Full implementation of the ERAS protocol significantly improves short term outcomes both in comparison to the high- and low-compliant groups.

and chronic forms of anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity (AIC), which is classified into early-onset (first year) and late-onset cardiotoxicity. 6 Chronic AIC typically presents as irreversible myocardial dysfunction and heart failure (HF). The estimated incidence of HF ranges from 6.6% to 26%. 7,8 An asymptomatic INTRODUCTION Breast cancer (BC) is the most common malignancy in women worldwide. 1,2 The use of potentially cardiotoxic anthracyclines, cytostatic agents introduced many years ago, still remains the cornerstone of BC therapy. 3-5 Most sources distinguish between acute (throughout anthracycline treatment)

The aim of the study was to compare efficacy and safety of first-line palliative chemotherapy with (EOX) epirubicin/oxaliplatin/capecitabine and (mDCF) docetaxel/cisplatin/5FU/leucovorin regimens for untreated advanced HER2-negative gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. Fifty-six patients were randomly assigned to mDCF (docetaxel 40 mg/m2 day 1, leucovorin 400 mg/m2 day 1, 5FU 400 mg/m2 bolus day 1, 5FU 1000 mg/m2/d days 1 and 2, cisplatin 40 mg/m2 day 3) or EOX (epirubicin 50 mg/m2 day 1, oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 day 1, capecitabine 1250 mg/m2/d days 1–21). The primary endpoint was overall survival. The median overall survival was 9.5 months with EOX and 11.9 months with mDCF (p = 0.135), while median progression-free survival was 6.4 and 6.8 months, respectively (p = 0.440). Two-year survival rate was 22.2 % with mDCF compared to 5.2 % with EOX. Patients in the EOX arm had more frequent reductions in chemotherapy doses (34.5 vs. 3.7 %; p = 0.010) and delays in subsequent chemotherapy cycles (82.8 vs. 63.0 %; p = 0.171). There was no statistically significant difference in the rates of grade 3–4 adverse events (EOX 79.3 vs. mDCF 61.5 %; p = 0.234). As compared with the mDCF, the EOX regimen was associated with more frequent nausea (34.5 vs. 15.4 %), thromboembolic events (13.8 vs. 7.7 %), abdominal pain (13.8 vs. 7.7 %) and grades 3–4 neutropenia (72.4 vs. 50.0 %), but lower incidences of anemia (44.8 vs. 61.5 %), mucositis (6.9 vs. 15.4 %) and peripheral neuropathy (6.9 vs. 15.4 %). In conclusion, the mDCF regimen was associated with a statistically nonsignificant 2.4-month longer median overall survival without an increase in toxicity. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02445209.

Combination treatment with BRAF (BRAFi) plus MEK inhibitors (MEKi) has demonstrated survival benefit in patients with advanced melanoma harboring activating BRAF mutations. Previous preclinical studies suggested that an intermittent dosing of these drugs could delay the emergence of resistance. Contrary to expectations, the first published phase 2 randomized study comparing continuous versus intermittent schedule of dabrafenib (BRAFi) plus trametinib (MEKi) demonstrated a detrimental effect of the “on−off” schedule. Here we report confirmatory data from the Phase II randomized open-label clinical trial comparing the antitumoral activity of the standard schedule versus an intermittent combination of vemurafenib (BRAFi) plus cobimetinib (MEKi) in advanced BRAF mutant melanoma patients (NCT02583516). The trial did not meet its primary endpoint of progression free survival (PFS) improvement. Our results show that the antitumor activity of the experimental intermittent schedule of vemurafenib plus cobimetinib is not superior to the standard continuous schedule. Detection of BRAF mutation in cell free tumor DNA has prognostic value for survival and its dynamics has an excellent correlation with clinical response, but not with progression. NGS analysis demonstrated de novo mutations in resistant cases.

IntroductionLaparoscopic technique combined with the ERAS (Enhanced Recovery after Surgery) protocol enables a shorter hospital stay and a lower complication rate. Although it has been widely used in many patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery, especially in patients with colorectal cancer, there are only a few papers describing laparoscopic total gastrectomy and the enhanced recovery protocol in patients with gastric cancer. Minimally invasive gastrectomy is still an uncommon procedure, mostly because of its difficulty.AimTo present the preliminary results of treatment of patients with gastric neoplasms who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy D2 with perioperative care according to ERAS principles.Material and methodsEleven patients (5 male and 6 female, age 52–77 years) underwent laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy with intracorporeal esophagojejunal anastomosis. In all patients the ERAS protocol was implemented. We analyzed operation time, complications and hospital stay. Additionally we focused on operative technique as well as the perioperative care protocol.ResultsThe mean duration of the procedure was 245 min. There was 1 conversion due to unclear tumor infiltration. Mean hospital stay was 4.6 days. One postoperative complication (central venous catheter sepsis) was reported. Histological analysis confirmed the tentative diagnosis (R0 resection) in 10/11 patients. There were no readmissions.ConclusionsLaparoscopic gastrectomy is a valuable alternative to the classical approach and combined with the ERAS protocol can result in reduced hospital stay. However, due to the small group of patients it is difficult to adequately assess the incidence of early and late complications of the laparoscopic procedures; therefore further research is needed.