Search

Bevacizumab is a humanized anti-VeGF monoclonal antibody able to produce clinical beneit in advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (nsCLC) patients when combined to chemotherapy. At present, while there is a rising attention to bevacizumab-related adverse events and costs, no clinical or biological markers have been identiied and validated for baseline patient selection. preclinical indings suggest an important role for myeloid-derived inlammatory cells, such as neutrophils and monocytes, in the development of VeGF-independent angiogenesis. We conducted a retrospective analysis to investigate the role of peripheral blood cells count and of an inlammatory index, the neutrophil-tolymphocyte ratio (nLR), as predictors of clinical outcome in nsCLC patients treated with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy. one hundred twelve nsCLC patients treated with chemotherapy ± bevacizumab were retrospectively evaluated for the predictive value of clinical or laboratory parameters correlated with inlammatory status. Univariate analysis revealed that a high number of circulating neutrophils and monocytes as well as a high nLR were associated with shorter progression-free survival (pFs) and overall survival (os) in bevacizumab-treated patients only. We have thus developed a model based on the absence or the presence of at least one of the above-mentioned inlammatory parameters. We found that the absence of all variables strongly correlated with longer pFs and os (9.0 vs. 7.0 mo, hR: 0.39, p = 0.002; and 20.0 vs. 12.0 mo, hR: 0.29, p < 0.001 respectively) only in nsCLC patients treated with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy. our results suggest that a baseline systemic inlammatory status is marker of resistance to bevacizumab treatment in nsCLC patients. © 2013 Landes Bioscience.

Background: Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Gemcitabine is the mainstay treatment for advanced disease. However, almost all up-to-date trials, that evaluated the benefit of gemcitabine-combination schedules, failed to demonstrate an improvement in overall survival (OS). In this study, we performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) to investigate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine-based combination regimens as compared to gemcitabine alone in the management of pancreatic cancer. Methods: Clinical trials were collected by searching different databases (PubMed, Embase and the Central Registry of Controlled Trials of the Cochrane Library) and abstracts from major cancer meetings. We considered period ranging from January 1997 to January 2012. Primary end-point was OS, secondary end-points were response rate (RR), disease control rate (DCR) and safety. Hazard ratios (HRs) of OS, odds-ratios (ORs) of RR, DCR and risk ratios of grade 3-4 toxicity rates (TRs), were extracted as presented in retrieved studies and used for statistical analysis. Meta-analytic estimates were derived using random-effects model. Findings: Thirty-four trials for a total of 10,660 patients were selected and included in the final analysis. The analysis showed that combination chemotherapy confers benefit in terms of OS (HR: 0.93; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.89-0.97; p = 0.001). ORs for both RR and DCR demonstrated a significant advantage for combination therapy (OR for RR: 0.60, 95%CI: 0.47-0.76, p < 0.001; OR for DCR: 0.79; 95%CI: 0.66-0.93; p = 0.006). Toxicities were more frequent with the combination treatment and significance in terms of risk ratio was reached for diarrhoea (0.53, 95%CI: 0.36-0.79), nausea (0.74, 95%CI: 0.56-0.96), neutropenia (0.71, 95%CI: 0.59-0.85) and thrombocytopenia (0.57, 95%CI: 0.43-0.75). Interpretation: The combination chemotherapy as compared to gemcitabine alone significantly improves OS in advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). However, this advantage is marginal whereas the treatment-related toxicity is increased, suggesting the use of gemcitabine-based combination regimens only in selected patient populations. New prospective trials, based on translational approaches and innovative validated biomarkers, are eagerly awaited on this topic. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Aim A systematic review and meta-analysis from literature has been performed to assess the impact of targeted therapy in advanced pancreatic cancer. Methods By searching different literature databases and major cancer meetings proceedings, data from all randomized clinical trials designed to investigate molecular targeted agents in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer were collected. The time-frame between January 2007 and March 2015 was selected. Data on predefined end-points, including overall survival, progression-free survival in terms of Hazard Ratio and response-rate were extracted and analyzed by a random effects model. Pooled data analysis was performed according to the DerSimonian and Laird test. The occurrence of publication bias was investigated through Begg's test by visual inspection of funnel plots. Results Twenty-seven randomized clinical trials for a total of 8205 patients were selected and included in the final analysis. A significant benefit was demonstrated for anti-EGFR agents on overall survival (HR = 0.880; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.797–0.972; p = 0.011). In the pooled analysis no benefit on overall survival (OS: pooled HR = 0.957; 95%CI 0.900–1.017; p = 0.153), or progression-free survival (PFS: pooled HR = 0.908; 95%CI 0.817–1.010; p = 0.075) for targeted-based therapies as compared to conventional treatments could be demonstrated. No advantage was reported in response-rate (OR for RR = 1.210; 95%CI 0.990–1.478; p = 0.063). Begg's funnel plot showed no evidence of publication bias. Conclusion The use of molecular targeted agents does not translate into clinical benefit. Therefore, our work highlights the need to identify predictive factors for patient selection and rationally designed clinical trials.

