Search

Aim: The association of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and local radiotherapy in EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer patients experiencing disease progression under TKIs could be a valid an option. Patients & methods: We included 131 patients experiencing disease progression during first-line TKI. In group A, patients received TKI beyond progression and site(s) of progression were irradiated; in group B, patients remained on TKI alone beyond progression; and group C stopped TKI at first disease progression. Results: Median overall survival resulted longer in group A versus B and C (p

The personalized medicine is in a rapidly evolving scenario. The identification of actionable mutations is revolutionizing the therapeutic landscape of tumors. The morphological and histological tumor features are enriched by the extensive genomic profiling, and the first tumor-agnostic drugs have been approved regardless of tumor histology, guided by predictive and druggable genetic alterations. This new paradigm of "mutational oncology", presents a great potential to change the oncologic therapeutic scenario, but also some critical aspects need to be underlined. A process governance is mandatory to ensure the genomic testing accuracy and homogeneity, the economic sustainability, and the regulatory issues, ultimately granting the possibility of translating this model in the "real world". In this position paper, based on experts' opinion, the AIOM-SIAPEC-IAP-SIBIOC-SIF Italian Scientific Societies revised the new agnostic biomarkers, the diagnostic technologies available, the current availability of agnostic drugs and their present indication.

Oncology is going through the fastest innovation period in the history of medicine and a growing number of patients improve or experience increased chances of survival. The declining death rate, starting from 1991, resulted in 2.9 million deaths avoided in the United States so far. A growing prevalence of patients is observed in all Western countries. New cancer drug approvals between 2000 and 2016, linked to other diagnostic, surgical, and health care improvements, were significantly associated with death reduction for the most common cancers. Alongside many positive aspects, other effects of innovations in oncology also deserve attention, especially challenges associated with the substantial increase of knowledge volume, the sharp growth of prevalence, and a concomitant or consequent increase in clinical, social, and organizational complexity. We analyse some of the consequences of oncology innovation on healthcare systems and professionals and present some suggestions on how these could be addressed by healthcare systems.

The term liquid biopsy (LB) refers to the use of various biological fluids as a surrogate for neoplastic tissue to achieve information for diagnostic, prognostic and predictive purposes. In the current clinical practice, LB is used for the identification of driver mutations in circulating tumor DNA derived from both tumor tissue and circulating neoplastic cells. As suggested by a growing body of evidence, however, there are several clinical settings where biological samples other than tissue could be used in the routine practice to identify potentially predictive biomarkers of either response or resistance to targeted treatments. New applications are emerging as useful clinical tools, and other blood derivatives, such as circulating tumor cells, circulating tumor RNA, microRNAs, platelets, extracellular vesicles, as well as other biofluids such as urine and cerebrospinal fluid, may be adopted in the near future. Despite the evident advantages compared with tissue biopsy, LB still presents some limitations due to both biological and technological issues. In this context, the absence of harmonized procedures corresponds to an unmet clinical need, ultimately affecting the rapid implementation of LB in clinical practice. In this position paper, based on experts’ opinions, the AIOM–SIAPEC-IAP–SIBIOC–SIF Italian Scientific Societies critically discuss the most relevant technical issues of LB, the current and emerging evidences, with the aim to optimizing the applications of LB in the clinical setting., Highlights • In the current clinical practice LB is used for the identification of driver mutations in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). • New applications in tumors other than non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are emerging as useful clinical tools. • Other blood derivatives, together with other biofluids, are an active field of research and may be adopted in the near future. • Despite the evident advantages, liquid biopsy still presents limitations due to both biological and technological issues. • Standardization of the procedures needs to be addressed to ensure widespread implementation in clinical practice.

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a common cause of cancer-related death, due to difficulties in detecting early-stage disease, to its aggressive behaviour, and to poor response to systemic therapy. Therefore, developing strategies for early diagnosis of resectable PC is critical for improving survival. Diabetes mellitus is another major public health problem worldwide. Furthermore, diabetes can represent both a risk factor and a consequence of PC: nowadays, the relationship between these two diseases is considered a high priority for research. New-onset diabetes can be an early manifestation of PC, especially in a thin adult without a family history of diabetes. However, even if targeted screening for patients at higher risk of PC could be a promising approach, this is not recommended in asymptomatic adults with new-onset diabetes, due to the much higher incidence of hyperglycaemia than PC and to the lack of a safe and affordable PC screening test. Prompted by a well-established and productive multidisciplinary cooperation, the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM), the Italian Medical Diabetologists Association (AMD), the Italian Society of Endocrinology (SIE), and the Italian Society of Pharmacology (SIF) here review available evidence on the mechanisms linking diabetes and PC, addressing the feasibility of screening for early PC in patients with diabetes, and sharing a set of update statements with the aim of providing a state-of-the-art overview and a decision aid tool for daily clinical practice., Highlights • The incidence of PC is increasing and its prognosis is very poor; therefore, early detection is fundamental. • New-onset diabetes may be an early manifestation of PC, often disappearing after its resection. • Screening for PC is not currently recommended among people with new-onset diabetes, due to its high incidence. • Thin subjects >50 years old at the time of diabetes onset, with sudden weight loss and severe hyperglycaemia are at higher risk. • Currently some clinical models are promising for stratifying cancer risk in people with new-onset diabetes.

Cancer patients may be at high risk of infection and poor outcomes related to SARS-CoV-2. Analyzing their prognosis, examining the effects of baseline characteristics and systemic anti-cancer active therapy (SACT) are critical to their management through the evolving COVID-19 pandemic. The AIOM-L CORONA was a multicenter, observational, ambispective, cohort study, with the intended participation of 26 centers in the Lombardy region (Italy). A total of 231 cases were included between March and September 2020. The median age was 68 years, 151 patients (62.2%) were receiving SACT, mostly chemotherapy. During a median follow-up of 138 days (range 12–218), 93 events occurred. Age ≥60 years, metastatic dissemination, dyspnea, desaturation, and interstitial pneumonia were all independent mortality predictors. Overall SACT had a neutral effect (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.83, 95%Confidence Interval [95%CI] 0.32–2.15), however, metastatic patients receiving SACT were less likely to die as compared to untreated counterparts, after adjusting for other confounding variables (OR 0.23, 95%CI 0.11–0.51, p &lt, 0.001). Among cancer patients infected by SARS-CoV-2, those with metastases were most at risk of death, especially in the absence of SACT. During the ongoing pandemic, these vulnerable patients should avoid exposure to SARS-CoV-2, while treatment adjustments and prioritizing vaccination are being considered according to international recommendations.

High mortality rates in elderly patients or in those with underlying chronic illnesses and/or a compromised immune system is a peculiar feature of COVID-19 infection. The possible coexistence of a cancer and COVID-19 infection in the same individual prompted concerns regarding their synergistic effect on prognosis. In order to balance patients’ needs with the risks related to the infection, the question oncologists have asked from the beginning of the first wave of the pandemic has been: ‘how can we deal with COVID-19 infection in cancer patients?’ In pursuing its mission, the Associazione Italiana Oncologia Medica (AIOM) has made every possible effort to support cancer patients, health care professionals and institutions in the decision-making processes the pandemic has engendered within this scenario. The relevant documents as well as the educational and institutional initiatives the AIOM has taken are reported in this article.

