Search

Introduction: Hepatocholangiocarcinoma (HCC-ICC) is a rare tumor presenting the histologic characteristics of both hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). As there is no consensus on it management, the therapeutic strategy rests on the specific treatments for HCC or ICC. Programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) inhibitors showed encouraging results in the second line treatment of HCC after sorafenib but it efficacy in HCC-ICC has never been reported. Methods and results: We present the case of a 72-year-old male patient treated for metastatic HCC-ICC due to a viral hepatitis C cirrhosis in progression after two lines of treatment. Tumor was characterized by a PDL-1 status of 85%. Patient received pembrolizumab at doses of 200 mg every 21 days by intravenous infusion. After one injection he was presented an immediate clinical benefit, a partial response was observed after two months of treatment and a complete response two months later. This response was maintained over time along with toxicity-free tumor control after 18 months treatment. Conclusion: To our knowledge, we reported for the first time the efficacy of a PD1 inhibitor treatment in a patient presenting metastatic HCC-ICC due to viral cirrhosis and overexpressing PDL-1 after failure of two lines of treatment.

Purpose: There is no consensus for parametrial boost technic while both transvaginal and transperineal approaches are discussed. A prototype was developed consisting of a perineal template, allowing transperineal needle insertion. This study analyzed acute toxicity of concomitant cervical and transperineal parametrial high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDRB) boost for locally advanced cervical cancer. Material and methods: From 01.2011 to 12.2014, 33 patients (pts) presenting a locally advanced cervical cancer with parametrial invasion were treated. After the first course of external beam radiation therapy with cisplatinum, HDRB was performed combining endocavitary and interstitial technique for cervical and parametrial disease. Post-operative delineation (CTV, bladder, rectum, sigmoid) and planification were based on CT-scan/MRI. HDRB was delivered in 3-5 fractions over 2-3 consecutive days. Acute toxicities occurring within 6 months after HDRB were retrospectively reviewed. Results: Median age was 56.4 years (27-79). Clinical stages were: T2b = 23 pts (69.7%), T3a = 1 pt (3%), T3b = 6 pts (18.2%), and T4a = 3 pts (9.1%). Median HDRB prescribed dose was 21 Gy (21-27). Median CTVCT (16 pts) and HR-CTV MRI (17 pts) were 52.6 cc (28.5-74.3), 31.9 cc (17.1-58), respectively. Median EQD2αβ10 for D90CTV and D90HR-CTV were 82.9 Gy (78.2-96.5), 84.8 Gy (80.6-91.4), respectively. Median EQD2αβ3 (CT/MRI) for D2cc bladder, rectum and sigmoid were 75.5 Gy (66.6-90.9), 64.4 Gy (51.9-77.4), and 60.4 Gy (50.9-81.1), respectively. Median follow-up was 14 months (ranged 6-51). Among the 24 pts with MFU = 24 months, 2-year LRFS rate, RRFS, and OS were 86.8%, 88.8%, and 94.1%, respectively. The rates of acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were 36% (G1 dysuria = 8 pts, G2 infection = 2 pt, G3 infection = 2 pts), and 27% (G1 diarrhea = 9 pts), respectively. One patient presented vaginal bleeding at the time of applicator withdrawal (G3-blood transfusion); no bleeding was observed due to the parametrial implant. Conclusions : Concomitant cervical and transperineal parametrial HDRB boost for locally advanced cervical cancer appears feasible and safe with no specific acute toxicity compare to cervical HDRB alone. Longer follow-up and larger patient cohort will be needed.

Background: Invasive fungal infections (IFIs) remain one of the worrying complications in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) due to their incidence and high level of attributable mortality. In light of these risks, antifungal prophylaxis has always been debated. We conducted a single-center retrospective study of two prophylactic antifungal agents (fluconazole/posaconazole) in 91 consecutive patients receiving induction chemotherapy for AML between 2005 and 2009, in order to evaluate the impact on the incidence of IFI and on the mycological flora of the patients. Methods: In total, 39 patients received prophylactic fluconazole versus 52 who received posaconazole. The baseline characteristics of the two groups were comparable. Results: Overall, 17 patients developed an IFI, with no difference in frequency between the two groups. Utilization of empirical or pre-emptive therapy was similar irrespective of the type of prophylaxis used. Mycological examination of stools revealed an increase in non-albicans Candida colonization in the fluconazole group during hospitalization and the appearance of Saccharomyces cerevisiae colonization in patients receiving posaconazole. Conclusion: The present study does not distinguish between fluconazole and posaconazole as a primary effective prevention against fungal infections. More prospective studies and meta-analyses are warranted.