Exposure-response relationship of cabozantinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated in routine care.

BACKGROUND: Interindividual pharmacokinetic variability may influence the clinical benefit or toxicity of cabozantinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). We aimed to investigate the exposure-toxicity and exposure-response relationship of cabozantinib in unselected mRCC patients treated in routine care. METHODS: This ambispective multicenter study enrolled consecutive patients receiving cabozantinib in monotherapy. Steady-state trough concentration (Cmin,ss) within the first 3 months after treatment initiation was used for the PK/PD analysis with dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and survival outcomes. Logistic regression and Cox proportional-hazards models were used to identify the risk factors of DLT and inefficacy in patients, respectively. RESULTS: Seventy-eight mRCC patients were eligible for the statistical analysis. Fifty-two patients (67%) experienced DLT with a median onset of 2.1 months (95%CI 0.7-8.2). In multivariate analysis, Cmin,ss was identified as an independent risk factor of DLT (OR 1.46, 95%CI [1.04-2.04]; p = 0.029). PFS and OS were not statistically associated with the starting dose (p = 0.81 and p = 0.98, respectively). In the multivariate analysis of PFS, Cmin, ss > 336 ng/mL resulted in a hazard ratio of 0.28 (95%CI, 0.10-0.77, p = 0.014). By contrast, Cmin, ss > 336 ng/mL was not statistically associated with longer OS. CONCLUSION: Early plasma drug monitoring may be useful to optimise cabozantinib treatment in mRCC patients treated in monotherapy, especially in frail patients starting at a lower than standard dose.

Impact of the Sars-Cov-2 outbreak on the initial clinical presentation of new solid cancer diagnoses: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic might have delayed cancer diagnosis and management. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the initial tumor stage of new cancer diagnoses before and after the pandemic. METHODS: We systematically reviewed articles that compared the tumor stage of new solid cancer diagnoses before and after the initial pandemic waves. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis to compare the rate of metastatic tumors and the distribution of stages at diagnosis. Subgroup analyses were performed by primary tumor site and by country. RESULTS: From 2,013 studies published between January 2020 and April 2022, we included 58 studies with 109,996 patients. The rate of metastatic tumors was higher after the COVID-19 outbreak than before (pooled OR: 1.29 (95% CI, 1.06-1.57), I2: 89% (95% CI, 86-91)). For specific cancers, common ORs reached statistical significance for breast (OR: 1.51 (95% CI 1.07-2.12)) and gynecologic (OR: 1.51 (95% CI 1.04-2.18)) cancers, but not for other cancer types. According to countries, common OR (95% CI) reached statistical significance only for Italy: 1.55 (1.01-2.39) and Spain:1.14 (1.02-1.29). Rates were comparable for stage I-II versus III-IV in studies for which that information was available, and for stages I-II versus stage III in studies that did not include metastatic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Despite inter-study heterogeneity, our meta-analysis showed a higher rate of metastatic tumors at diagnosis after the pandemic. The burden of social distancing policies might explain those results, as patients may have delayed seeking care.

Management of biliary tract cancers in early-onset patients: A nested multicenter retrospective study of the ACABI GERCOR PRONOBIL cohort.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Accumulating data has shown the rising incidence and poor prognosis of early-onset gastrointestinal cancers, but few data exist on biliary tract cancers (BTC). We aimed to analyse the clinico-pathological, molecular, therapeutic characteristics and prognosis of patients with early onset BTC (EOBTC, age ≤50 years at diagnosis), versus olders. METHODS: We analysed patients diagnosed with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and gallbladder adenocarcinoma between 1 January 2003 and 30 June 2021. Baseline characteristics and treatment were described in each group and compared. Progression-free survival, overall survival and disease-free survival were estimated in each group using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Overall, 1256 patients were included, 188 (15%) with EOBTC. Patients with EOBTC demonstrated fewer comorbidities (63.5% vs. 84.5%, p < .0001), higher tumour stage (cT3-4: 50.0% vs. 32.3%, p = .0162), bilobar liver involvement (47.8% vs. 32.1%, p = .0002), and metastatic disease (67.6% vs. 57.5%, p = .0097) compared to older. Patients with EOBTC received second-line therapy more frequently (89.5% vs. 81.0% non-EOBTC, p = .0224). For unresectable patients with BTC, median overall survival was 17.0 vs. 16.2 months (p = .0876), and median progression-free survival was 5.8 vs. 6.0 months (p = .8293), in EOBTC vs. older. In advanced stages, fewer actionable alterations were found in EOBTC (e.g., IDH1 mutations [7.8% vs. 16.6%]; FGFR2-fusion [11.7% vs. 8.9%]; p = .029). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with EOBTC have a more advanced disease at diagnosis, are treated more heavily at an advanced stage but show similar survival. A distinctive molecular profile enriched for FGRF2 fusions was found.

