Search

Background Up to 70% of breast cancer patients report symptoms of insomnia during and after treatment. Despite the ubiquity of insomnia symptoms, they are under-screened, under-diagnosed and poorly managed in breast cancer patients. Sleep medications treat symptoms but are ineffective to cure insomnia. Other approaches such as cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia, relaxation through yoga and mindfulness are often not available for patients and are complex to implement. An aerobic exercise program could be a promising treatment and a feasible option for insomnia management in breast cancer patients, but few studies have investigated the effects of such a program on insomnia. Methods This multicenter, randomized clinical trial evaluate the effectiveness of a moderate to high intensity physical activity program (45 min, 3 times per week), lasting 12 weeks, in minimizing insomnia, sleep disturbances, anxiety/depression, fatigue, and pain, and in enhancing cardiorespiratory fitness. Patients with breast cancer be recruited from six hospitals in France and randomly allocated to either the “training” or the “control” group. Baseline assessments include questionnaires [Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index questionnaire (PSQI), Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS), Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS)], home polysomnography (PSG), and 7-day actigraphy coupled with completion of a sleep diary. Assessments are repeated at the end of training program and at six-month follow-up. Discussion This clinical trial will provide additional evidence regarding the effectiveness of physical exercise in minimizing insomnia during and after chemotherapy. If shown to be effective, exercise intervention programs will be welcome addition to the standard program of care offered to patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy. Trial registration : National Clinical Trials Number (NCT04867096).

Introduction: Soft tissue sarcomas (STSs) are a rare and heterogenous group of tumors, with poor prognostic, judging from their frequency to relapse. Few drugs are available after the conventional first-line regimen. Since 2007, trabectedin got approval after failure of anthracyclines and ifosfamide, for advanced or metastatic STS. This led to a FDA approval in 2015, but real-world evidence is still required, complementary to the pivotal phase II and III trials. Methods: One hundred twenty-six patients with STS, treated by trabectedin between 2002 and 2019, were analyzed in this retrospective study, in two French centers. The effects of trabectedin on survival, response, and toxicity were described. All patients were tested for toxicities, and efficacy was assessed in patients exposed to at least 2 cycles of trabectedin. Results: Three median cycles were administered per patient (1–79). Among the 113 patients analyzed for efficacy, the median progression-free survival was 3.0 months (95% CI: 2.3–4.8), with an overall survival of 12.3 months (95% CI: 10.2–16.9). The rate of disease control was 46% at the end of treatment. Myxoid liposarcoma (n = 11) was the histology subtype that benefited most from this chemotherapy with median progression-free survival and overall survival of 13.3 months (95% CI: 2.3–18.7) and 27.8 months (95% CI: 3.2–64.7), respectively. Adverse events were manageable. Discussion and Conclusion: Efficacy of trabectedin is confirmed in terms of clinical benefit and low toxicity, especially for myxoid liposarcoma. Combinatory regimens are under clinical trials to optimize the place of this chemotherapy.

Background The initial management of patients with sarcoma is a critical issue. We used the nationwide French National Cancer Institute-funded prospective sarcoma database NETSARC to report the management and oncologic outcomes in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) patients with sarcoma at the national level. Patients and methods NETSARC database gathers regularly monitored and updated data from patients with sarcoma. NETSARC was queried for patients (15–30 years) with sarcoma diagnosed from 2010 to 2017 for whom tumor resection had been performed. We reported management, locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) in AYA treated in French reference sarcoma centers (RSC) and outside RSC (non-RSC) and conducted multivariable survival analyses adjusted for classical prognostic factors. Results Among 3,227 patients aged 15–30 years with sarcoma diagnosed between 2010 and 2017, the study included 2,227 patients with surgery data available, among whom 1,290 AYAs had been operated in RSC, and 937 AYAs in non-RSC. Significant differences in compliance to guidelines were observed including pre-treatment biopsy (RSC: 85.9%; non-RSC 48.1%), pre-treatment imaging (RSC: 86.8%; non-RSC: 56.5%) and R0 margins (RSC 57.6%; non-RSC: 20.2%) (p Conclusions This study highlights the importance for AYA patients with sarcoma to be managed in national sarcoma reference centers involving multidisciplinary medical teams with paediatric and adult oncologists.

International audience; Simple Summary As patients with rare cancers face specific problems, reference networks have been developed in several European countries and then at the European level to improve their management. In some cases, the specialized centers belonging to reference networks provide remote services (specialized diagnosis review, discussion in the Multidisciplinary Tumour Board, etc.) to increase access to these services. Using data from the national sarcoma reference network implemented in France (NETSARC+), the IGeAS research program assesses the potential of its organization to address the geographical inequalities in cancer management. We analyze the individual, clinical, and geographical determinants of the overall survival of sarcoma patients in France. We found no association between the overall survival of sarcoma patients and variables measuring their social deprivation, remoteness from reference centers, and geographical context. Following previous results from the research program, this study suggests that reference network organization should be considered to reduce cancer inequalities. The national reference network NETSARC+ provides remote access to specialized diagnosis and the Multidisciplinary Tumour Board (MTB) to improve the management and survival of sarcoma patients in France. The IGeAS research program aims to assess the potential of this innovative organization to address geographical inequalities in cancer management. Using the IGeAS cohort built from the nationwide NETSARC+ database, the individual, clinical, and geographical determinants of the 3-year overall survival of sarcoma patients in France were analyzed. The survival analysis was focused on patients diagnosed in 2013 (n = 2281) to ensure sufficient hindsight to collect patient follow-up. Our study included patients with bone (16.8%), soft-tissue (69%), and visceral (14.2%) sarcomas, with a median age of 61.8 years. The overall survival was not associated with geographical variables after adjustment for individual and clinical factors. The lower survival in precarious population districts [HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.48] in comparison to wealthy metropolitan areas (HR = 1) found in univariable analysis was due to the worst clinical presentation at diagnosis of patients. The place of residence had no impact on sarcoma patients' survival, in the context of the national organization driven by the reference network. Following previous findings, this suggests the ability of this organization to go through geographical barriers usually impeding the optimal management of cancer patients.

Objectives The goal of this study was to determine the benefit in terms of time disease control (TDC) achieved by the succession of chemotherapy beyond the third line in patients treated for recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. Secondary objectives were to identify patients who benefited from treatments beyond 3 lines and to estimate overall survival and disease-free progression lengths. Materials and Methods The cohort of 122 patients was identified from a pharmacy database of patients treated with chemotherapy between 1992 and 2010. The evaluation of benefit obtained by each line was based on TDC duration, defined as the interval between the beginning of the treatment and the date of progressive disease or death. Results Median TDC durations was 4.15 (0–54.7), 4 (0–21.7), 3.34 (0–29.6), 4.97 (0–29.2), and 3.13 months (0–15) for the fourth to eighth lines, respectively. Time to disease control was longer than 6 months in 34% to 40% of patients treated by lines 4 to 8. The most important factor influencing TDC length beyond the third line was the TDC duration observed in the 2 previous lines of therapy. Median overall survival after the third line was 15.3 months (95% confidence interval, 12–20 months). Factors associated with longer overall survival after 3 lines were performance status lower than 2 (P = 0.0058), no hepatic metastasis (P = 0.0098), no pulmonary metastasis (P = 0.0003), and platinum sensitivity (P = 0.04) Conclusions These results may justify the administration of chemotherapy beyond the third line, in particular when the 2 previous lines are effective and resulted in disease control longer than 6 months.