Search

Background FLOT regimen is the standard perioperative treatment in Western countries for patients with locally advanced gastric (GC) or gastroesophageal junction cancer (GEJC). High microsatellite instability (MSI-H) and Mismatch Repair deficient (dMMR) demonstrated a favorable prognostic role and a concomitant negative predictive impact on the benefit of perioperative 5-fluorouracil-based doublets; however, its role in pts receiving FLOT chemotherapy is still unclear. Methods This is a retrospective, multicenter observational study of 265 pts with GC/GEJC treated with perioperative FLOT regimen in 11 Italian oncology centers between January 2017 to December 2021 and analyzed for microsatellite status. Results The MSI-H phenotype was found in 27 (10.2%) of 265 analyzed tumors. Compared to microsatellite stable (MSS) and Mismatch Repair proficient (pMMR) cases, MSI-H/dMMR were more frequently female (48.1% vs. 27.3%, p = 0.0424), elderly pts (age > 70 years, 44.4% vs. 13.4%, p = 0.0003), Laurens’s intestinal type (62.5% vs. 36.1%, p = 0.02) and pts with a primary location tumor in the antrum (37 vs. 14.3%, p = 0.0004). A statistically significant difference in the rate of pathologically negative lymph node emerged (63% vs 30.7%, p = 0.0018). Compared to the MSS/pMMR tumor population, the MSI-H/dMMR subgroup had a better DFS (median not reached [NR] vs. 19.5 [15.59–23.59] mos, p = 0.031) and OS (median NR vs. 34.84 [26.68–47.60] mos, p = 0.0316). Conclusions These real-world data confirm that FLOT treatment is effective in daily clinical practice for locally advanced GC/GEJC, also in the MSI-H/dMMR subgroup. It also showed a higher rate of nodal status downstaging and a better outcome of MSI-H/dMMR pts in comparison to MSS/pMMR.

The publisher regrets that at the time the article was published the name of the author N. La Verde was mistakenly abbreviated as N.L. Verde. This has now been corrected. The publisher would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.

Background: The presence of KRASG12C mutation in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) correlates with poor outcome. Although different selective inhibitors are under clinical development, the optimal treatment remains uncertain. Thus, we conducted a retrospective analysis in a large cohort of patients with KRASG12C mCRC treated in 12 Italian oncology units. Patients and methods: Patients with unresectable mCRC harboring KRASG12C mutation receiving a first-line chemotherapy doublet or triplet between 2011 and 2021 were included in the study. Evaluation of overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) analysis was carried out. Results: A total of 256/6952 (3.7%) patients with mCRC displayed KRASG12C mutation; of these, 111 met the inclusion criteria. The ORR of first-line therapy was 38.7% (43/111). Median PFS (mPFS) was 9 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.5-10.5 months]. After progression, only 62% and 36% of the patients are fit to receive second or third lines of treatment, with limited clinical benefit. Median OS (mOS) was 21 months (95% CI 17.4-24.6 months). In patients receiving first-line triplet chemotherapy, ORR was 56.3% (9/16), mPFS was 13 months (95% CI 10.3-15.7 months) and mOS was 32 months (95% CI 7.7-56.3 months). For irinotecan-based doublets, ORR was 34.5 (10/29), mPFS was 9 months (95% CI 6.4-11.6 months) and mOS was 22 months (95% CI 16.0-28.0 months). With oxaliplatin-based doublets ORR was 36.4% (24/62), mPFS was 7 months (95% CI 4.6-9.4 months) and mOS was 18 months (95% CI, 13.6-22.4 months). Conclusion: Patients with KRASG12C-mutant mCRC had a disappointing response to standard treatments. Within the limitations of a retrospective study, these results suggest that first-line chemotherapy intensification with FOLFOXIRI is a valid option in fit patients.

Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a rare and highly aggressive cutaneous neuroendocrine carcinoma. The MCC incidence rate has rapidly grown over the last years, with Italy showing the highest increase among European countries. This malignancy has been the focus of active scientific research over the last years, focusing mainly on pathogenesis, new therapeutic trials and diagnosis. A national expert board developed 28 consensus statements that delineated the evolution of disease management and highlighted the paradigm shift towards the use of immunological strategies, which were then presented to a national MCC specialists panel for review. Sixty-five panelists answered both rounds of the questionnaire. The statements were divided into five areas: a high level of agreement was reached in the area of guidelines and multidisciplinary management, even if in real life the multidisciplinary team was not always represented by all the specialists. In the diagnostic pathway area, imaging played a crucial role in diagnosis and initial staging, planning for surgery or radiation therapy, assessment of treatment response and surveillance of recurrence and metastases. Concerning diagnosis, the usefulness of Merkel cell polyomavirus is recognized, but the agreement and consensus regarding the need for cytokeratin evaluation appears greater. Regarding the areas of clinical management and follow-up, patients with MCC require customized treatment. There was a wide dispersion of results and the suggestion to increase awareness about the adjuvant radiation therapy. The panelists unanimously agreed that the information concerning avelumab provided by the JAVELIN Merkel 200 study is adequate and reliable and that the expanded access program data could have concrete clinical implications. An immunocompromised patient with advanced MCC can be treated with immunotherapy after multidisciplinary risk/benefit assessment, as evidenced by real-world analysis and highlighted in the guidelines. A very high consensus regarding the addition of radiotherapy to treat the ongoing focal progression of immunotherapy was observed. This paper emphasizes the importance of collaboration and communication among the interprofessional team members and encourages managing patients with MCC within dedicated multidisciplinary teams. New insights in the treatment of this challenging cancer needs the contribution of many and different experts.