No changes in clinical presentation, treatment strategies and survival of pancreatic cancer cases during the SARS-COV-2 outbreak: A retrospective multicenter cohort study on real-world data.

The SARS-COV-2 pandemic disrupted healthcare systems. We assessed its impact on the presentation, care trajectories and outcomes of new pancreatic cancers (PCs) in the Paris area. We performed a retrospective multicenter cohort study on the data warehouse of Greater Paris University Hospitals (AP-HP). We identified all patients newly referred with a PC between January 1, 2019, and June 30, 2021, and excluded endocrine tumors. Using claims data and health records, we analyzed the timeline of care trajectories, the initial tumor stage, the treatment categories: pancreatectomy, exclusive systemic therapy or exclusive best supportive care (BSC). We calculated patients' 1-year overall survival (OS) and compared indicators in 2019 and 2020 to 2021. We included 2335 patients. Referral fell by 29% during the first lockdown. The median time from biopsy and from first MDM to treatment were 25 days (16-50) and 21 days (11-40), respectively. Between 2019 and 2020 to 2021, the rate of metastatic tumors (36% vs 33%, P = .39), the pTNM distribution of the 464 cases with upfront tumor resection (P = .80), and the proportion of treatment categories did not vary: tumor resection (32% vs 33%), exclusive systemic therapy (49% vs 49%), exclusive BSC (19% vs 19%). The 1-year OS rates in 2019 vs 2020 to 2021 were 92% vs 89% (aHR = 1.42; 95% CI, 0.82-2.48), 52% vs 56% (aHR = 0.88; 95% CI, 0.73-1.08), 13% vs 10% (aHR = 1.00; 95% CI, 0.78-1.25), in the treatment categories, respectively. Despite an initial decrease in the number of new PCs, we did not observe any stage shift. OS did not vary significantly.

External Validity of Two Scores for Predicting the Risk of Chemotherapy Toxicity Among Older Patients With Solid Tumors: Results From the ELCAPA Prospective Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Severe chemotherapy-related toxicities are frequent among older patients. The Chemotherapy Risk Assessment Scale for High-Age Patients (CRASH) and the Cancer and Aging Research Group Study (CARG) score were both developed to predict these events. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The objective of this study was to evaluate the scores' predictive performance in a prospective cohort, which included patients aged 70 years and older referred for a geriatric assessment prior to chemotherapy for a solid tumor. The main endpoints were grades 3/4/5 toxicities for the CARG score and grades 4/5 hematologic toxicities and grades 3/4/5 non-hematologic toxicities for the CRASH score. RESULTS: A total of 248 patients were included, of which 150 (61%) and 126 (51%) experienced at least one severe adverse event as defined respectively in CARG and CRASH studies. The incidence of adverse events was not significantly greater in the intermediate and high-risk CARG groups than in the low-risk group (odds ratio (OR) [95% CI] = 0.3 [0.1-1.4] (P = .1) and 0.4 [0.1-1.7], respectively). The area under curve (AUC) was 0.55. Similarly, the incidence of severe toxicities was no greater in the intermediate-low, intermediate-high, and high-risk CRASH groups than in the low-risk CRASH group (OR [95%CI] = 1 [0.3-3.6], 1 [0.3-3.4], and 1.5 [0.3-8.1], respectively). The AUC was 0.52. The type of cancer, performance status, comorbidities, body mass index, and MAX2 index were independently associated with grades 3/4/5 toxicities. CONCLUSION: In an external cohort of older patients referred for a pretherapeutic GA, the CARG and CRASH scores were poor predictors of the risk of chemotherapy severe toxicities.

Two-part joint model for a longitudinal semicontinuous marker and a terminal event with application to metastatic colorectal cancer data.

Joint models for a longitudinal biomarker and a terminal event have gained interests for evaluating cancer clinical trials because the tumor evolution reflects directly the state of the disease. A biomarker characterizing the tumor size evolution over time can be highly informative for assessing treatment options and could be taken into account in addition to the survival time. The biomarker often has a semicontinuous distribution, i.e., it is zero inflated and right skewed. An appropriate model is needed for the longitudinal biomarker as well as an association structure with the survival outcome. In this article, we propose a joint model for a longitudinal semicontinuous biomarker and a survival time. The semicontinuous nature of the longitudinal biomarker is specified by a two-part model, which splits its distribution into a binary outcome (first part) represented by the positive versus zero values and a continuous outcome (second part) with the positive values only. Survival times are modeled with a proportional hazards model for which we propose three association structures with the biomarker. Our simulation studies show some bias can arise in the parameter estimates when the semicontinuous nature of the biomarker is ignored, assuming the true model is a two-part model. An application to advanced metastatic colorectal cancer data from the GERCOR study is performed where our two-part model is compared to one-part joint models. Our results show that treatment arm B (FOLFOX6/FOLFIRI) is associated to higher SLD values over time and its positive association with the terminal event leads to an increased risk of death compared to treatment arm A (FOLFIRI/FOLFOX6).