The authors summarize the great variety of options currently available for the treatment of NENs. This reflects the lack of knowledge still existing in the biology of these diseases and justify the high number of researches aimed to better characterize and classify these diseases. Some advances in the knowledge of the cell mechanisms that regulate cell growth, differentiation, and proliferation are leading to the possible validation of new parameters for predicting the outcome and tumor response. On this basis, the study and the development of new anticancer agents are ongoing, and many clinical trials with new treatment schedules and drug combination have been started and are under evaluation. This complex subject is a fertile field of discussion and debate and must be faced in a multidisciplinary way both within the laboratory investigations and in clinical practice from bench to beds.

Background The role of combination chemotherapy has not yet been established in unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) lacking dedicated randomized trials. Methods This phase II trial tested the efficacy of Nab-paclitaxel (NAB-P)/Gemcitabine (G) versus G alone. Patients were randomized, 1:1 to G 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8 and 15 every 28 days versus NAB-P 125 mg/m2 on days 1, 8 and 15 every 28 days plus G 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8 and 15 every 28 days. Disease progression rate after three cycles of chemotherapy was the primary end-point. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and response rate were secondary end-points. Findings A total of124 patients were enrolled. The study showed a reduction of a progressive disease from 45.6% with G to 25.4% with NAB-P/G (P = 0.01) at 3 months. Noteworthy, at 6 months in the G arm, 35.6% of patients present a metastatic spread versus 20.8% in the NAB/G arm. The response rate was 5.3% in the G arm and 27% in the NAB/G arm. Median PFS was 4 months for the G arm and 7 months for the NAB-P/G arm. Median OS was 10.6 in the G arm and 12.7 months in the NAB-P/G arm. One patient died during treatment with G due to a stroke. Interpretation. NAB-P/G reduced the rate of LAPC patients progressing after three cycles of chemotherapy compared with G, especially in terms of distant relapses. It positively affects PFS. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first randomized trial providing evidence that combination chemotherapy is superior to gemcitabine alone in this setting. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02043730 .

Oncological patients increasingly require second medical opinions to feel more likely confident with their oncologists and treatments, although this could lead to wrong opinions and delay in the start of treatments. Second opinions can be required also by physicians to obtain advices, especially in case of rare tumors. The request of new opinions is documented in radiology and pathology settings too, with not negligible discrepancy rate. Conversely, the role in general medical/surgical conditions has not been well established. Literature is poor of studies relative to second opinions or they are more focused on patient's motivations. For these reasons, AIOM (Italian Association of Medical Oncology) and AIOM Foundation faced this topic during the 7th Annual Meeting on Ethics in Oncology (Ragusa, 4–5 t h May 2018). In this position paper we report reasons, limits, advantages and outcomes of second medical opinion and the respective Decalogue in the oncological setting.

Poorly differentiated neuroendocrine neoplasms (G3 NEN) comprehend a wide variety of tumors, ranging from well-differentiated neoplasms with high proliferation index (Ki-67 higher than 25%) (G3 NET) to poorly differentiated carcinomas (NEC). Morphological, biological, and clinical characterization of G3 NEN is, therefore, crucial in order to define the correct diagnosis and subsequently the right treatment choices. Platinum/etoposide-based chemotherapy remains the standard of treatment for advanced NEC with high Ki-67, while the approach in G3 NEN can be challenging and needs further validation and studies to be clearly defined. In G3 NEN (with Ki-67 ranging from 20% to 50%), oxaliplatin- and temozolomide-based chemotherapy demonstrated to be active in first and second line. According to recent data, immunotherapy seems to improve first-line treatment results in lung NEC, while there are not definitive data in extrapulmonary G3 NEN yet. Finally, local treatment and PRRT can have a role even in poorly differentiated NEN, mainly in G3 NET.

The unexpected outbreak of COVID-19 in the area of Bergamo and the general crisis of personnel and devices has been managed as well as possible during the maximum peak of epidemic; Humanitas Gavazzeni Hospital implemented its facilities and organization in order to optimize the treatment of patients. The number of beds in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) was doubled (from 16 to 33), and more than 220 beds were dedicated to the COVID-19 patients. This paper analyzes the factors affecting mortality in 1022 COVID-19 patients who referred to Humanitas Gavazzeni between February 25 and March 26, 2020. A total of 274 (34.9%) fatal events were registered: 202 among those admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and COVID department and 72 among those treated in Acute Admission Unit Level II (AAUl-2) who died before hospital admission. This paper studies 274 dead cases by analyzing patient’s characteristics, physiological and laboratory parameters, symptoms, and the scores of severity of the disease. Patients who had fatal events in the AAUL-2 showed the worst parameters of risk. The most important differences regarded the Apache II score, Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), CRP (C-reactive protein), pH, creatinine, RR (respiratory rate), and asthenia.

In cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome, an excessive host inflammatory response has been reported, with elevated serum interleukin-6 levels. In this multicenter retrospective cohort study we included adult patients with COVID-19, need of respiratory support, and elevated C-reactive protein who received intravenous tocilizumab in addition to standard of care. Control patients not receiving tocilizumab were matched for sex, age and respiratory support. We selected survival as the primary endpoint, along with need for invasive ventilation, thrombosis, hemorrhage, and infections as secondary endpoints at 30 days. We included 64 patients with COVID-19 in the tocilizumab group and 64 matched controls. At baseline the tocilizumab group had longer symptom duration (13 ± 5 vs. 9 ± 5 days) and received hydroxychloroquine more often than controls (100% vs. 81%). The mortality rate was similar between groups (27% with tocilizumab vs. 38%) and at multivariable analysis risk of death was not significantly influenced by tocilizumab (hazard ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.33–1.15), while being associated with the use at baseline of non invasive mechanical or invasive ventilation, and the presence of comorbidities. Among secondary outcomes, tocilizumab was associated with a lower probability of requiring invasive ventilation (hazard ratio 0.36, 95% confidence interval 0.16–0.83; P = 0.017) but not with the risk of thrombosis, bleeding, or infections. The use of intravenous tocilizumab was not associated with changes in 30-day mortality in patients with COVID-19 severe respiratory impairment. Among the secondary outcomes there was less use of invasive ventilation in the tocilizumab group., Highlights • Survival in ARDS from COVID-19 is significantly associated with age and comorbidities. • The use of tocilizumab is not associated with difference in 30-day mortality. • Patients treated with tocilizumab require invasive ventilation significantly less frequently than controls. • No clear effect of tocilizumab was measured also on secondary outcome such as bleeding, thrombosis or infections. • In patients with a survival exceeding 5 days, tocilizumab is associated with a significantly better survival.