This is a retrospective analysis on the safety and activity of compassionate Ipilimumab and Nivolumab (IPI-NIVO) administered to patients with metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC) with intermediate or poor International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) score as a first-line regimen. IPI was infused at 1 mg/kg in combination with Nivolumab 3 mg/kg every three weeks for four doses, followed by maintenance Nivolumab (240 or 480 mg flat dose every two or four weeks, respectively) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. A total of 324 patients started IPI-NIVO at 86 Italian centers. Median age was 62 years, 68.2% IMDC intermediate risk. Primary tumor had been removed in 65.1% of patients. Two hundred and twenty patients (67.9%) completed the four IPI-NIVO doses. Investigator-assessed overall response rate was 37.6% (2.8% complete). Twelve-month survival rate was 66.8%, median progression-free survival was 8.3 months. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 67 patients (26.9%). IMDC intermediate risk, nephrectomy, BMI ≥ 25 kg/m

The Meet-URO score allowed a more accurate prognostication than the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) for patients with pre-treated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) by adding the pre-treatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and presence of bone metastases.A post hoc analysis was carried out to validate the Meet-URO score on the overall survival (OS) of patients with IMDC intermediate-poor-risk mRCC treated with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab within the prospective Italian Expanded Access Programme (EAP). We additionally considered progression-free survival (PFS) and disease response rates. Harrell's c-index was calculated to compare the accuracy of survival prediction.Overall the EAP included 306 patients, with a median follow-up of 12.2 months, median OS was not reached, 1-year OS was 66.8% and median PFS was 7.9 months. By univariable analysis, both the IMDC score and the two additional variables of the Meet-URO score were associated with either OS or PFS (P0.001 for all comparisons). The four Meet-URO risk groups (G) had 1-year OS of 92%, 72%, 50% and 21% for G2 (29.1% of patients), G3 (28.8%), G4 (33.0%) and G5 (9.1%), respectively. OS was significantly shorter in each consecutive G (P = 0.001 for G3, P0.001 for both G4 and G5 compared to G2). Similarly, Meet-URO Gs 2-5 showed decreasing median PFS and response rates. The Meet-URO score showed the highest c-index for both OS (0.73) and PFS (0.67). Limitations include the post hoc nature of this analysis and the lack of a comparative arm to assess predictive value.The Meet-URO score appeared to show better prognostic classification than the IMDC alone in patients with mRCC at IMDC intermediate-poor risk treated with first-line nivolumab and ipilimumab.

Biliary tract cancers (BTCs) are a pool of diseases with poor prognosis and there is no orphan drug available. Currently, no molecular targets have been tested as druggable oncogenic drivers. C‑ros oncogene 1 (ROS1) rearrangements have been previously described in various tumors, including BTCs; however, data regarding their incidence and biological significance are controversial. Therefore, a retrospective multi‑ center study was performed to assess the incidence of ROS1 rearrangements in BTCs by means of immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). The present study failed to demonstrate ROS1 expression in a multicenter series of 150 cases with BTCs and revealed that D4D6 was the most specific clone compared with other ROS1 primary antibodies, namely PA1‑30318 and EPMGHR2. Notably, nega‑ tive results obtained with D4D6 completely matched to data sorted out by FISH analysis, thus confirming a lack of ROS1 gene rearrangements in BTCs and false positive results when PA1‑30318 and EPMGHR2 clones were used. These results suggest that ROS1 rearrangements may not be targets for molecular therapy of BTCs with specific inhibitors.

Background: Despite the well-known negative prognostic value of the V600EBRAF mutation in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), its outcome is quite heterogeneous, and the basis for this prognostic heterogeneity should be better defined. Methods: Two large retrospective series of V600EBRAF-mutated mCRC from 22 institutions served as an exploratory and validation set to develop a prognostic score. The model was internally and externally validated. Results: A total of 395 V600EBRAF-mutated mCRCs were included in the exploratory set. Performance status, CA19.9, lactate dehydrogenase, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, grading and liver, lung and nodal involvement emerged as independent prognostic factors for overall survival (OS). Two different scoring systems were built: a ‘complete’ score (0–16) including all significant covariates and a ‘simplified’ score (0–9), based only on clinicopathological covariates, and excluding laboratory values. Adopting the complete score, proportions of patients with a low (0–4), intermediate (5–8) and high (9–16) score were 44.7%, 42.6% and 12.6%, respectively. The median OS was 29.6, 15.5 (hazard ratio [HR] for intermediate vs low risk: 2.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.44–3.22, p < .001) and 6.6 months (HR for high vs low risk: 4.72, 95% CI: 2.72–8.20, p < .001). Similar results were observed also after adjusting for the type of first-line treatment and adopting the simplified score. The simplified prognostic score derived from the exploratory set was then applied to the validation set for external confirmation. Conclusions: These scoring systems are based on easy-to-collect data and defined specific subgroups with relevant differences in their life expectancy. These tools could be useful in clinical practice, would allow better stratification of patients in clinical trials and may be adopted for proper adjustments in exploratory translational analyses.