Effect of Adapted Physical Activity in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: The APACaP GERCOR Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: The impact of adapted physical activity (APA) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (aPDAC) is unknown. This study evaluated whether APA in addition to standard care improved HRQoL in patients who have aPDAC who are receiving first-line chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced/metastatic PDAC and an ECOG performance status of 0 to 2 were randomized (1:1) to receive standard care (standard arm) or standard care plus a home-based 16-week APA program (APA arm). The primary objective was the effect of the APA program on 3 dimensions of the EORTC QLQ-C30: global health status, physical function, and fatigue at week 16 (W16), with a one-sided type I error of 0.017 for each dimension. The primary HRQoL analysis was performed in patients with available baseline and W16 scores for the dimensions (ie, the modified intention-to-treat population 1 [mITT1]), and secondary longitudinal HRQoL analyses using the mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) and time until definitive deterioration (TUDD) methods were performed in the mITT1 population and in patients with baseline and at least one follow-up questionnaire (mITT2 population). A difference of ≥5 points was considered to be clinically relevant. RESULTS: Of 326 included patients, 313 were randomized to the standard (n=157) or APA (n=156) arms. In the mITT1 population (n=172), the mean differences in global health status, physical function, and fatigue at W16 adjusted from baseline were -0.98 (SD, 23.9; P=.39), -2.08 (SD, 21.3; P=.26), and 4.16 (SD, 29.2; P=.17), respectively, showing a non-statistically significant benefit with APA. In the mITT2 population (n=259), APA was associated with statistically significant and clinically relevant improvement in 5 and 8 dimensions of the HRQoL in the longitudinal MMRM and TUDD analyses, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: APA improved several dimensions of HRQoL in patients with aPDAC receiving first-line chemotherapy and standard care.

Association between overweight, obesity, and quality of life of patients receiving an anticancer treatment for prostate cancer: a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PCa) and obesity are two ever-increasing public health issues that can independently impair the quality of life (QOL) of affected patients. Our objective was to evaluate the impact of overweight and obesity on the QOL of patients with PCa receiving an anticancer treatment. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. The search equation targeted studies that included PCa patients who had a body mass index (BMI) greater than 25 kg/m2, who were receiving anticancer therapy, and whose QOL was analyzed according to validated or non-validated scores. RESULTS: Of 759 identified articles, we selected 20 studies published between 2000 and 2019 of 12,529 patients treated for PCa, including 5549 overweight or obese patients. QOL assessment was performed using nine validated scales and two non-validated questionnaires. Of seven studies on radiotherapy, six found obesity to have a negative impact on patients' QOL (especially urinary, sexual, and bowel-related QOL). Thirteen studies assessed the QOL of patients who underwent radical prostatectomy, with a BMI > 25 kg/m2 having no observed impact. In obese patients under 65 years of age and without comorbidities, nerve-sparing surgery appeared to limit the deterioration of QOL. Four studies on brachytherapy found discordant results. One study showed greater QOL impairment in obese patients receiving first-generation hormone therapy than in those with normal or decreased BMI. No study evaluated the QOL of overweight or obese patients receiving other types of systemic treatment. CONCLUSION: Based on the published data, the level of evidence for an association between QOL and overweight or obesity in patients treated for PCa is not high. Prospective cohort studies including this type of patient population are warranted to answer this topical public health issue.

Bayesian estimation of two-part joint models for a longitudinal semicontinuous biomarker and a terminal event with INLA: Interests for cancer clinical trial evaluation.