Italy is the European country that was hit first and hardest by the COVID-19 epidemic. Since February 2020, the outbreak of the epidemic disease in Italy, with fatal outcomes in up to 10% of cases, made it urgent to implement extraordinary measures to avoid a breakdown of the universal Italian national health system. The update for April 1, 2020, in Italy recorded 102,669 confirmed COVID-19 cases, with a median patient age of 63 years. The deceased patients were older people (median age 80 years) and often had a cancer diagnosis (about 20%). Thus, in the extraordinary epidemiological scenario of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy, older persons in cancer treatment are at particularly high risk of being severely affected by COVID-19. These people face a health- and economics-related emergency that also carries cultural and ethical implications. In accordance with the measures adopted by the Italian government to limit viral transmission, several associations of Italian oncologists have taken action to update Elderly Cancer Care programs. In view of the newly emerging needs, we herein outline practical suggestions aimed at guaranteeing the best continuity to elderly cancer patients.

Summary Background Trifluridine/tipiracil showed activity and was well tolerated in a phase 2 study of pretreated patients with advanced gastric cancer done in Japan. We investigated whether the treatment was efficacious compared with placebo in a global population. Methods TAGS was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done in 110 academic hospitals in 17 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed, non-resectable, metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma (including adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction) as defined by the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging classification (7th edition) who had received at least two previous chemotherapy regimens and had experienced radiological disease progression were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) via dynamic randomisation from a centralised interactive voice-response system to receive either oral trifluridine/tipiracil (35 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1–5 and days 8–12 every 28 days) plus best supportive care or placebo plus best supportive care. Participants were allocated to groups by study-site personnel. Randomisation was stratified by region (Japan vs rest of world), ECOG performance status (0 vs 1), and previous treatment with ramucirumab (yes vs no). Both patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat population and safety in all patients who received at least one dose of treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT02500043 . The trial, including follow-up of all participants, has been completed. Findings Between Feb 24, 2016, and Jan 5, 2018, 507 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, 337 to the trifluridine/tipiracil group and 170 to the placebo group. Median overall survival was 5·7 months (95% CI 4·8–6·2) in the trifluridine/tipiracil group and 3·6 months (3·1–4·1) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·69 [95% CI 0·56–0·85]; one-sided p=0·00029, two-sided p=0·00058). Grade 3 or worse adverse events of any cause occurred in 267 (80%) patients in the trifluridine/tipiracil group and 97 (58%) in the placebo group. The most frequent grade 3 or worse adverse events of any cause were neutropenia (n=114 [34%]) and anaemia (n=64 [19%]) in the trifluridine/tipiracil group and abdominal pain (n=15 [9%]) and general deterioration of physical health (n=15 [9%]) in the placebo group. Serious adverse events of any cause were reported in 143 (43%) patients in the trifluridine/tipiracil group and 70 (42%) in the placebo group. One treatment-related death was reported in each group (because of cardiopulmonary arrest in the trifluridine/tipiracil group and because of toxic hepatitis in the placebo group). Interpretation Trifluridine/tipiracil significantly improved overall survival compared with placebo and was well tolerated in this heavily pretreated population of patients with advanced gastric cancer. Trifluridine/tipiracil could be a new treatment option in this population who represent a high unmet medical need. Funding Taiho Oncology and Taiho Pharmaceutical.

Purpose Lung cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death worldwide and, although targeted therapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors has dramatically improved the rates of response and survival in advanced EGFR-mutated adenocarcinoma, the overall outcome remains unsatisfactory. Therefore, new prognostic factors, preferably simple, inexpensive, and easy to reproduce on a large scale, are needed. We performed a retrospective analysis of our database including 63 western Caucasian patients with advanced EGFR-mutated lung adenocarcinoma and receiving gefitinib, erlotinib, or afatinib as first- or second-line therapy. Several studies demonstrated a strong link between elevated neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and poor prognosis both in early and advanced stages of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods From January 2011 to December 2015, 63 consecutive elegible patients with advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC were included in this analysis from 5 institutions. The NLR was derived from the absolute neutrophil and the absolute lymphocyte counts of a full blood count and the cutoff value was determined according to the mean NLR level. Results Despite the small sample analyzed, we found that NLR has a prognostic role for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), reaching a statistically significant difference with a better PFS and OS in the lower NLR group. Conclusions Pretreatment NLR seems to represent a reliable, simple, and easy to reproduce laboratory tool to predict outcome and response to cancer therapies in this setting of Western Caucasian patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC.

BackgroundIdentifying the patients who may benefit the most from immune checkpoints inhibitors remains a great challenge for clinicians. Here we investigate on blood serum amyloid A (SAA) as biomarker of response to upfront pembrolizumab in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).MethodsPatients with PD-L1 ≥ 50% receiving upfront pembrolizumab (P cohort) and with PD-L1 0–49% treated with chemotherapy (CT cohort) were evaluated for blood SAA and radiological response at baseline and every 9 weeks. Endpoints were response rate (RR) according to RECIST1.1, progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The most accurate SAA cut-off to predict response was established with ROC analysis in the P cohort.ResultsIn the P Cohort (n = 42), the overall RR was 38%. After a median follow-up of 18.5 months (mo), baseline SAA ≤ the ROC-derived cut-off (29.9 mg/L;n = 28/42.67%) was significantly associated with higher RR (53.6 versus 7.1%; OR15, 95% CI 1.72–130.7,p = 0.009), longer PFS (17.4 versus 2.1 mo;p p 29.9 mg/L. In multivariate analysis, low SAA positively affects PFS (p = 0.001) and OS (p = 0.048) irrespective of ECOG PS, number of metastatic sites and pleural effusion. SAA monitoring (n = 40) was also significantly associated with survival endpoints: median PFS 17.4 versus 2.1 mo and median OS not reached versus 7.2 mo when SAA remained low (n = 14) and high (n = 12), respectively. In the CT Cohort (n = 30), RR was not affected by SAA level (p > 0.05) while low SAA at baseline (n = 17) was associated with better PFS (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.16–0.90,p = 0.006) and OS (HR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09–0.67,p ConclusionLow SAA predicts good survival outcomes irrespective of treatment for advanced NSCLC patients and higher likelihood of response to upfront pembrolizumab only. The strong prognostic value might be exploited to easily identify patients most likely to benefit from immunotherapy. A further study (FoRECATT-2) is ongoing to confirm results in a larger sample size and to investigate the effect of SAA on immune response in vitro assays.

About 75% of colorectal cancers are diagnosed as early stage, in which radical surgery is achievable. In the last decade, in Italy, the overall incidence of colorectal cancer has remained stable, while mortality gradually decreased, which is attributable to early diagnosis and improved medical, surgical and locoregional treatments. The Italian Medical Oncology Association formulated guidelines to manage early-stage colon cancer, including screening, diagnosis, treatment and follow-up, which we herein present.

