A randomised controlled intervention trial to study the effect of a personalised lifestyle programme on cancer-related fatigue among colorectal cancer survivors: protocol for the SoFiT study.

Observational studies suggest that a healthy diet in combination with ample physical activity is associated with a lower prevalence of cancer-related fatigue. The SoFiT trial (SoFiT: Study on Fatigue: a lifestyle intervention among colorectal cancer survivors) will assess the effect of a personalised lifestyle programme on cancer-related fatigue in a randomised study. We designed a programme that aims to increase adherence to lifestyle recommendations on diet and physical activity. The programme was person-centred with regard to the lifestyle and personal characteristics of participants, to the determinants of behaviour of that participant, and to the preferences, opportunities and barriers of the participant. The effect of the programme was tested in the SoFiT trial: a two-armed, parallel, randomised controlled trial among adult stage I-III colorectal cancer survivors, who experience cancer-related fatigue after treatment completion; intended sample size n=184. Participants randomised to the intervention group received the personalised lifestyle programme. During 6 months, participants in the intervention group had individual sessions with a lifestyle coach of which four sessions were face-to-face and eight sessions were remote. After 6 months, participants randomised to the control group had access to two lifestyle coaching sessions and to the same materials that the intervention group also received. The primary endpoint of the trial is cancer-related fatigue. Secondary endpoints are sleep quality and duration, health-related quality of life, physical performance, depression and anxiety, skeletal muscle echo intensity and cross-sectional area, and gut microbiota composition. This trial will show the effects of a personalised lifestyle programme on cancer-related fatigue and on an extensive set of secondary outcomes. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05390398.

Transcriptomic subtyping of gastrointestinal malignancies.

Gastrointestinal (GI) cancers are highly heterogeneous at multiple levels. Tumor heterogeneity can be captured by molecular profiling, such as genetic, epigenetic, proteomic, and transcriptomic classification. Transcriptomic subtyping has the advantage of combining genetic and epigenetic information, cancer cell-intrinsic properties, and the tumor microenvironment (TME). Unsupervised transcriptomic subtyping systems of different GI malignancies have gained interest because they reveal shared biological features across cancers and bear prognostic and predictive value. Importantly, transcriptomic subtypes accurately reflect complex phenotypic states varying not only per tumor region, but also throughout disease progression, with consequences for clinical management. Here, we discuss methodologies of transcriptomic subtyping, proposed taxonomies for GI malignancies, and the challenges posed to clinical implementation, highlighting opportunities for future transcriptomic profiling efforts to optimize clinical impact.

Incidence, clinical management and prognosis of patients with small intestinal adenocarcinomas from 1999 through 2019: A nationwide Dutch cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Small intestinal adenocarcinomas (SIAs) are rare. Hence, randomized controlled trials are lacking and understanding of the disease features is limited. This nationwide cohort investigates incidence, treatment and prognosis of SIA patients, to improve disease outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data of 2697 SIA patients diagnosed from January 1999 through December 2019 were retrieved from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and Pathology Archive. Incidence was calculated using the revised European Standardized Rate. The influence of patient and tumor characteristics on overall survival (OS) was studied using survival analyses. RESULTS: The age-standardized incidence rate almost doubled from 0.58 to 1.06 per 100,000 person-years, exclusively caused by an increase in duodenal adenocarcinomas. OS did not improve over time. Independent factors for a better OS were a younger age, jejunal tumors, Lynch syndrome and systemic therapy. Only 13.8% of resected patients was treated with adjuvant chemotherapy, which improved OS compared to surgery alone in stage III disease (HR 0.47 (0.35-0.61)), but not in the limited group of deficient mismatch repair (MMR) patients (n = 53, HR 0.93 (0.25-3.47)). In the first-line setting, CAPOX was associated with improved OS compared to FOLFOX (HR 0.51 (0.36-0.72)). For oligometastatic patients, a metastasectomy significantly improved OS (HR 0.54 (0.36-0.80)). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of SIAs almost doubled in the past 20 years, with no improvement in OS. This retrospective non-randomized study suggests the use of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III disease and first-line CAPOX for metastatic patients. For selected oligometastatic patients, a metastasectomy may be considered. MMR-status testing could aid in clinical decision-making.

A consensus molecular subtypes classification strategy for clinical colorectal cancer tissues.

Consensus Molecular Subtype (CMS) classification of colorectal cancer (CRC) tissues is complicated by RNA degradation upon formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) preservation. Here, we present an FFPE-curated CMS classifier. The CMSFFPE classifier was developed using genes with a high transcript integrity in FFPE-derived RNA. We evaluated the classification accuracy in two FFPE-RNA datasets with matched fresh-frozen (FF) RNA data, and an FF-derived RNA set. An FFPE-RNA application cohort of metastatic CRC patients was established, partly treated with anti-EGFR therapy. Key characteristics per CMS were assessed. Cross-referenced with matched benchmark FF CMS calls, the CMSFFPE classifier strongly improved classification accuracy in two FFPE datasets compared with the original CMSClassifier (63.6% versus 40.9% and 83.3% versus 66.7%, respectively). We recovered CMS-specific recurrence-free survival patterns (CMS4 versus CMS2: hazard ratio 1.75, 95% CI 1.24-2.46). Key molecular and clinical associations of the CMSs were confirmed. In particular, we demonstrated the predictive value of CMS2 and CMS3 for anti-EGFR therapy response (CMS2&3: odds ratio 5.48, 95% CI 1.10-27.27). The CMSFFPE classifier is an optimized FFPE-curated research tool for CMS classification of clinical CRC samples.

Potential Adverse Outcomes of Shared Decision Making about Palliative Cancer Treatment: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: While shared decision making (SDM) is advocated for ethical reasons and beneficial outcomes, SDM might also negatively affect patients with incurable cancer. The current study explored whether SDM, and an oncologist training in SDM, are associated with adverse outcomes (i.e., patient anxiety, tension, helplessness/hopelessness, decisional uncertainty, and reduced fighting spirit). DESIGN: A secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial investigating the effects of SDM interventions in the context of advanced cancer. The relations between observed SDM (OPTION12), specific SDM elements (4SDM), oncologist SDM training, and adverse outcomes were analyzed. We modeled adverse outcomes as a multivariate phenomenon, followed by univariate regressions if significant. RESULTS: In total, 194 patients consulted by 31 oncologists were included. In a multivariate analysis, observed SDM and adverse outcomes were significantly related. More specifically, more observed SDM in the consultation was related to patients reporting more tension (P = 0.002) and more decisional uncertainty (P = 0.004) at 1 wk after the consultation. The SDM element "informing about the options" was especially found to be related to adverse outcomes, specifically to more helplessness/hopelessness (P = 0.002) and more tension (P = 0.016) at 1 wk after the consultation. Whether the patient consulted an oncologist who had received SDM training or not was not significantly related to adverse outcomes. No relations with long-term adverse outcomes were found. CONCLUSIONS: It is important for oncologists to realize that for some patients, SDM may temporarily be associated with negative emotions. Further research is needed to untangle which, when, and how adverse outcomes might occur and whether and how burden may be minimized for patients. HIGHLIGHTS: Observed shared decision making was related to more tension and uncertainty postconsultation in advanced cancer patientsHowever, training oncologists in SDM did not affect adverse outcomes.Further research is needed to untangle which, when, and how adverse outcomes might occur and how burden may be minimized.