Two-part joint models for a longitudinal semicontinuous biomarker and a terminal event have been recently introduced based on frequentist estimation. The biomarker distribution is decomposed into a probability of positive value and the expected value among positive values. Shared random effects can represent the association structure between the biomarker and the terminal event. The computational burden increases compared to standard joint models with a single regression model for the biomarker. In this context, the frequentist estimation implemented in the R package frailtypack can be challenging for complex models (i.e., a large number of parameters and dimension of the random effects). As an alternative, we propose a Bayesian estimation of two-part joint models based on the Integrated Nested Laplace Approximation (INLA) algorithm to alleviate the computational burden and fit more complex models. Our simulation studies confirm that INLA provides accurate approximation of posterior estimates and to reduced computation time and variability of estimates compared to frailtypack in the situations considered. We contrast the Bayesian and frequentist approaches in the analysis of two randomized cancer clinical trials (GERCOR and PRIME studies), where INLA has a reduced variability for the association between the biomarker and the risk of event. Moreover, the Bayesian approach was able to characterize subgroups of patients associated with different responses to treatment in the PRIME study. Our study suggests that the Bayesian approach using the INLA algorithm enables to fit complex joint models that might be of interest in a wide range of clinical applications.

Generalized pairwise comparisons for censored data: An overview.

The method of generalized pairwise comparisons (GPC) is an extension of the well-known nonparametric Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test for comparing two groups of observations. Multiple generalizations of Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test and other GPC methods have been proposed over the years to handle censored data. These methods apply different approaches to handling loss of information due to censoring: ignoring noninformative pairwise comparisons due to censoring (Gehan, Harrell, and Buyse); imputation using estimates of the survival distribution (Efron, Péron, and Latta); or inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW, Datta and Dong). Based on the GPC statistic, a measure of treatment effect, the "net benefit," can be defined. It quantifies the difference between the probabilities that a randomly selected individual from one group is doing better than an individual from the other group. This paper aims at evaluating GPC methods for censored data, both in the context of hypothesis testing and estimation, and providing recommendations related to their choice in various situations. The methods that ignore uninformative pairs have comparable power to more complex and computationally demanding methods in situations of low censoring, and are slightly superior for high proportions (>40%) of censoring. If one is interested in estimation of the net benefit, Harrell's c index is an unbiased estimator if the proportional hazards assumption holds. Otherwise, the imputation (Efron or Peron) or IPCW (Datta, Dong) methods provide unbiased estimators in case of proportions of drop-out censoring up to 60%.

Development of a natural language processing model for deriving breast cancer quality indicators : A cross-sectional, multicenter study.

OBJECTIVES: Medico-administrative data are promising to automate the calculation of Healthcare Quality and Safety Indicators. Nevertheless, not all relevant indicators can be calculated with this data alone. Our feasibility study objective is to analyze 1) the availability of data sources; 2) the availability of each indicator elementary variables, and 3) to apply natural language processing to automatically retrieve such information. METHOD: We performed a multicenter cross-sectional observational feasibility study on the clinical data warehouse of Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP). We studied the management of breast cancer patients treated at AP-HP between January 2019 and June 2021, and the quality indicators published by the European Society of Breast Cancer Specialist, using claims data from the Programme de Médicalisation du Système d'Information (PMSI) and pathology reports. For each indicator, we calculated the number (%) of patients for whom all necessary data sources were available, and the number (%) of patients for whom all elementary variables were available in the sources, and for whom the related HQSI was computable. To extract useful data from the free text reports, we developed and validated dedicated rule-based algorithms, whose performance metrics were assessed with recall, precision, and f1-score. RESULTS: Out of 5785 female patients diagnosed with a breast cancer (60.9 years, IQR [50.0-71.9]), 5,147 (89.0%) had procedures related to breast cancer recorded in the PMSI, and 3732 (72.5%) had at least one surgery. Out of the 34 key indicators, 9 could be calculated with the PMSI alone, and 6 others became so using the data from pathology reports. Ten elementary variables were needed to calculate the 6 indicators combining the PMSI and pathology reports. The necessary sources were available for 58.8% to 94.6% of patients, depending on the indicators. The extraction algorithms developed had an average accuracy of 76.5% (min-max [32.7%-93.3%]), an average precision of 77.7% [10.0%-97.4%] and an average sensitivity of 71.6% [2.8% to 100.0%]. Once these algorithms applied, the variables needed to calculate the indicators were extracted for 2% to 88% of patients, depending on the indicators. DISCUSSION: The availability of medical reports in the electronic health records, of the elementary variables within the reports, and the performance of the extraction algorithms limit the population for which the indicators can be calculated. CONCLUSIONS: The automated calculation of quality indicators from electronic health records is a prospect that comes up against many practical obstacles.

