The gene expression platform can classify correctly from FFPE samples the majority of tumors classes both in patients with known primary and in patients with ACUP. Therefore, gene expression profiling represents an additional analytic approach to assist with the histogenetic diagnosis of patients with ACUP.

SELDI-TOF MS followed by classification tree pattern analysis is a suitable technique for finding new serum markers for CRC. Biomarkers can be identified and reproducibly detected in independent sample sets with high sensitivities and specificities. Although not specific for CRC, these biomarkers have a potential role in disease and treatment monitoring.

Sunitinib has been registered for the treatment of advanced renal cell cancer (RCC). As patient inclusion was highly selective in previous studies, experience with sunitinib in general oncological practice remains to be reported. We determined the efficacy and safety of sunitinib in patients with advanced RCC included in an expanded access programme. ECOG performance status 41, histology other than clear cell and presence of brain metastases were no exclusion criteria. Eighty-two patients were treated: 23% reached a partial response, 50% had stable disease, 20% progressed and six patients were not evaluable. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9 months and median overall survival (OS) was 15 months. Importantly, 47 patients (57%) needed a dose reduction, 35 (43%) because of treatment-related adverse events, 10 (12%) because of continuous dosing, and two because of both. Stomatitis, fatigue, hand -foot syndrome and a combination of grade 1 -2 adverse events were the most frequent reasons for dose reduction. In 40 patients (49%), there was severe toxicity, defined as dose reduction or permanent discontinuation, which was highly correlated with low body surface area, high age and female gender. On the basis of age and gender, a model was developed that could predict the probability of severe toxicity.

Background:The detection of circulating tumour cells (CTCs) has been linked with poor prognosis in advanced breast cancer. Relatively few studies have been undertaken to study the clinical relevance of CTCs in early-stage breast cancer.Methods:In a prospective study, we evaluated CTCs in the peripheral blood of 82 early-stage breast cancer patients. Control groups consisted of 16 advanced breast cancer patients and 45 healthy volunteers. The CTC detection was performed using ErbB2/EpCAM immunomagnetic tumour cell enrichment followed by multimarker quantitative PCR (QPCR). The CTC status and common clinicopathological factors were correlated to relapse-free, breast cancer-related and overall survival.Results:Circulating tumour cells were detected in 16 of 82 (20%) patients with early-stage breast cancer and in 13 out of 16 (81%) with advanced breast cancer. The specificity was 100%. The median follow-up time was 51 months (range: 17–60). The CTC positivity in early-stage breast cancer patients resulted in significantly poorer relapse-free survival (log rank test: P=0.003) and was an independent predictor of relapse-free survival (multivariate hazard ratio=5.13, P=0.006, 95% CI: 1.62–16.31).Conclusion:The detection of CTCs in peripheral blood of early-stage breast cancer patients provided prognostic information for relapse-free survival.

To receive student/resident rate, orders must be accompanied by name of affiliated institution, date of term, and the signature of program/residency coordinator on institution letterhead. Orders will be billed at individual rate until proof of status is received. Current prices are in effect for back volumes and back issues. Back issues sold in conjunction with a subscription rate are on a prorated basis. Subscriptions are accepted on a 12-month basis. Prices are subject to change without notice. Single issues, both current and back, exist in limited quantities and are offered for sale subject to availability. JCO Legacy Archive (electronic back issues from January 1983 through December 1998) is also available; please inquire.

The role of primary tumor resection (PTR) in synchronous patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who had unresectable metastases and few or absent symptoms of their primary tumor is unclear. Studying subgroups with low postoperative mortality may identify patients who potentially benefit from PTR.OBJECTIVE To determine the difference in 60-day mortality between patients randomized to systemic treatment only vs PTR followed by systemic treatment, and to explore risk factors associated with 60-day mortality.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS CAIRO4 is a randomized phase 3 trial initiated in 2012 in which patients with mCRC were randomized to systemic treatment only or PTR followed by systemic treatment with palliative intent. This multicenter study was conducted by the Danish and Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group in general and academic hospitals in Denmark and the Netherlands. Patients included between August 2012 and December 2019 with histologically proven colorectal cancer, unresectable metastases, and a primary tumor with few or absent symptoms were eligible.INTERVENTIONS Systemic treatment, consisting of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab vs PTR followed by fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe aim of the current analysis was to compare 60-day mortality rates in both treatment arms. A secondary aim was the identification of risk factors for 60-day mortality in the treatment arms. These aims were not predefined in the study protocol.RESULTS A total of 196 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (112 [57%] men; median [IQR] age, 65 [59-70] years). Sixty-day mortality was 3% (95% CI, 1%-9%) in the systemic treatment arm and 11% (95% CI, 6%-19%) in the PTR arm (P = .03). In a per-protocol analysis, 60-day mortality was 2% (95% CI, 1%-7%) vs 10% (95% CI, 5%-18%; P = .048). Patients with elevated serum levels of lactate dehydrogenase, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, and/or neutrophils who were randomized to PTR had a significantly higher 60-day mortality than patients without these characteristics.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Patients with mCRC who were randomized to PTR followed by systemic treatment had a higher 60-day mortality than patients randomized to systemic treatment. Especially patients randomized to the PTR arm with elevated serum levels of lactate dehydrogenase, neutrophils, aspartate aminotransferase, and/or alanine aminotransferase were at high risk of postoperative mortality. Final study results on overall survival have to be awaited.