IMPORTANCE: Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) treatment has shown clinical benefit in patients with pretreated metastatic gastric cancer or gastroesophageal junction cancer (mGC/GEJC). Patients who have undergone gastrectomy constitute a significant proportion of patients with mGC/GEJC. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of FTD/TPI among patients with previously treated mGC/GEJC who had or had not undergone gastrectomy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This preplanned subgroup analysis of TAGS (TAS-102 Gastric Study), a phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial included patients with mGC/GEJC who had received at least 2 previous chemotherapy regimens, and was conducted at 110 academic hospitals in 17 countries in Europe, Asia, and North America, with enrollment between February 24, 2016, and January 5, 2018; the data cutoff was March 31, 2018. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive oral FTD/TPI 35 mg/m2 twice daily or placebo twice daily with best supportive care on days 1 through 5 and days 8 through 12 of each 28-day treatment cycle. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was overall survival. This subgroup analysis was conducted to examine potential trends and was not powered for statistical significance. Efficacy and safety end points were evaluated in the subgroups. RESULTS: Of 507 randomized patients (369 [72.8%] male; mean [SD] age, 62.5 [10.5] years), 221 (43.6%) had undergone gastrectomy (147 randomized to FTD/TPI and 74 to placebo) and 286 (56.4%) had not undergone gastrectomy (190 randomized to FTD/TPI and 96 to placebo). In the gastrectomy subgroup, the overall survival hazard ratio (HR) in the FTD/TPI group vs placebo group was 0.57 (95% CI, 0.41-0.79), and the progression-free survival HR was 0.48 (95% CI, 0.35-0.65). In the no gastrectomy subgroup, the overall survival HR in the FTD/TPI group vs placebo group was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.60-1.06), and the progression-free survival HR was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.49-0.85). Among FTD/TPI-treated patients, grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause occurred in 122 of 145 patients (84.1%) in the gastrectomy subgroup and 145 of 190 (76.3%) in the no gastrectomy subgroup: 64 (44.1%) in the gastrectomy subgroup and 50 (26.3%) in the no gastrectomy subgroup had grade 3 or higher neutropenia, 31 (21.4%) in the gastrectomy subgroup and 33 (17.4%) in the no gastrectomy subgroup had grade 3 or higher anemia, and 21 (14.5%) in the gastrectomy subgroup and 10 (5.3%) in the no gastrectomy subgroup hD grade 3 or higher leukopenia. In the gastrectomy subgroup, 94 (64.8%) had dosing modifications because of adverse events vs 101 (53.2%) in the no gastrectomy subgroup; 15 (10.3%) in the gastrectomy group and 28 (14.7%) in the no gastrectomy group discontinued treatment because of adverse events. Treatment exposure was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The FTD/TPI treatment was tolerable and provided efficacy benefits among patients with pretreated mGC/GEJC regardless of previous gastrectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02500043. ispartof: JAMA ONCOLOGY vol:6 issue:1 ispartof: location:United States status: published

Monoclonal antibodies targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) or vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) have demonstrated efficacy with chemotherapy (CT) as second line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The right sequence of the treatments in all RAS (KRAS/NRAS) wild type (wt) patients has not precisely defined. We evaluated the impact of aforementioned targeted therapies in second line setting, analyzing efficacy and safety data from phase III clinical trials. We performed both direct and indirect comparisons between anti-EGFR and anti-VEGF. Outcomes included disease control rate (DCR), objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and G3-G5 toxicities. Our results showed significantly improved OS (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72−0.94) and DCR (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.04−1.54) favouring anti-VEGF combinations in overall population; no statistically significant differences in all RAS wt patients was observed (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.70−1.09). Anti-EGFR combinations significantly increased ORR in all patients (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31−0.96), showing a trend also in all RAS wt patients (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.48−0.83). No significant difference in PFS and DCR all RAS was registered. Our results provided for the first time a strong rationale to manage both targeted agents in second line setting.

Most anticancer molecules are administered in body-size-based dosing schedules, bringing up unsolved issues regarding pharmacokinetic data in heavy patients. The worldwide spread of obesity has not been matched by improved methods and strategies for tailored drug dosage in this population. The weight or body surface area (BSA)-based approaches may fail to fully reflect the complexity of the anthropometric features besides obesity in cancer patients suffering from sarcopenia. Likewise, there is a lack of pharmacokinetic data on obese patients for the majority of chemotherapeutic agents as well as for new target drugs and immunotherapy. Therefore, although the available findings point to the role of dose intensity in cancer treatment, and support full weight-based dosing, empirical dose capping often occurs in clinical practice in order to avoid toxicity. Thus a panel of experts of the Associazione Italiana Oncologia Medica (AIOM), Associazione Medici Diabetologi (AMD), Società Italiana Endocrinologia (SIE), and Società Italiana Farmacologia (SIF), provides here a consensus statement for appropriate cytotoxic chemotherapy and new biological cancer drug dosing in obese patients., Highlights • The worldwide spread of obesity is an emerging challenge also in cancer patients • Weight or BSA-based approaches do not adequately address the critical issue of optimal dosing for cancer drugs under obesity • Empirical dose capping is often employed in clinical practice to avoid toxicities among overweight and obese patients • There is a lack of clinical and pharmacokinetic studies in this population • Clinical practice recommendations should guide suitable dosing of cytotoxic and biological cancer drugs in obese patients

e15503 Background: Data on anti-angiogenic second line treatment in RAS wild type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts) progressing after first-line anti-EGFR drug are lacking and no validated biomarkers are available. We present the pre-planned interim analysis of the DISTINCTIVE trial (NCT04252456), a biologically enriched, prospectively stratified phase 2 study assessing the aflibercept use in this setting. Methods: RAS wt mCRC pts progressing after first line oxaliplatin-based + anti-EGFR therapy and candidates for second-line FOLFIRI/aflibercept are eligible for the DISTINCTIVE trial. Pts are prospectively allocated to a favorable (F) or unfavorable (U) prognostic group, according to Elisa-assessed baseline (BL) VEGFR2 plasma levels (PL). Other circulating angiogenic factors are evaluated at BL, first tumor assessment (TA1) and disease progression (PD). Primary endpoint is overall survival (OS) according to VEGFR2 levels. Secondary endpoints are OS, progression free survival (PFS), response rate, safety and angiogenic factors levels. Statistical analysis is performed with MedCalc (survival distribution: Kaplan-Meier; survival comparison: log-rank test; multivariate analysis: logistic regression). Sample size: 151 pts (one-sided test, α: 0.1, β: 0.2). Results: From 04/2018 to 06/2020, 73 pts were enrolled. Complete data from 44 pts were available for interim analysis. 33 pts (75%) achieved DCR (26 pts/59% SD, 7 pts/16% PR). Globally, median OS was 11.9 months (m) (95%CI 10 – 14.2). 24 (54.5%) pts were prospectively assigned to F group (VEGFR2 PL > 4 ng/ml) and 20 (45.5%) to U group (VEGFR2 PL ≤4 ng/ml). OS in F group was 13.1 m (95%CI 9.6 – 14.2) vs 11.9 m (95%CI 6.8 – 11.9) in U group (HR 0.76 p = 0.6218). PFS was 9.8 m [95%CI 5.7 – 24.2] in F group vs 4.2 m [95%CI 2.5 – 14.2] in U group (HR 0.41 p = 0.0105). We also found preliminary correlation with PD as shown in table. Conclusions: Interim analysis showed high activity of FOLFIRI/aflibercept in RAS WT anti-EGFR pretreated mCRC pts. VEGFR2 showed promising ability to predict aflibercept efficacy. Our data on circulating angiogenic biomarkers are likely to further compose the landscape of anti-angiogenic activity in mCRC pts. Clinical trial information: NCT04252456. [Table: see text]

