Search

Introduction Performance status (PS) is an established prognostic factor in patients with advanced cancer and is usually scored by the treating physician. The EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire as reported by cancer patients is a validated tool to assess quality of life (QoL). Subjectivity plays a role in both assessments, and data on a direct comparison are scarce. Methods We compared the prognostic value for overall survival (OS) of the WHO PS to the baseline physical function scale of the EORTC QLQ-C30 (QLQ-C30 PF) in a prospective randomised phase 3 trial in advanced colorectal cancer (ACC), the CAIRO study. Patients were divided into two groups based on the baseline QLQ-C30 PF. QLQ-C30 PF was considered ‘good’ if the score was more than 66.7% and ‘poor’ if 66.7% or less. Results were validated in a subsequent phase 3 study in ACC, the CAIRO2 study. Results The median OS for patients with a ‘good’ QLQ-C30 PF and a ‘poor’ PF in patients with WHO PS 0 was 20.3 months (n = 300) and 10.4 months (n = 44), in patients with WHO PS 1 16.8 months (n = 125) and 10.1 months (n = 63), and in patients with WHO PS 2 16.2 months (n = 11) and 9.9 months (n = 12), respectively. In a Cox regression model which included other prognostic factors, ‘good’ versus ‘poor’ QLQ-C30 PF was significantly prognostic for OS (0.57 95% confidence interval: 0.46–0.72), but not WHO PS. These results were confirmed in the CAIRO2 study. Conclusions We demonstrate in ACC patients that PF, as assessed by patients using the EORTC QLQ-C30, is superior in terms of prognostic value to WHO PS as scored by physicians. Our data support to include the results of baseline EORTC QLQ-C30 PF instead of WHO PS as a stratification parameter in oncology trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Synchronous metastases of colorectal cancer (CRC) are considered to be of worse prognostic value compared with metachronous metastases, but only few and conflicting data have been reported on this issue.Methods: We retrospectively investigated patient demographics, primary tumour characteristics and overall survival (OS) in 550 advanced CRC patients with metachronous vs synchronous metastases, who participated in the phase III CAIRO study. For this purpose only patients with a prior resection of the primary tumour were considered.Results: The clinical and pathological characteristics associated with poor prognosis that we observed more often in patients with synchronous metastases (n=280) concerned an abnormal serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) concentration (P=0.01), a worse WHO performance status (P=0.02), primary tumour localisation in the colon (P=0.002) and a higher T stage (P=0.0006). No significant difference in median OS was observed between patients with synchronous metastases and metachronous metastases (17.6 vs 18.5 months, respectively, P=0.24).Conclusion: Despite unfavourable clinicopathological features in patients with synchronous metastases with a resected primary tumour compared to patients with metachronous metastases, no difference in the median OS was observed. Possible explanations include a (partial) chemoresistance in patients with metachronous disease because of previous adjuvant treatment, whereas differences between the two groups in screening procedures resulting in a lead time bias to diagnosis or in prognostic molecular markers remain speculative. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Early and correct assessment of treatment-related mortality is highly important in clinical cancer trials. However, no data are available on the quality of safety monitoring. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Upfront primary tumor resection (PTR) has been associated with longer overall survival (OS) in patients with synchronous unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in retrospective analyses. The aim of the CAIRO4 study was to investigate whether the addition of upfront PTR to systemic therapy resulted in a survival benefit in patients with synchronous mCRC without severe symptoms of their primary tumor. This randomized phase III trial was conducted in 45 hospitals in The Netherlands and Denmark. Eligibility criteria included previously untreated mCRC, unresectable metastases, and no severe symptoms of the primary tumor. Patients were randomized (1 : 1) to upfront PTR followed by systemic therapy or systemic therapy without upfront PTR. Systemic therapy consisted of first-line fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab in both arms. Primary endpoint was OS in the intention-to-treat population. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01606098. Between August 2012 and February 2021, 206 patients were randomized. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 204 patients were included (n = 103 without upfront PTR, n = 101 with upfront PTR) of whom 116 were men (57%) with median age of 65 years (interquartile range 59-71 years). Median follow-up was 69.4 months. Median OS in the arm without upfront PTR was 18.3 months (95% confidence interval 16.0-22.2 months) compared with 20.1 months (95% confidence interval 17.0-25.1 months) in the upfront PTR arm (P = 0.32). The number of grade 3-4 events was 71 (72%) in the arm without upfront PTR and 61 (65%) in the upfront PTR arm (P = 0.33). Three deaths (3%) possibly related to treatment were reported in the arm without upfront PTR and four (4%) in the upfront PTR arm. Addition of upfront PTR to palliative systemic therapy in patients with synchronous mCRC without severe symptoms of the primary tumor does not result in a survival benefit. This practice should no longer be considered standard of care. • Adding upfront primary tumor resection to systemic therapy does not result in OS benefit in unresectable metastatic CRC. • No subgroups were identified who experience survival benefit of upfront primary tumor resection. • A small fraction of patients solely treated with systemic therapy require surgery for symptom palliation later on. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To compare the median overall survival of patients with isolated nonresectable liver metastases in comparable groups of patients treated with either isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) with melphalan or systemic chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]