PURPOSE Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) remains a lethal disease with current standard-of-care therapies. Homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations, including BRCA1/2 alterations, can sensitize cancer cells to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibition, which may improve outcomes in treatment-naïve mCRPC when combined with androgen receptor signaling inhibition. METHODS MAGNITUDE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03748641 ) is a phase III, randomized, double-blinded study that evaluates niraparib and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (niraparib + AAP) in patients with (HRR+, n = 423) or without (HRR−, n = 247) HRR-associated gene alterations, as prospectively determined by tissue/plasma-based assays. Patients were assigned 1:1 to receive niraparib + AAP or placebo + AAP. The primary end point, radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) assessed by central review, was evaluated first in the BRCA1/2 subgroup and then in the full HRR+ cohort, with secondary end points analyzed for the full HRR+ cohort if rPFS was statistically significant. A futility analysis was preplanned in the HRR− cohort. RESULTS Median rPFS in the BRCA1/2 subgroup was significantly longer in the niraparib + AAP group compared with the placebo + AAP group (16.6 v 10.9 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.79; P = .001). In the overall HRR+ cohort, rPFS was significantly longer in the niraparib + AAP group compared with the placebo + AAP group (16.5 v 13.7 months; HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.96; P = .022). These findings were supported by improvement in the secondary end points of time to symptomatic progression and time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy. In the HRR− cohort, futility was declared per the prespecified criteria. Treatment with niraparib + AAP was tolerable, with anemia and hypertension as the most reported grade ≥ 3 adverse events. CONCLUSION Combination treatment with niraparib + AAP significantly lengthened rPFS in patients with HRR+ mCRPC compared with standard-of-care AAP.

Paclitaxel is an important chemotherapeutic agent for breast cancer. Paclitaxel has high affinity for the P-glycoprotein (P-gp) (drug efflux pump) in the gastrointestinal tract causing low and variable oral bioavailability. Previously, we demonstrated that oral paclitaxel plus the P-gp inhibitor ciclosporin (CsA) is safe and results in adequate exposure to paclitaxel. This study evaluates the activity, toxicity and pharmacokinetics of paclitaxel combined with CsA in breast cancer patients. Patients with measurable metastatic breast cancer were given oral paclitaxel 90 mg m À2 combined with CsA 10 mg kg À1 (30 min prior to each paclitaxel administration) twice on one day, each week. Twenty-nine patients with a median age of 50 years were entered. All patients had received prior treatments, 25 had received prior anthracycline-containing chemotherapy and 19 had three or more metastatic sites. Total number of weekly administrations was 442 (median: 15/patient) and dose intensity of 97 mg m À2 week À1 . Most patients needed treatment delay and 17 patients needed dose reductions. In intention to treat analysis, the overall response rate was 52%, the median time to progression was 6.5 months and overall survival was 16 months. The pharmacokinetics revealed moderate inter-and low intrapatient variability. Weekly oral paclitaxel, combined with CsA, is active in patients with advanced breast cancer. British Journal of Cancer (2006) As the incidence of breast cancer rises with advancing age, the total number of women with breast cancer will increase (Feigelson et al, 1997). Paclitaxel is widely used in advanced breast, lung and ovarian cancer. In breast cancer, paclitaxel has demonstrated activity as a single agent in first-and second-line treatment and in combination schedules (Van Poznak et al, 2002). Tumour response rates of 20 -30% have been observed in several phase III studies in second-line treatment (Di Leo and Piccart, 1999). Weekly infusions of paclitaxel have gained wide popularity because of the favourable toxicity profile allowing dose intensifications (Seidman et al, 1997;Perez et al, 2001). Seidman et al (1997) reported in a phase II study using weekly 100 mg m À2 an overall response rate (ORR) of 53% in 30 breast cancer patients who had failed first-line chemotherapy (Perez et al, 2001). Therapy was well tolerated and remarkable for a lack of overall and cumulative myelosuppression. Grade 3 sensory neuropathy was observed in 10% of patients receiving doses of less than 100 mg m weekly  2 q3wks (Green et al, 2005). There is also evidence that weekly paclitaxel can be effective as rescue in patients who have failed paclitaxel administered every 3 weeks (Perez et al, 2001). Oral administration of paclitaxel is convenient and practical for patients and circumvents systemic exposure to the vehicle Cremophor EL, which is held responsible for hypersensitivity reactions (Meerum Terwogt et al, 1998). Moreover, oral administration enables the development of chronic treatment schedules, resulting in sustained plasma...