Purpose To evaluate the prognostic role of chest computed tomography (CT), alone or in combination with clinical and laboratory parameters, in COVID-19 patients during the first peak of the pandemic. Methods A retrospective single-center study of 301 COVID-19 patients referred to our Emergency Department (ED) from February 25 to March 29, 2020. At presentation, patients underwent chest CT and clinical and laboratory examinations. Outcomes included discharge from the ED after improvement/recovery (positive outcome), or admission to the intensive care unit or death (poor prognosis). A visual quantitative analysis was formed using two scores: the Pulmonary Involvement (PI) score based on the extension of lung involvement, and the Pulmonary Consolidation (PC) score based on lung consolidation. The prognostic value of CT alone or integrated with other parameters was studied by logistic regression and ROC analysis. Results The impact of the CT PI score [≥15 vs. ≤ 6] on predicting poor prognosis (OR 5.71 95 % CI 1.93−16.92, P = 0.002) was demonstrated; no significant association was found for the PC score. Chest CT had a prognostic role considering the PI score alone (AUC 0.722) and when evaluated with demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and laboratory data (AUC 0.841). We, therefore, developed a nomogram as an easy tool for immediate clinical application. Conclusions Visual analysis of CT gives useful information to physicians for prognostic evaluations, even in conditions of COVID-19 emergency. The predictive value is increased by evaluating CT in combination with clinical and laboratory data.

The introduction of biological agents in cancer therapy is changing the progression of metastatic colorectal cancer. Currently, resistance to biological agents is an emerging problem; the progression of the disease is caused by the development of resistant clones. According to some authors, these clones can be re-sensitized to traditional and previously utilized chemotherapy agents. The results of the CORRECT study demonstrated the efficacy of regorafenib monotherapy in both KRAS wild type and mutant pretreated patients (pts). Two recent reports showed the potential of reintroduction of chemotherapy, even after treatment with regorafenib.We performed a retrospective review of clinical data from patients treated with regorafenib at our institution between March 2012 and March 2013. We analysed patient characteristics, KRAS/NRAS status, response to treatment (evaluated by RECIST v1.1 criteria) and survival.Regorafenib was administered to 128 patients, and 11 (8.6%) received post-regorafenib therapy (to our knowledge). Seven (63.6%) patients were wild type for KRAS/NRAS. Post-regorafenib therapy represented for all the patients at least the fourth line: all the pts received both oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based chemotherapy, all of them were treated with bevacizumab, and 7 patients also received cetuximab. Eight patients (72.7%) were treated with standard chemotherapy after regorafenib (irinotecan monotherapy, capecitabine plus oxaliplatin or irinotecan, dacarbazine or raltitrexed), while 3 patients received an experimental therapy (clinical trial). Nine of the 11 (81.8%) patients had PD and 2 patients had SD. The median progression-free survival was 1.6+ months (range 0.5-3.5), the median OS post-regorafenib was 2.1+ months (range 0.5-10.2) and the 6-month OS was 27.3%.Our retrospective analysis showed that after regorafenib therapy, re-introduction of chemotherapy is possible. Unfortunately, we reported a high percentage of disease progression beyond regorafenib, which is likely due to the high percentage of heavily pretreated patients (some received four or five types of therapy before regorafenib). We think that regorafenib could represent a chemotherapy resensitizing agent; however, additional studies are needed in patients who have received less pretreatment.

9598 Background: Identifying the patients who may benefit the most from immune checkpoints inhibitors remains a great challenge for clinicians. The tumor-derived Serum Amyloid A (SAA) inhibits the immune-response in melanoma patients. Here we present the early results of FoRECATT study investigating on blood SAA as biomarker of response to upfront pembrolizumab in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: In this prospective study, patients with PD-L1 ≥ 50% receiving upfront pembrolizumab (P cohort) and with PD-L1 0-49% treated with chemotherapy (CT cohort), were evaluated for blood SAA and radiological response at baseline and every 9 weeks. Primary endpoint was response rate (RR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1; secondary endpoints were progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The most accurate SAA cut-off to predict response was established with ROC-analysis in the P cohort. Results: In the P Cohort (n = 42), the overall RR was 38%. After a median follow-up of 18.5 months (mo), baseline SAA ≤ the ROC-derived cut-off (29.9 mg/L; n = 14/42, 33%) was significantly associated with higher RR (53.6 versus 7.1%; OR 15, 95%CI 1.72-130.7, P= 0.009), longer PFS (17.4 versus 2.1 mo; P< 0.0001) and OS (not reached versus 7.2 mo; P< 0.0001) compared with SAA > 29.9 mg/L. In multivariate analysis, low SAA positively affects PFS ( P= 0.001) and OS ( P= 0.048) irrespective of ECOG PS, number of metastatic sites and pleural effusion. SAA monitoring (n = 40) was also significantly associated with survival endpoints: median PFS 17.4 versus 2.1 mo and median OS not reached versus 7.2 mo when SAA remained low (n = 14) and high (n = 12), respectively. In the CT Cohort (n = 30), RR was not significantly affected by SAA level, while low SAA at baseline (n = 17) was associated with better PFS (HR = 0.42, 95%CI 0.16-1.10, P= 0.02) and OS (HR = 0.16, 95% CI 0.04-0.55, P= 0.0004). Conclusions: Low SAA predicts a higher likelihood of response to upfront pembrolizumab only and good survival outcomes irrespective of treatment in advanced NSCLC patients. Therefore, a simple blood test might be useful to identify patients likely to derive better outcomes from immunotherapy. A further study (FoRECATT-2) is ongoing to confirm the results in a larger validation cohort and to assess the potential effect of SAA on immune response in vitro assays.

Background: Tissue evaluation for RAS (KRAS or NRAS) gene status in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients represent the standard of care to establish the optimal therapeutic strategy. Unfortunately, tissue biopsy is hampered by several critical limitations due to its invasiveness, difficulty to access to disease site, patient’s compliance and, more recently, neoplastic tissue spatial and temporal heterogeneity. Methods: The authors performed a systematic literature review to identify available trials with paired matched tissue and ctDNA RAS gene status evaluation. The authors searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane, www.ClinicalTrials.gov , and abstracts from international meetings. In total, 19 trials comparing standard tissue RAS mutational status matched paired ctDNA evaluated through polymerase chain reaction (PCR), next generation sequencing (NGS) or beads, emulsions, amplification and magnetics (BEAMing) were identified. Results: The pooled sensitivity and specificity of ctDNA were 0.83 (95% CI: 0.80–0.85) and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.89–0.93) respectively. The pooled positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of the ctDNA were 0.87 (95% CI: 0.81–0.92) and 0.87 (95% CI: 0.82–0.92), respectively. Positive likelihood ratio (PLR) was 8.20 (95% CI: 5.16–13.02) and the negative likelihood ratio (NLR) was 0.22 (95% CI: 0.16–0.30). The pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 50.86 (95% CI: 26.15–98.76), and the area under the curve (AUC) of the summary receiver operational characteristics (sROC) curve was 0.94. Conclusion: The authors’ meta-analysis produced a complete and updated overview of ctDNA diagnostic accuracy to test RAS mutation in mCRC. Results provide a strong rationale to include the RAS ctDNA test into randomized clinical trials to validate it prospectively.