Nivolumab, nivolumab-ipilimumab, and VEGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors as first-line treatment for metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (BIONIKK): a biomarker-driven, open-label, non-comparative, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: We previously reported a 35-gene expression classifier identifying four clear-cell renal cell carcinoma groups (ccrcc1 to ccrcc4) with different tumour microenvironments and sensitivities to sunitinib in metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. Efficacy profiles might differ with nivolumab and nivolumab-ipilimumab. We therefore aimed to evaluate treatment efficacy and tolerability of nivolumab, nivolumab-ipilimumab, and VEGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs) in patients according to tumour molecular groups. METHODS: This biomarker-driven, open-label, non-comparative, randomised, phase 2 trial included patients from 15 university hospitals or expert cancer centres in France. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and had previously untreated metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using permuted blocks of varying sizes to receive either nivolumab or nivolumab-ipilimumab (ccrcc1 and ccrcc4 groups), or either a VEGFR-TKI or nivolumab-ipilimumab (ccrcc2 and ccrcc3 groups). Patients assigned to nivolumab-ipilimumab received intravenous nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses followed by intravenous nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks. Patients assigned to nivolumab received intravenous nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks. Patients assigned to VEGFR-TKIs received oral sunitinib (50 mg/day for 4 weeks every 6 weeks) or oral pazopanib (800 mg daily continuously). The primary endpoint was the objective response rate by investigator assessment per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. The primary endpoint and safety were assessed in the population who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02960906, and with the EU Clinical Trials Register, EudraCT 2016-003099-28, and is closed to enrolment. FINDINGS: Between June 28, 2017, and July 18, 2019, 303 patients were screened for eligibility, 202 of whom were randomly assigned to treatment (61 to nivolumab, 101 to nivolumab-ipilimumab, 40 to a VEGFR-TKI). In the nivolumab group, two patients were excluded due to a serious adverse event before the first study dose and one patient was excluded from analyses due to incorrect diagnosis. Median follow-up was 18·0 months (IQR 17·6-18·4). In the ccrcc1 group, objective responses were seen in 12 (29%; 95% CI 16-45) of 42 patients with nivolumab and 16 (39%; 24-55) of 41 patients with nivolumab-ipilimumab (odds ratio [OR] 0·63 [95% CI 0·25-1·56]). In the ccrcc4 group, objective responses were seen in seven (44%; 95% CI 20-70) of 16 patients with nivolumab and nine (50% 26-74) of 18 patients with nivolumab-ipilimumab (OR 0·78 [95% CI 0·20-3·01]). In the ccrcc2 group, objective responses were seen in 18 (50%; 95% CI 33-67) of 36 patients with a VEGFR-TKI and 19 (51%; 34-68) of 37 patients with nivolumab-ipilimumab (OR 0·95 [95% CI 0·38-2·37]). In the ccrcc3 group, no objective responses were seen in the four patients who received a VEGFR-TKI, and in one (20%; 95% CI 1-72) of five patients who received nivolumab-ipilimumab. The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were hepatic failure and lipase increase (two [3%] of 58 for both) with nivolumab, lipase increase and hepatobiliary disorders (six [6%] of 101 for both) with nivolumab-ipilimumab, and hypertension (six [15%] of 40) with a VEGFR-TKI. Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in two (3%) patients in the nivolumab group, 38 (38%) in the nivolumab-ipilimumab group, and ten (25%) patients in the VEGFR-TKI group. Three deaths were treatment-related: one due to fulminant hepatitis with nivolumab-ipilimumab, one death from heart failure with sunitinib, and one due to thrombotic microangiopathy with sunitinib. INTERPRETATION: We demonstrate the feasibility and positive effect of a prospective patient selection based on tumour molecular phenotype to choose the most efficacious treatment between nivolumab with or without ipilimumab and a VEGFR-TKI in the first-line treatment of metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb, ARTIC.

Impact of two waves of Sars-Cov2 outbreak on the number, clinical presentation, care trajectories and survival of patients newly referred for a colorectal cancer: A French multicentric cohort study from a large group of university hospitals.

The SARS-Cov2 may have impaired care trajectories, patient overall survival (OS), tumor stage at initial presentation for new colorectal cancer (CRC) cases. This study aimed at assessing those indicators before and after the beginning of the pandemic in France. In this retrospective cohort study, we collected prospectively the clinical data of the 11.4 million of patients referred to the Greater Paris University Hospitals (AP-HP). We identified new CRC cases between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2020, and compared indicators for 2018-2019 to 2020. pTNM tumor stage was extracted from postoperative pathology reports for localized colon cancer, and metastatic status was extracted from CT-scan baseline text reports. Between 2018 and 2020, 3602 and 1083 new colon and rectal cancers were referred to the AP-HP, respectively. The 1-year OS rates reached 94%, 93% and 76% for new CRC patients undergoing a resection of the primary tumor, in 2018-2019, in 2020 without any Sars-Cov2 infection and in 2020 with a Sars-Cov2 infection, respectively (HR 3.78, 95% CI 2.1-7.1). For patients undergoing other kind of anticancer treatment, the percentages are 64%, 66% and 27% (HR 2.1, 95% CI 1.4-3.3). Tumor stage at initial presentation, emergency level of primary tumor resection, delays between the first multidisciplinary meeting and the first anticancer treatment did not differ over time. The SARS-Cov2 pandemic has been associated with less newly diagnosed CRC patients and worse 1-year OS rates attributable to the infection itself rather than to its impact on hospital care delivery or tumor stage at initial presentation.

