6083 Background: SGCHN are rare tumors including adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC) and non-ACC, with no standard systemic treatment for R/M pts. We evaluated N monotherapy in R/M SGCHN pts. Methods: R/M SGCHN pts (ACC or non-ACC) not eligible to local treatment and with centrally confirmed RECIST 1.1 disease progression over the last 6 months were enrolled and received N 3 mg/kg IV, every 2 weeks for a maximum of 12 months (mo). Possibility was given to re-start N in case of progression during the 2-year follow-up phase. Primary endpoint was 6-mo non-progression Rate (NPR6m) as per RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints included ORR, PFS, OS, and safety. Considering that N would be uninteresting if NPR6m ≤ 20% and promising if ≥ 40% and using a Fleming’s single-stage design (α: 5% unilateral, power: 90%), at least 14 successes/42 evaluable pts were required for each cohort to be positive. Results: 46 ACC and 52 Non-ACC pts (median age 61 yrs (range 29-81), 43.9% female, 55.1% PS1 and 2.0% PS2) were enrolled and received at least one dose of N. Median treatment duration was 5.5 mo (ACC) and 3.3 (Non-ACC). Median FU was 10.8 mo (ACC) and 8.3 mo (Non-ACC). 95 patients were evaluable for the primary endpoint. NPR6m was 15/45 pts (33.3%, 90%CI :21.8;46.6) and 7/50 pts (14.0%, 90%CI:6.8;24.7) for ACC and non-ACC pts respectively. 4 (8.7%) partial responses (PR) and 26 (56.5%) stable diseases (SD) were observed in ACC cohort while 2 (3.8%) PR and 22 (42.3%) SD were observed in non-ACC. Median PFS was 4.9 mo (95%CI = 3.4;5.6) in ACC pts and 1.8 mo (95%CI = 1.7;3.5) in non-ACC pts. The most common related adverse events (AE) ( > 10% by cohort) were asthenia, hyperthyroidism, diarrhea, rash, pruritus and hypothyroidism. 7/98 pts (7.1%) presented at least one related AE Grade 3-4 (mainly hepatic) and 9 pts (9.2%) prematurely discontinued Nivolumab due to toxicity. Conclusions: Limited efficacy was observed with N in R/M SGCHN pts. N in combination might be of interest and deserves exploration in ACC pts. Clinical trial information: NCT03132038.
In this large retrospective cohort of patients with AI-sensitive metastatic luminal BC, OS was similar, whether first-line treatment was chemotherapy or endocrine therapy. In agreement with international guidelines, endocrine therapy should be the first choice for first-line systemic treatment for MBC in the absence of visceral crisis.
Background. BRAF V600E mutations occurring in about 10% of metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRCs) are usually associated with a poor outcome. However, their prognostic factors are unknown. Materials and Methods. We built a multicenter clinicobiological database gathering data from patients with BRAF V600E -mutant mCRC treated in one of the 16 French centers from 2006 to 2017. The primary endpoint was to identify prognostic factors using a Cox model. Results. We included 287 patients (median age, 67 years [28-95]; female, 57%). Their median overall survival was 20.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.97-27.04), and median progression-free survival in the first-line setting was 4.34 months (95% CI, 3.81-5.03). Chemotherapy regimen and biological agents (antiangiogenic or anti-epidermal growth factor receptor) were not associated with overall and progression-free survival. Stage IV disease (synchronous metastases) and absence of curative-intent surgery were statistically associated with poor overall survival. Among the 194 patients with mismatch repair (MMR) status available, overall survival was significantly longer in patients with deficient MMR tumors compared with those with proficient MMR tumors (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.56; p = .009). Conclusion. Despite that BRAF V600E -mutant mCRCs are associated with poor overall and progression-free-survival, patients with deficient MMR tumors and/or resectable disease experienced a longer survival. These results highlight the importance of MMR testing and resectability discussion in patients with BRAF V600E mCRC in day-to-day practice. The Oncologist 2019;24:e1331-e1340 Implications for Practice: Mismatch repair (MMR) testing and resectability discussion in patients with BRAF V600E metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) should be performed in day-to-day practice to steer treatment decision making in patients with BRAF V600E -mutant mCRC.
