventional human colorectal CSC fraction. Single-cell transcriptomics of organoids highlighted RHAMM-positive proliferative cells that revealed distinct characteristics among the various cell types. Prospectively isolated RHAMM+CD44+ cells from the human colorectal cancer tissues showed highly proliferative characteristics with a self-renewal ability in comparison with the other cancer cells. Furthermore, inhibition of RHAMM strongly suppressed organoid formation in vitro and inhibited tumor growth in vivo. Our findings suggest that RHAMM is a potential therapeutic target because it is a specific marker of the proliferative subpopulation within the conventional CSC fraction.

Preferential B cell differentiation by combined immune checkpoint blockade for renal cell carcinoma is associated with clinical response and autoimmune reactions.

Combined immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) is effective therapy for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, the dynamic changes in circulating B cells induced by combined ICB have not been clarified. The present study prospectively examined 22 patients scheduled to receive ICB for unresectable or metastatic RCC between March 2018 and August 2021. Eleven patients received combined therapy with anti-PD-1 (nivolumab) and anti-CTLA-4 (ipilimumab), and the other 11 patients received nivolumab monotherapy. Comprehensive phenotypes of circulating immune cells obtained prior to and after ICB therapy were analyzed by flow cytometry. Although the proportion of naïve B cells among total B cells was significantly decreased, that of switched memory B cells was significantly increased after combined therapy. In responders, the proportion of B cells among peripheral blood mononuclear cells was significantly higher prior to ICB therapy, and the proportion of switched memory B cells among total B cells tended to increase after ICB therapy. Of note, the proportion of plasmablasts among total B cells was significantly increased after ICB therapy in patients who developed severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs), and the proportion of B cells among peripheral blood decreased significantly. Furthermore, in four of five patients who developed immune-related hypophysitis following combined therapy, anti-pituitary antibody was detected in the serum. These results suggested that immune-related hypophysitis was closely related to the increase in circulating plasmablasts. Collectively, this study suggests that combined ICB promotes the differentiation of B cell populations, which is associated with efficient tumor suppression and development of irAEs.

Survival outcomes including salvage therapy of adult head and neck para-meningeal rhabdomyosarcoma: a multicenter retrospective study from Japan.

BACKGROUND: Rhabdomyosarcoma is the most common soft tissue sarcoma in children, but rare in adults. Para-meningeal rhabdomyosarcoma in head and neck (PM-HNRMS) is less applicable for surgery due to the anatomic reason. PM-HNRMS has a poor prognosis in children. However, its clinical outcomes remain unclear in adults due to the rarity. Further, there is almost no detailed data about salvage therapy. METHODS: We retrospectively examined the adult patients with PM-HNRMS treated at institutions belonging to the Kyushu Medical Oncology Group from 2009 to 2022. We evaluated the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of the patients who received a first-line therapy. We also reviewed the clinical outcomes of patients who progressed against a first-line therapy and received salvage therapy. RESULTS: Total 11 patients of PM-HNRMS received a first-line therapy. The characteristics were as follows: median age: 38 years (range 25 - 63 years), histology (alveolar/spindle): 10/1, and risk group (intermediate/high): 7/4. As a first-line therapy, VAC and ARST0431-based regimen was performed in 10 and 1 patients, respectively. During a first-line therapy, definitive radiation for all lesions were performed in seven patients. The median PFS was 14.2 months (95%CI: 6.0 - 25.8 months): 17.1 months (95%CI: 6.0 - not reached (NR)) for patients with stage I-III and 8.5 months (95%CI: 5.2 - 25.8 months) for patients with stage IV. The 1-year and 3-year PFS rates were 54.5% and 11.3% for all patients. Median OS in all patients was 40.8 months (95%CI: 12.1 months-NR): 40.8 months (95%CI: 12.1 - NR) for patients with stage I-III and NR for patients with stage IV. The 5-year OS rate was 48.5% for all patients. Among seven patients who received salvage therapy, three are still alive, two of whom remain disease-free for over 4 years after completion of the last therapy. Those two patients received multi-modal therapy including local therapy for all detected lesions. CONCLUSION: The cure rate of adult PM-HNRMS is low in spite of a first-line therapy in this study. Salvage therapy might prolong the survival in patients who received the multi-modal therapy including local therapy for all detected lesions.

Pattern of disease progression during third-line or later chemotherapy with nivolumab associated with poor prognosis in advanced gastric cancer: a multicenter retrospective study in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Accelerated tumor growth during immunotherapy in pre-existing measurable lesions, hyperprogressive disease (HPD), has been reported. However, progression of non-measurable lesions and new lesions are frequently observed in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). METHODS: This retrospective study involved AGC patients at 24 Japanese institutions who had measurable lesions and received nivolumab after ≥ 2 lines of chemotherapy. HPD was defined as a ≥ two-fold increase in the tumor growth rate of measurable lesions. The pattern of disease progression was classified according to new lesions in different organs and ascites appeared/increase of ascites. RESULTS: Of 245 patients, 147 (60.0%) showed progressive disease (PD) as the best response and 41 (16.7%) showed HPD during nivolumab monotherapy. There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between patients with HPD and those with PD other than HPD (median OS 5.0 vs 4.8 months; hazard ratio [HR] 1.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.6-1.5; p = 1.0). Fifty-three patients developed new lesions in different organs and 58 had appearance/increase of ascites; these patients showed shorter OS than those without each of these features (median OS 3.3 vs 7.1 months, HR 1.8, 95% CI 1.2-2.7, p = 0.0031 for new lesions, and 3.0 vs 7.8 months, HR 2.6, 95% CI 1.8-3.8, p < 0.0001 for ascites). Thirty-one patients who had both features showed the worst prognosis (median OS 2.6 months). CONCLUSIONS: New lesions in different organs and appearance/increase of ascites, rather than the original definition of HPD, are the patterns of disease progression associated with poor prognosis in AGC patients receiving nivolumab whose best response was PD.