FOLFIRI plus BEvacizumab or aFLIbercept after FOLFOX-bevacizumab failure for COlorectal cancer (BEFLICO): An AGEO multicenter study.

After failure of first line FOLFOX-bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), adding either bevacizumab or aflibercept to second-line FOLFIRI increases survival compared to FOLFIRI alone. In this French retrospective multicentre cohort, we included patients with a mCRC treated with either FOLFIRI-aflibercept or FOLFIRI-bevacizumab. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR: CR + PR + SD) and safety. We included 681 patients from 36 centers, 326 and 355 in the aflibercept and bevacizumab groups, respectively. Median age was 64.2 years and 45.2% of patients were men. Most patients had RAS-mutated tumors (80.8%) and synchronous metastases (85.7%). After a median follow up of 31.2 months, median OS was 13.0 months (95% CI: 11.3-14.7) and 10.4 months (95% CI: 8.8-11.4) in the bevacizumab and aflibercept groups, respectively (P < .0001). Median PFS was 6.0 months (95% CI: 5.4-6.5) and 5.1 months (95% CI: 4.3-5.6) (P < .0001). After adjustment on age, PS, PFS of first line, primary tumor resection, metastasis location and RAS/BRAF status, bevacizumab was still associated with better OS (HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.59-0.86, P = .0003). FOLFIRI-bevacizumab combination was associated with longer OS and PFS, and a better tolerability, as compared to FOLFIRI-aflibercept after progression on FOLFOX-bevacizumab.

Artificial intelligence predicts immune and inflammatory gene signatures directly from hepatocellular carcinoma histology.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) displaying overexpression of immune gene signatures are likely to be more sensitive to immunotherapy, however, the use of such signatures in clinical settings remains challenging. We thus aimed, using artificial intelligence (AI) on whole-slide digital histological images, to develop models able to predict the activation of 6 immune gene signatures. METHODS: AI models were trained and validated in 2 different series of patients with HCC treated by surgical resection. Gene expression was investigated using RNA sequencing or NanoString technology. Three deep learning approaches were investigated: patch-based, classic MIL and CLAM. Pathological reviewing of the most predictive tissue areas was performed for all gene signatures. RESULTS: The CLAM model showed the best overall performance in the discovery series. Its best-fold areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) for the prediction of tumors with upregulation of the immune gene signatures ranged from 0.78 to 0.91. The different models generalized well in the validation dataset with AUCs ranging from 0.81 to 0.92. Pathological analysis of highly predictive tissue areas showed enrichment in lymphocytes, plasma cells, and neutrophils. CONCLUSION: We have developed and validated AI-based pathology models able to predict the activation of several immune and inflammatory gene signatures. Our approach also provides insights into the morphological features that impact the model predictions. This proof-of-concept study shows that AI-based pathology could represent a novel type of biomarker that will ease the translation of our biological knowledge of HCC into clinical practice. LAY SUMMARY: Immune and inflammatory gene signatures may be associated with increased sensitivity to immunotherapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. In the present study, the use of artificial intelligence-based pathology enabled us to predict the activation of these signatures directly from histology.

Nestin as a diagnostic and prognostic marker for combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) is a rare primary liver cancer (PLC) associated with a poor prognosis. Given the challenges in its identification and its clinical implications, biomarkers are critically needed. We aimed to investigate the diagnostic and prognostic value of the immunohistochemical expression of Nestin, a progenitor cell marker, in a large multicentric series of PLCs. METHODS: We collected 461 cHCC-CCA samples from 32 different clinical centers. Control cases included 368 hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) and 221 intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas (iCCAs). Nestin immunohistochemistry was performed on whole tumor sections. Diagnostic and prognostic performances of Nestin expression were determined using receiver-operating characteristic curves and Cox regression modeling. RESULTS: Nestin was able to distinguish cHCC-CCA from HCC with AUCs of 0.85 and 0.86 on surgical and biopsy samples, respectively. Performance was lower for the distinction of cHCC-CCA from iCCA (AUCs of 0.59 and 0.60). Nestin, however, showed a high prognostic value, allowing identification of the subset of cHCC-CCA ("Nestin High", >30% neoplastic cells with positive staining) associated with the worst clinical outcome (shorter disease-free and overall survival) after surgical resection and liver transplantation, as well as when assessment was performed on biopsies. CONCLUSION: We show in different clinical settings that Nestin has diagnostic value and that it is a useful biomarker to identify the subset of cHCC-CCA associated with the worst clinical outcome. Nestin immunohistochemistry may be used to refine risk stratification and improve treatment allocation for patients with this highly aggressive malignancy. LAY SUMMARY: There are different types of primary liver cancers (i.e. cancers that originate in the liver). Accurately identifying a specific subtype of primary liver cancer (and determining its associated prognosis) is important as it can have a major impact on treatment allocation. Herein, we show that a protein called Nestin could be used to refine risk stratification and improve treatment allocation for patients with combined hepatocellular carcinoma, a rare but highly aggressive subtype of primary liver cancer.