Background Common epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations in non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) predict sensitivity to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), with exon 19 deletions being associated with better outcome compared to L858R mutations. We aimed to investigate the impact of different exon 19 deletions on patient outcome in EGFR-mutant NSCLC treated with first-line TKIs. Patients and Methods In this retrospective analysis, 106 patients with metastatic NSCLC harboring EGFR exon 19 deletions and treated with first-line TKIs were included. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), the secondary end point progression-free survival (PFS). Analyses were performed by grouping exon 19 deletions according to 2 models: we compared different type of deletion (delE746_A750 vs. deletions other than delE746-A750, defined as “uncommon”) or different starting codon of deletion (E746 vs. L747). Results The frequency of uncommon deletions of exon 19 was 36%. When delE746_A750 (n = 68) was compared to the other deletions in exon 19 (n = 38), no differences were found, either in terms of OS (P = .65) or PFS (P = .65). Similarly, no difference in OS (P = .74) or PFS (P = .99) emerged when comparing the E746 group (n = 81) to the L747 group (n = 25). On multivariate analysis including clinical characteristics and type of deletions (delE746_A750 vs. uncommon deletions or E746 vs. L747), only the presence of brain metastases at diagnosis or during TKI treatment was associated with shorter PFS but not with worse OS. Conclusion Different exon 19 deletions are equally sensitive to first-line EGFR-TKIs in EGFR-mutant NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Ramucirumab-alone or combined with paclitaxel-represents one of the main options for patients failing first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer. OBJECTIVE: The RAMoss study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy profile of ramucirumab in the "real-life setting". PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients from 25 Italian hospitals started therapy consisting of ramucirumab 8 mg/kg i.v. d1,15q28 with or without paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 i.v. d1,8,15q28. The primary endpoint was safety, and secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: One hundred sixty-seven patients with disease progression on first-line therapy received ramucirumab as monotherapy (10%) or combined with paclitaxel (90%). Median treatment duration was 4 months (1-17 months). Global incidence of grade (G) 3-4 toxicity was 9.6%, and for neutropenia 5.4%; treatment was discontinued due to toxicity in 3% of patients. The most frequent adverse events (AE) were G1-2 fatigue (27.5%), G1-2 neuropathy (26.3%), and G1-2 neutropenia (14.9%). ORR was 20.2%. Stable disease was observed in 39.2% of patients, with a disease control rate of 59.4%. With a median follow-up of 11 months, median PFS was 4.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.1-4.7), whereas median OS was 8.0 months (95% CI: 7.09-8.9). In a multivariate analysis, ECOG performance status

Background The role of a combination therapy is defined in metastatic pancreatic cancer but not in LAUPC. Lacking dedicated randomized trials, evidence mostly comes from retrospective or phase II studies. G alone remains the standard option following a subgroup LAUPC analysis of a GERCOR/GISCAD trial (J Clin Oncol 2005). Methods GAP is a multicentre, open-label, randomized, comparative phase II trial testing the efficacy of NabG vs G. Patients ≤75 years, PS 0-1, were randomized 1:1 to Nab/G (Nab 125 mg/mq plus G 1000 mg/mq on days 1, 8 and 15 every 28 days for 3 cycles) or G (same schedule and doses). Patients not progressing after 3 cycles had to receive capecitabine plus radiotherapy for 5 weeks. Disease progression rate (DPR) according to RECIST 1.1 after 3 cycles of chemotherapy is the primary endpoint. With 80% power in detecting a reduction of DPR from 40% to 20%, one-tailed alpha=0.05, 124 patients were required. Progression-free survival (PFS) is a secondary endpoint; with 109 events the study has 80% power, with one-tailed alpha=0.05, to detect a 0.62 hazard ratio of PFS. Results 124 patients were enrolled in this trial (4 withdrew consent after randomization in the G arm). Most of the patients were PS 0 (65.8%), and women (56.7%). The study met its primary endpoint DPR, with a reduction from 45.6% with G to 25.4% with Nab/G. There was no unexpected toxicity. One patient died during treatment with G due to a stroke. Table . 673PD Arm Patients DPR One-tail chi square Median PFS (102 events) HR of PFS Progression at distant site Median OS (82 events) HR of OS G 57 26 (45.6%) P = 0.01 5.1 mos 0.71 (90% CI 0.51-0.99) 18/26 10.7 mos 0.65 (90% CI 0.44-0.94) NabG 63 16 (25.4%) 7.6 mos 6/16 13.1 mos Conclusions NabG reduces the rate of LAUPC patients who progress after 3 cycles of chemotherapy compared with G, especially in terms of distant relapses, positively affecting PFS and overall survival. Nowadays it should be the therapeutic option in this setting. Clinical trial identification NCT02043730; 2013-002973-23. Legal entity responsible for the study Fondazione GISCAD (Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio dei Carcinomi dell’Apparato Digerente). Funding Celgene. Disclosure S. Cascinu: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Lilly; Advisory / Consultancy, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Bayer; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Servier; Advisory / Consultancy: Amgen; Research grant / Funding (self), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Celgene; Honoraria (self): Sanofi; Research grant / Funding (self): Eisai. R. Bianco: Advisory / Consultancy: Boehringer Ingelheim; Advisory / Consultancy: Italfarmaco; Advisory / Consultancy: AstraZeneca. D. Ferrari: Advisory / Consultancy: Merck Serono; Advisory / Consultancy: Bristol-Meyers Squibb; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Roche. L. Cavanna: Advisory / Consultancy: AstraZeneca; Advisory / Consultancy: Merck; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Pfizer; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Ipsen; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Celgene. G.D. Beretta: Research grant / Funding (institution), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Roche; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Ipsen; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Celgene; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Servier; Research grant / Funding (institution): Lilly; Research grant / Funding (institution): Taiho Pharmaceutical. A. Sobrero: Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Roche; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Merck Serono; Advisory / Consultancy: Servier; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Sanofi; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Celgene; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Amgen; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Bayer; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Takeda; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Lilly; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: AstraZeneca; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Bristol-Meyers Squibb. A. Morabito: Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Roche; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Novartis; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Ipsen; Honoraria (self): Delphi Diagnostics; Honoraria (self): Servier; Research grant / Funding (institution): Celgene. M.C. Piccirillo: Advisory / Consultancy: Glaxo; Honoraria (self), Research grant / Funding (institution), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: AstraZeneca; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Bayer; Honoraria (self): MSD; Research grant / Funding (institution): Roche. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Malnutrition is a frequent problem in cancer patients, which leads to prolonged hospitalization, a higher degree of treatment-related toxicity, reduced response to cancer treatment, impaired quality of life and a worse overall prognosis. The attitude towards this issue varies considerably and many malnourished patients receive inadequate nutritional support. We reviewed available data present in the literature, together with the guidelines issued by scientific societies and health authorities, on the nutritional management of patients with cancer, in order to make suitable and concise practical recommendations for appropriate nutritional support in this patient population. Evidence from the literature suggests that nutritional screening should be performed using validated tools (the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 [NRS 2002], the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool [MUST], the Malnutrition Screening Tool [MST] and the Mini Nutritional Assessment [MNA]), both at diagnosis and at regular time points during the course of disease according to tumor type, stage and treatment. Patients at nutritional risk should be promptly referred for comprehensive nutritional assessment and support to clinical nutrition services or medical personnel with documented skills in clinical nutrition, specifically for cancer patients. Nutritional intervention should be actively managed and targeted for each patient; it should comprise personalized dietary counseling and/or artificial nutrition according to spontaneous food intake, tolerance and effectiveness. Nutritional support may be integrated into palliative care programs. “Alternative hypocaloric anti-cancer diets” (e.g. macrobiotic or vegan diets) should not be recommended as they may worsen nutritional status. Well-designed clinical trials are needed to further our knowledge of the nutritional support required in different care settings for cancer patients.