Japanese Society of Medical Oncology/Japan Society of Clinical Oncology/Japanese Society of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology-led clinical recommendations on the diagnosis and use of immunotherapy in patients with DNA mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) tumors, third edition.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials have reported the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) advanced solid tumors. The accumulated evidence of tumor agnostic agent has been made since PD-1 inhibitor was approved and used in clinical practice. Therefore, we have revised the guideline "Japan Society of Clinical Oncology provisional clinical opinion for the diagnosis and use of immunotherapy in patients with deficient DNA mismatch repair tumors, cooperated by Japanese Society of Medical Oncology, First Edition". METHODS: Clinical questions regarding medical care were formulated for patients with dMMR advanced solid tumors. Relevant publications were searched by PubMed and Cochrane Database. Critical publications and conference reports were added manually. Systematic reviews were performed for each clinical question for the purpose of developing clinical recommendations. The committee members identified by Japan Society of Clinical Oncology (JSCO), Japanese Society of Medical Oncology (JSMO), and Japanese society of pediatric hematology/oncology (JSPHO) voted to determine the level of each recommendation considering the strength of evidence, expected risks and benefits to patients, and other related factors. Thereafter, a peer review by experts nominated from JSCO, JSMO, and JSPHO and the public comments among all societies' members were done. RESULTS: The current guideline describes two clinical questions and eight recommendations for whom, when, and how MMR status should be tested. CONCLUSION: In this guideline, the committee proposed eight recommendations for performing MMR testing properly to select patients who are likely to benefit from immunotherapy.

Japanese Society of Medical Oncology/Japan Society of Clinical Oncology/Japanese Society of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology-led clinical recommendations on the diagnosis and use of immunotherapy in patients with high tumor mutational burden tumors.

The development of novel antitumor agents and accompanying biomarkers has improved survival across several tumor types. Previously, we developed recommendations for tumor-agnostic treatments in patients with solid tumors with DNA mismatch repair deficient or neurotrophic receptor tyrosine kinase fusions. Recently, immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown efficacy in patient with tumor mutation burden-high (TMB-H) solid tumors and have been established as a third tumor-agnostic agent, making it necessary to develop the guideline prioritized for these patients. Clinical questions regarding medical care were formulated for patients with TMB-H advanced solid tumors. Relevant publications were searched by PubMed and Cochrane Database. Critical publications and conference reports were added manually. Systematic reviews were performed for each clinical question for the purpose of developing clinical recommendations. The committee members identified by Japan Society of Clinical Oncology (JSCO), Japanese Society of Medical Oncology (JSMO), and Japanese society of pediatric hematology/oncology (JSPHO) voted to determine the level of each recommendation considering the strength of evidence, expected risks and benefits to patients, and other related factors. Thereafter, a peer review by experts nominated from JSCO, JSMO, and JSPHO, and the public comments among all societies' members was done. The current guideline describes three clinical questions and seven recommendations for whom, when, and how TMB should be tested, and what is recommended for patients with TMB-H advanced solid tumors. In this guideline, the committee proposed seven recommendations for performing TMB testing properly to select patients who are likely to benefit from immunotherapy.

Japanese Society of Medical Oncology/Japan Society of Clinical Oncology/Japanese Society of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology-led clinical recommendations on the diagnosis and use of tropomyosin receptor kinase inhibitors in adult and pediatric patients with neurotrophic receptor tyrosine kinase fusion-positive advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials have reported the efficacy of tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitors against neurotrophic receptor tyrosine kinase (NTRK) fusion gene-positive advanced solid tumors. The accumulated evidence of tumor-agnostic agent has made since TRK inhibitors were approved and used in clinical practice. Therefore, we have revised the 'Japan Society of Clinical Oncology (JSCO)/Japanese Society of Medical Oncology (JSMO)-led clinical recommendations on the diagnosis and use of tropomyosin receptor kinase inhibitors in adult and pediatric patients with neurotrophic receptor tyrosine kinase fusion-positive advanced solid tumors, cooperated by the Japanese Society of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology (JSPHO)'. METHODS: Clinical questions regarding medical care were formulated for patients with NTRK fusion-positive advanced solid tumors. Relevant publications were searched by PubMed and Cochrane Database. Critical publications and conference reports were added manually. Systematic reviews were performed for each clinical question for the purpose of developing clinical recommendations. The committee members identified by JSCO, JSMO, and JSPHO voted to determine the level of each recommendation considering the strength of evidence, expected risks and benefits to patients, and other related factors. Thereafter, a peer review by experts nominated from JSCO, JSMO, and JSPHO, and the public comments among all societies' members was done. RESULTS: The current guideline describes 3 clinical questions and 14 recommendations for whom, when, and how NTRK fusion should be tested, and what is recommended for patients with NTRK fusion-positive advanced solid tumors. CONCLUSION: The committee proposed 14 recommendations for performing NTRK testing properly to select patients who are likely to benefit from TRK inhibitors.