Adverse event load, onset, and maximum grade: A novel method of reporting adverse events in cancer clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Current adverse event reporting practices do not document longitudinal characteristics of adverse effects, and alternative methods are not easily interpretable and have not been employed by clinical trials. Introducing time parameters in the evaluation of safety that are comprehensive yet easily interpretable could allow for a better understanding of treatment quality. In this study, we developed and applied a novel adverse event reporting method based on longitudinal adverse event changes to aid describing, summarizing, and presenting adverse event profile. We termed it the "Adverse Event Load, Onset, and Maximum Grade" method. METHODS: We developed two adverse event summary metrics to complement the traditional maximum grade report. Onset time indicates the time period in which the maximum grade for a specific adverse event occurred and was defined as "early" (i.e. maximum grade happened for the first time before 6 weeks) or "late" (i.e. after the 6th week). Adverse event load indicates the overall severity of a specific adverse event over the entire treatment. Higher adverse event load indicates a worse overall experience. These metrics can be calculated for adverse events with different maximum grades, in treatments with planned changes (e.g. dosage changes), using data sets with different number of adverse event data points between treatments (e.g. treatments with longer cycle lengths may have less adverse event data points) and on data sets with different adverse event data availability (e.g. cycle basis and patient-outcome reports). We tested the utility of this method using individual patient data from two major backbone therapies ("Irinotecan" and "Oxaliplatin") from the N9741 trial available in the Fondation ARCAD database (fondationarcad.org). We investigated profiles of diarrhea, neutropenia/leukopenia, and nausea/vomiting. RESULTS: Our method provided additional information compared to traditional adverse event reports. For example, for nausea/vomiting, while patients in Irinotecan had a higher risk of experiencing maximum grade 3-4 (15.6% vs 7.6%, respectively; p < 0.001), patients in both groups experienced similar severity over time (adverse effect load = 0.102 and 0.096, respectively; p = 0.26), suggesting that patients in Oxaliplatin experienced a lower-grade but more persistent nausea/vomiting. For neutropenia/leukopenia, more patients in Irinotecan experienced their maximum grade for the first time early in the treatment compared to patients in Oxaliplatin (67.9% vs 41.7%; p < 0.001), regardless of maximum grade. Longitudinal information can help compare treatments or guide clinicians on choosing appropriate interventions for low-grade but persistent adverse event or early adverse event onset. CONCLUSION: We developed an adverse event reporting method that provides clinically relevant information about treatment toxicity by incorporating two longitudinal adverse event metrics to the traditional maximum grade approach. Future research should establish clinical benchmarks for metrics included in this adverse event reporting method.

Impact on Health-Related Quality of Life of Parenteral Nutrition for Patients with Advanced Cancer Cachexia: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition worsens health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and the prognosis of patients with advanced cancer. This study aimed to assess the clinical benefits of parenteral nutrition (PN) over oral feeding (OF) for patients with advanced cancer cachexia and without intestinal impairment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this prospective multicentric randomized controlled study, patients with advanced cancer and malnutrition were randomly assigned to optimized nutritional care with or without supplemental PN. Zelen's method was used for randomization to facilitate inclusions. Nutritional and performance status and HRQoL using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C15-PAL questionnaire were evaluated at baseline and monthly until death. Primary endpoint was HRQoL deterioration-free survival (DFS) defined as a definitive deterioration of ≥10 points compared with baseline, or death. RESULTS: Among the 148 randomized patients, 48 patients were in the experimental arm with PN, 63 patients were in the control arm with OF only, and 37 patients were not included because of early withdrawal or refused consent. In an intent to treat analysis, there was no difference in HRQoL DFS between the PN arm or OF arm for the three targeted dimensions: global health (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88-1.94; p = .18), physical functioning (HR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.06-2.35; p = .024), and fatigue (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.80-1.77; p = .40); there was a negative trend for overall survival among patients in the PN arm. In as treated analysis, serious adverse events (mainly infectious) were more frequent in the PN arm than in the OF arm (p = .01). CONCLUSION: PN improved neither HRQoL nor survival and induced more serious adverse events than OF among patients with advanced cancer and malnutrition. Clinical trial identification number. NCT02151214 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This clinical trial showed that parenteral nutrition improved neither quality of life nor survival and generated more serious adverse events than oral feeding only among patients with advanced cancer cachexia and no intestinal impairment. Parenteral nutrition should not be prescribed for patients with advanced cancer, cachexia, and no intestinal failure when life expectancy is shorter than 3 months. Further studies are needed to assess the useful period with a potential benefit of artificial nutrition for patients with advanced cancer.