The treatment of liver metastases is generally considered as a palliative approach. A large body of literature refers to the experience gained in colorectal metastases, and surgery remains the cornerstone of treatments with a 40% survival at 5 years. Comparable results are attainable in the treatment of patients with neuroendocrine liver metastases. However, only a small proportion of these patients are suitable candidates for hepatic resection. Furthermore, there is limited data referring to the management of non-colorectal, non-neuroendocrine liver metastases, and most of the reports refer to smaller, retrospective case series with scarce information on treatment carried out during the patient’s journey. In this chapter, we present current perspectives on the management of liver metastases, with a focus on state-of-the-art resection, by drawing on clinical data provided in the medical literature.

Aims Inhibition of angiogenesis is an effective treatment option for metastatic colorectal cancer. Predictive biomarkers to select patients who are most likely to benefit from this therapeutic strategy are lacking. We conducted a pilot, retrospective biomarker study in a cohort of metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with bevacizumab. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the prognostic value of biomarker expression in metastases and to compare their expression in paired tumor specimens. Materials and methods Eligible patients were treated with a bevacizumab-containing therapy; from these patients, tumor tissue from metastases was available. PTEN, PI3K p110a, c-MET, and CAIX were analyzed by immunohistochemistry. Results Forty-two patients received bevacizumab, 13 (31%) with first-line and 29 (69%) with second-line chemotherapy. Expression of CAIX, PI3K p110a, and c-MET in metastases did not predict objective response. PTEN loss was associated with response to treatment (p=0.02) and this association remained significant after adjusting for prognostic variables (p=0.006). However, no association with survival outcomes was found. In 32 patients (76%) with available paired specimens, we observed an equal expression between primary tumors and corresponding metastases in 75% of cases for CAIX in epithelial tumor cells, 56% for CAIX in stromal cells, 63% for PTEN, and 87% for c-MET. Conclusion PTEN loss in metastases appears to be associated with response to bevacizumab-based therapy. However, larger studies are necessary to confirm the potential role of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway in modulating the therapeutic effect of bevacizumab. Tumor heterogeneity should be taken into consideration when analyzing tumor tissues for biomarker studies.

Background: The incidence of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) in elderly patients is increasing. There are no specific guidelines for their management. Methods: The clinical records of elderly patients (⩾70 years old) with MPM referred from January 2005 to November 2011 to six Italian Centres were reviewed. Age, gender, histology, International Mesothelioma Interest Group (IMIG) stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and treatment modalities were analysed and correlated to overall survival (OS). Results: In total, 241 patients were identified. Charlson Comorbidity Index was ⩾1 in 92 patients (38%). Treatment was multimodality therapy including surgery in 18, chemotherapy alone in 180 (75%) and best supportive care in 43 cases (18%). Chemotherapy was mainly pemetrexed based. Median OS was 11.4 months. Non-epithelioid histology (HR 2.32; 95% CI 1.66–3.23, P

4038 Background: The incidence of GEJC is increasing in North America and Europe, especially among white men. Many pts present with metastatic disease or relapse locally or systemically after resection of early-stage disease. The global phase 3 study TAGS (NCT02500043) demonstrated the efficacy and safety of FTD/TPI in previously treated pts with metastatic gastric cancer (mGC)/mGEJC. Here we report results in the mGEJC subgroup from TAGS. Methods: Pts with mGC/mGEJC treated with ≥2 prior chemotherapy regimens were randomized (2:1) to receive FTD/TPI (35 mg/m2 BID on days 1–5 and 8–12 of each 28-day cycle) or placebo, plus best supportive care. A preplanned efficacy and safety analysis was performed in pts with mGEJC. Results: Of 507 randomized pts, 145 (29%) had GEJC as the sole primary disease site (FTD/TPI, 98/337; placebo, 47/170). Of pts with mGEJC, 85% were male and 83% were white (overall population, 73% and 70%). Baseline characteristics were generally balanced for pts with mGEJC across treatment groups, except for fewer pts having prior gastrectomy (40% vs 55%) and more pts having received ≥3 prior regimens (74% vs 66%) in the FTD/TPI group than in the placebo group. FTD/TPI had an efficacy benefit in pts with mGEJC, and the FTD/TPI safety profile was similar in this subgroup and the overall population (table). Conclusions: FTD/TPI showed a manageable safety profile and efficacy benefit in pts with mGEJC in the TAGS trial, despite heavier pretreatment of the FTD/TPI than the placebo group. Clinical trial information: NCT02500043. [Table: see text]

e15006 Background: Monoclonal antibodies targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) or vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) have demonstrated efficacy in combination with chemotherapy as second line for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, there is still a paucity of evidence or guidelines suggesting the right sequential treatment in all RAS (KRAS/NRAS) wild type(wt)mCRC. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the impact of these targeted therapies by reviewing literature data. Methods: We used Cochrane, EMBASE and Medline databases to select phase III clinical trials containing efficacy and safety data about chemotherapy (CT) or CT + targeted agents combination (Anti-VEGF and Anti-EGFR) in second line mCRC setting. We performed direct comparisons to obtain pooled data for anti-VEGF + CT versus CT and anti-EGFR +CT versus CT comparisons. Then we performed indirect comparisons between anti-EGFR and Anti-VEGF. Outcomes were disease control rate (DCR), response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and most common G3-G5 toxicities. Results: Eight eligible RCTs (6793 pts) were included: 5 studies compared anti-VEGF + CT and 3 anti-EGFR + CT combinations to CT. After direct comparisons, pooled indirect results showed significantly improved OS (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72–0.94) and DCR (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.04–1.54) favouring anti-VEGF combinations in overall population; however, no statistically significant differences in all RAS wt patients was observed (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.70–1.09). Additionally, anti-EGFR combinations significantly increased ORR in all patients (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31–0.96), showing a trend in all RAS wt patients (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.48–0.83) too. Furthermore, no significant difference in PFS and DCR all RAS was registered. Anti-VEGF combination significantly increased Only a significant asthenia difference (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.03–1.75) was registered. Conclusions: At our knowledge, our indirect comparisons between anti-VEGF and anti-EGFR combinations showed for the first time better OS and DCR for anti-VEGF combinations, whereas better RR is observed for anti-EGFR combinatory regimens, defining a role of both targeted agents in second line mCRC setting.