Purpose The identification and referral of patients in need of palliative care should be improved. The French society for palliative support and care recommended to use the PALLIA‐10 questionnaire and its score greater than 3 to refer patients to palliative care. We explored the use of the PALLIA‐10 questionnaire and its related score in a population of advanced cancer patients. Methods This prospective multicentric study is to be conducted in authorized French comprehensive cancer centers on hospitalized patients on a given day. We aimed to use the PALLIA‐10 score to determine the proportion of palliative patients with a score >3. Main secondary endpoints were to determine the proportion of patients already managed by palliative care teams at the study date or referred to palliative care in six following months, the prevalence of patients with a score greater than 5, and the overall survival using the predefined thresholds of 3 and 5. Results In 2015, eighteen French cancer centers enrolled 840 patients, including 687 (82%) palliative patients. 479 (69.5%) patients had a score >3, 230 (33.5%) had a score >5, 216 (31.4%) patients were already followed‐up by a palliative care team, 152 patients were finally referred to PC in the six subsequent months. The PALLIA‐10 score appeared as a reliable predictive (adjusted ORRef≤3: 1.9 [1.17‐3.16] and 3.59 [2.18‐5.91]) and prognostic (adjusted HRRef≤3 = 1.58 [95%CI 1.20‐2.08] and 2.18 [95%CI 1.63‐2.92]) factor for patients scored 4‐5 and >5, respectively. Conclusion The PALLIA‐10 questionnaire is an easy‐to‐use tool to refer cancer inpatients to palliative care in current practice. However a score greater than 5 using the PALLIA‐10 questionnaire would be more appropriate for advanced cancer patients hospitalized in comprehensive cancer center.
Background: Nucleolin (NCL) is a multifunctional protein with oncogenic properties. Anti-NCL drugs show strong cytotoxic effects, including in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) models, and are currently being evaluated in phase II clinical trials. However, few studies have investigated the clinical value of NCL and whether NCL stratified cancer patients. Here, we have investigated for the first time the association of NCL with clinical characteristics in breast cancers independently of the different subtypes. Methods: Using two independent series (n = 216; n = 661), we evaluated the prognostic value of NCL in non-metastatic breast cancers using univariate and/or multivariate Cox-regression analyses. Results: We reported that NCL mRNA expression levels are markers of poor survivals independently of tumour size and lymph node invasion status (n = 216). In addition, an association of NCL expression levels with poor survival was observed in TNBC (n = 40, overall survival (OS) p = 0.0287, disease-free survival (DFS) p = 0.0194). Transcriptomic analyses issued from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database (n = 661) revealed that breast tumours expressing either low or high NCL mRNA expression levels exhibit different gene expression profiles. These data suggest that tumours expressing high NCL mRNA levels are different from those expressing low NCL mRNA levels. Conclusions: NCL is an independent marker of prognosis in breast cancers. We anticipated that anti-NCL is a promising therapeutic strategy that could rapidly be evaluated in high NCL-expressing tumours to improve breast cancer management.
Background. Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) is an aggressive malignancy with a median overall survival (OS) of between 8 and 11 months. However, a significant number of patients experience a longer survival, more than 18 months. The aim of this study was to describe the "long-term survivor" population and to evaluate clinical and pathological factors that might affect survival. Materials and Methods. All patients with mPDAC diagnosed in the Centre Leon Bérard (Lyon, France) between January 2010 and June 2015 and who survived more than 18 months were identified. They were compared with a control cohort matched on age, sex, performance status, stage at diagnosis, primary tumor localization, treatment, and liver metastasis. Their clinical features, treatment modalities, and outcomes were analyzed. Results. A total of 94 patients were included, 47 in each cohort. Both cohorts had identical characteristics as follows: women (51%), performance status ≤1 (95.7%), median age at diagnosis (60 years), and metastasis at diagnosis (83%). Median OS was 26.87 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 23-31.08) in the long-term survivor group (LS group) and 9.79 months (95% CI 5.75-11.86) in the control group (C group). Potential factors of long-term survival were explored with a logistic model (LS group vs. C group). Three factors were identified as significant prognostic factors in the univariate analysis: lymphopenia (odds ratio [OR] ref: yes = 0.26), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR; OR ref >5 = 0.31), and peritoneal carcinomatosis (OR ref: yes = 0.40). NLR was the only remaining factor in our backward selection procedure. Conclusion. A significant subset of patients with mPDAC can achieve long-term survival (≥18 months) in 2018. We identified low NLR as a significant prognostic factor associated with longterm survival in mPDAC. The Oncologist 2019;24:1543-1548 Implications for Practice: Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) is one of the most lethal types of cancer. A subset of patients with mPDAC can achieve long-term survival (≥18 months) with a modern chemotherapy regimen, such as FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel. We identified low neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) as a significant prognostic factor associated with long-term survival in mPDAC. Prognostic factors such as NLR might allow accurate selection of patients with mPDAC in order to consider individual therapeutic approaches. NLR should be used as a stratification factor in clinical trials.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.