Optimal oncologic management and mTOR inhibitor introduction are safe and improve survival in kidney and liver allograft recipients with de novo carcinoma.

Prognosis and oncologic treatment feasibility in solid organ transplant patients with de novo cancer remain poorly described. We investigated the impact of immunosuppressive therapy modifications after de novo cancer diagnosis on oncologic treatment feasibility, toxicities, and prognosis. Patients with de novo cancer (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancers) were selected from a monocentric cohort of 4,637 kidney and liver allograft recipients. We assessed oncologic treatment optimality according to guidelines and analyzed immunosuppressive drug modifications and oncologic treatment impacts on treatment feasibility, toxicities, and graft/patient survivals. A total of 180 patients with 205 cancers were included: mean age 60 years, median delay from transplantation to first de novo cancer 5 years. In 46% of cases, immunosuppressive therapy was modified after cancer diagnosis: 24% dose reduction and 22% mTOR inhibitor introduction. Optimal oncologic treatment was performed in 80% and 38% of patients with localized and advanced cancer respectively. Transplantation and immunosuppression hindered optimal oncologic treatment in 11% instances. Immunosuppressive therapy modifications did not affect oncologic treatment tolerance nor graft survival. In multivariate analysis, optimal oncologic treatment and mTOR inhibitor introduction improved survival of patients with de novo carcinoma. Optimal oncologic treatment is feasible in kidney and liver allograft recipients without safety concerns. Optimal oncologic treatment and mTOR inhibitor introduction seem to markedly improve survival of patients with de novo carcinoma.

Inclusion of Older Patients with Cancer in Clinical Trials: The SAGE Prospective Multicenter Cohort Survey.

BACKGROUND: The primary objective was to evaluate the rates of older patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) who were eligible for a clinical trial, invited to participate, and, ultimately, included. The secondary objective was to assess the reasons for ineligibility, noninvitation, and noninclusion and factors associated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Sujets AGés dans les Essais Cliniques (SAGE; Older Subjects in Clinical Trials) multicenter prospective cohort was established in seven centers (10 departments of medical oncology, digestive oncology, and digestive surgery) between 2012 and 2016. All patients with CRC aged 65 or older were studied. The endpoints were clinical trial availability, patient's eligibility, invitation, and enrollment in a trial. RESULTS: We included 577 older patients (mean age ± SD: 75.6 ± 7 years; males: 56%; metastasis: 41%). Thirty-seven trials were ongoing (one trial for older patients). Of the 474 patients with at least one available trial for their cancer stage and site, 127 (27%) were eligible; 84 of these 127 (66%) were invited to participate, and 70 of these 84 (83%) were included. In a multivariate analysis, noninvitation was found to be associated with older age (p = .016): adjusted relative risk (95% confidence interval), 0.14 (0.02-0.60) for ≥80 vs. 65-69; 0.54 (0.18-1.04) for 75-79 vs. 65-69; 0.47 (0.17-0.93) for 70-74 vs. 65-69. CONCLUSION: Three-quarters of older patients with CRC were ineligible for a clinical trial. One-third of the eligible patients were not invited to participate in a trial, and 17% of invited patients were not included. Few trials are reserved for older patients. Patients aged 80 or older were significantly less likely to be eligible for a trial and invited to participate. Clinical trial identification number: NCT01754636. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The results of this study suggest that barriers to participation of older patients in clinical trials are particularly marked at age 80 years or older. Secondly, the results emphasize the need for trials for older patients. Thirdly, there is also a need for more pragmatic "real-world" trials, rather than solely randomized trials performed in idealized settings with strictly selected patients. Large prospective observational cohorts with a precise follow-up of toxicity, functional decline, and quality of life may constitute one way of generating more data on the risk-benefit ratio for cancer treatments in older patients.