Background Regorafenib and TAS-102 have recently demonstrated statistically significant survival gains in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Life expectancy ≥12 weeks was an inclusion criterion in registrative trials, and the identification of proper clinical selection tools for the daily use of these drugs in heavily pre-treated patients is needed to improve the cost-benefit ratio. We aimed at building a nomogram able to predict death probability within 12 weeks from the date of assessment of refractory mCRC. Patients and methods Four hundred eleven refractory mCRC patients with ECOG performance status (PS) ≤2 receiving regorafenib, TAS-102 or other treatments were used as developing set. Putative prognostic variables were selected using a random forest model and included in a binary logistic model from which the nomogram was developed. The nomogram was externally validated and its performance was evaluated by examining calibration (how close predictions were to the actual outcome) and discriminative ability (Harrell C index) both on developing (internal validation) and validating (external validation) sets. Results Four variables were selected and included in the nomogram: PS (P

3 Background: The phase 3 study TAGS demonstrated that the novel oral therapy FTD/TPI (TAS-102) represents an effective treatment option with a manageable safety profile for pts with heavily pretreated mGC. In an earlier single-arm Japanese phase 2 trial in mGC, no differences were found in the pharmacokinetics of either FTD or TPI in pts with or without prior gastrectomy. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of FTD/TPI in pts with or without prior gastrectomy within the TAGS study. Methods: In this global phase 3 study of adult pts with mGC who had received ≥ 2 prior regimens of chemotherapy, pts were randomized 2:1 to receive FTD/TPI (35 mg/m2 BID on days 1–5 and 8–12 of each 28-day cycle) or placebo, plus best supportive care. We performed a preplanned analysis of efficacy and safety endpoints in pt subgroups with or without prior gastrectomy. Results: Of 507 randomized pts, 221 (44%) had a prior gastrectomy (FTD/TPI, 147/337; placebo, 74/170). Baseline pt characteristics were balanced across pt subgroups. FTD/TPI prolonged survival versus placebo regardless of gastrectomy (table). The frequency of neutropenia/leukopenia appeared to be higher among FTD/TPI-treated pts with vs without gastrectomy, but this did not result in more treatment discontinuations (table). Conclusions: In the TAGS study, subgroup analysis demonstrated that FTD/TPI is an effective treatment option with a manageable safety profile for pts with heavily pretreated mGC, regardless of prior gastrectomy. Clinical trial information: NCT02500043. [Table: see text]

Colon cancer is one of the leading tumours in the world and it is considered among the big killers, together with lung, prostate and breast cancer. In the recent years very important advances occurred in the field of treatment of this frequent disease: adjuvant chemotherapy was demonstrated to be effective, chiefly in stage III patients, and surgery was optimized in order to achieve the best results with a low morbidity. Several new target-oriented drugs are under evaluation and some of them (cetuximab and bevacizumab) have already exhibited a good activity/efficacy, mainly in combination with chemotherapy. The development of updated recommendations for the best management of these patients is crucial in order to obtain the best results, not only in clinical research but also in every-day practice. This report summarizes the most important achievements in this field and provides the readers useful suggestions for their professional practice.

Despite the introduction of newer chemotherapeutic agents such as irinotecan, capecitabine and oxaliplatin, patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) still have a poor prognosis. More effective and better-tolerated treatment strategies are needed to improve patient outcomes, particularly in subsequent lines of treatment following chemotherapy failure. The favourable efficacy and acceptable safety profiles of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have led to the approval of panitumumab and cetuximab monotherapy for the treatment of patients with EGFR-expressing mCRC whose tumours express non-mutated (wildtype) KRAS, after failure of standard chemotherapy. Cetuximab is also approved in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of mCRC in this patient population. In phase III monotherapy studies, panitumumab and cetuximab demonstrated significant improvements in progression-free survival when administered with best supportive care (BSC) vs. BSC alone in chemotherapy-refractory mCRC patients. A planned retrospective analysis of the panitumumab monotherapy trial was the first large-scale clinical demonstration that efficacy was confined to patients with tumours expressing wild-type KRAS. It is now recognised that anti-EGFR mAb therapy should only be used in patients whose tumours express wild-type KRAS. While generally well tolerated, anti-EGFR mAb monotherapy is associated with skin toxicity, and severity of the skin rash has been proposed as an early marker of response to treatment. BRAF, PTEN, and PI3K are also emerging as future potential predictive markers of response; however, further clinical studies are warranted to define the role of these biomarkers.

Rectal cancer is an important tumour from an epidemiological point of view and represents the benchmark for an optimal use of integrated treatments (surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy) in the oncological practice. The conventional use of total mesorectal excision and the integration with radiochemotherapy, better if preoperatively, are now able to increase survival, to decrease the occurrence of pelvic recurrence and to ameliorate the quality of life of patients. Updated recommendations for the management of these patients are here reported.

Cholangiocarcinoma is an uncommon adenocarcinoma with poor prognosis. Although the 1-year survival has increased over time, the 5-year survival has not shown any significant change (less than 5%). Cure can only be expected from surgical resection of early stage tumours but most patients initially present with advanced disease. Cancer cachexia, liver failure, and recurrent sepsis due to biliary obstruction are among the main causes of mortality. Patients' prognosis is strongly related to radical surgery and complete resection is the most effective therapy; the location within the biliary tree (proximal versus distal) has no impact on survival when a complete resection is achieved despite the fact the rate of resectability is up to 70% in case of distal cancer and 15-20% for high bile ducts tumours. Prognosis of cholangiocarcinoma remains poor even with aggressive surgical therapy because of the high incidence of local or regional recurrence and distant metastasis. Based on these data many questions need an answer: is there a role for adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy? Neoadjuvant treatments provide best results? There is a standard therapy in unresectable or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma? This report tries to answer to frequently asked questions that the readers are faced with their patients every day (from diagnostic procedures to palliative treatment) and tries to suggest useful information for their professional practice.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers in the Western world, with > 500,000 new cases diagnosed each year. One of the strongest risk factors for colon cancer is age. Physicians and their older patients commonly face the dilemma of whether to give/receive systemic chemotherapy for CRC. Evidence supports similar survival benefits with adjuvant and palliative chemotherapy in elderly patients compared with younger age groups. Data on treatment-related side effects did not reveal a different toxicity profile for elderly patients. The safety and efficacy of systemic chemotherapy in fit older patients were proven, and this group of patients could be enrolled in clinical trials. Conversely, frail older patients are more likely to suffer adverse outcomes when faced with stressors and might not benefit from chemotherapy. Despite a growing body of data, a great deal of work is still needed to establish optimal strategies to care for patients diagnosed with cancer later in life. There is a paucity of reports published in the literature because of the difficulty in routinely collecting such data. We report an overview of recent studies (clinical trials, pooled analysis, and population studies) to provide more information and to identify new and better treatment options.