Background: At present, there is uncertainty on the best systemic treatment in first-line setting for RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. Indeed, several chemotherapy and biologics combinations showed an improvement on survival. We performed a systematic review with a pair-wise and bayesan meta-analysis to rank the best strategy for these patients. Methods: A systematic literature search through March 2017 was performed to evaluate the association between several treatment combinations and overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and toxicity rate (TR) in RAS WT mCRC patients. Data were extracted from studies and pooled using the random-effect model for pair-wise meta-analyses and bayesan model for network meta-analysis (NMA). Results: Eight studies with a total of 2518 individuals were included in the meta-analyses. Pooled analyses for subgroups stratified by type of schedule and tumor location demonstrated that anti-EGFR + doublet had the best OS when compared to doublet ± bevacizumab (0.767; 95%CI, 0.695–0.846; P < 0.0001). This benefit is limited to LSCC when compared to a doublet-based schedule and doublet + bevacizumab (HRs, 0.692; 95%CI, 0.596–0.804; P < 0.001; 0.706; 95%CI, 0.584–0.854; P < 0.001; respectively). No significant differences are detected in PFS, whereas the cetuximab-based regimens showed the highest ORR and TR. In NMA our ranking showed the best performance for FOLFOX + panitumumab. Conclusions: Our study indicates that FOLFOX + panitumumab has the major probability to provide an improvement of survival with a good safety profile in patients with RAS WT mCRC with an added value from selection based on sidedness.

Although significant therapeutic improvement has been achieved in the last 10 years, the survival of metastatic colorectal cancer patients remains in a range of 28 to 30 months. Presently, systemic treatment includes combination chemotherapy with oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan together with a backbone of 5-fluorouracil/levofolinate, alone or in combination with monoclonal antibodies to VEGFA (bevacizumab) or EGF receptor (cetuximab and panitumumab). The recent rise of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the therapeutic scenario has renewed scientific interest in the investigation of immunotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer patients. According to our experience and view, here, we review the immunological strategies investigated for the treatment of this disease, including the use of tumor target-specific cancer vaccines, chemo-immunotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors.

It is still uncertain if targeted therapy-based regimens in advanced gastric cancer actually produce survival benefit. To shed light on this important question, we performed a systematic review and meta-analyses on each relevant targeted-pathway. By searching literature databases and proceedings of major cancer meetings in the time-frame 2005–2014, 22 randomized clinical trials exploring targeted therapy for a total of 7022 advanced gastric cancer patients were selected and included in the final analysis. Benefit was demonstrated for antiangiogenic agents in terms of overall survival (HR 0.759; 95%CI 0.655–0.880; p < 0.001). Conversely no benefit was found for EGFR pathway (HR 1.077; 95%CI 0.847–1.370; p = 0.543). Meta-analysis of HER-2 pathway confirmed improvement in terms of survival outcome, already known for this class of drugs (HR 0.823; 95%CI 0.722–0.939; p = 0.004). Pooled analysis demonstrated a significant survival benefit (OS: HR 0.823; PFS: HR 0.762) with acceptable tolerability profile for targeted-based therapies as compared to conventional treatments. This finding conflicts with the outcome of most individual studies, probably due to poor trial design or patients selection. In conclusion, our findings demonstrate a significant survival benefit for targeted therapy in its whole, which can be ascribed to anti-angiogenic and anti-HER2 agents.

The GOLFIG-2 phase III trial was designed to compare the immunobiological activity and antitumor efficacy of GOLFIG chemoimmunotherapy regimen with standard FOLFOX-4 chemotherapy in frontline treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. This trial was conceived on the basis of previous evidence of antitumor and immunomodulating activity of the GOLFIG regimen in mCRC. GOLFIG-2 is a multicentric open/ label phase III trial (EUDRACT: 2005-003458-81). Chemo-naive mCRC patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive biweekly standard FOLFOX-4 or GOLFIG [gemcitabine (1000 mg/m 2, day 1); oxaliplatin (85 mg/m2, day 2); levofolinate (100 mg/m2, days 1-2), 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) (400 mg/m2 in bolus followed by 24 h infusion at 800 mg/m2,days 1-2), sc. GM-CSF (100 μg, days 3-7); sc. aldesleukin (0 ° 5 MIU bi-daily, days 8-14 and 17-30)] treatments. The study underwent early termination because of poor recruitment in the control arm. After a median follow-up of 43.83 months, GOLFIG regimen showed superiority over FOLFOX in terms of progression-free survival [median 9 ° 23 (95% confidence interval (CI), 6 ° 9-11.5) vs. median 5.70 (95% CI, 3.38-8.02) months; hazard ratio (HR): 0.52 (95% CI, 0.35-0.77), P=0 ° 002] and response rate [66.1% (95% CI, 0.41-0.73) vs. 37 °0% (95% CI, 0.28-0.59), P=0.002], with a trend to longer survival [median 21.63 (95% CI, 18.09-25.18) vs. 14.57mo (95% CI, 9.07-20.07); HR: 0 ° 79 (95% CI, 0.52-1.21); P=0.28]. Patients in the experimental arm showed higher incidence of non-neutropenic fever (18.5%), autoimmunity signs (18.5%), an increase in the number of monocytes, eosinophils, CD4+ T lymphocytes, natural killer cells, and a decrease in immunoregulatory (CD3+CD4 +CD25+ FoxP3+) T cells. Taken together, these findings provide proofof- principle that GOLFIG chemoimmunotherapy may represent a novel reliable option for first-line treatment of mCRC. Copyright © 2014 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.