Molecular profiling-selected treatment in metastatic gastric and oesophageal cancer: Real-life clinical experience.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15537-e15537 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ofer Purim ◽  
Alexander Beny ◽  
Moshe J. Inbar ◽  
Baruch Brenner ◽  
Elizabeth Dudnik ◽  
...  

e15537 Background: We evaluated real-life clinical experience with molecular profiling (MP)-guided therapy in metastatic gastric and oesophageal cancer in Israel Methods: This multicenter retrospective cohort study included patients with metastatic gastric or oesophageal cancer who were treated in the participating institutions and underwent MP (Caris Molecular Intelligence). Treatment was considered as having benefit if the ratio between the longest progression-free survival (PFS) post MP and the last PFS pre MP was ≥1.3. The null hypothesis was that ≤15% of patients gain such benefit. Results: The analysis included 46 patients (61% males; median age, 58 years; 57% with poorly-differentiated tumours). At least one actionable (i.e., predictive of response to a specific therapy) biomarker was identified per patient. Immunohistochemistry was performed on all samples and identified 1-8 (median: 3) biomarkers per patient (most commonly: low TS, high TOPO1, high TOP2A). Twenty-eight patients received therapy post MP (1-4 lines). In the 1st-line post MP, 5 patients (18%) achieved partial response and 5 (18%) stable disease; the median (range) PFS was 4.3 (0.4-38.5) months. Twenty-four patients were evaluable for PFS ratio analysis; in 7 (29.2%), the ratio was ≥1.3. In one-sided exact binomial test vs. the null hypothesis, P = 0.019; therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. Conclusions: Our findings demonstrated that implementing MP is feasible and that MP could provide clinical benefit for a considerable proportion (~30%) of patients with metastatic gastric or oesophageal cancer.

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (11) ◽  
pp. 887-895 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martina Catalano ◽  
Giandomenico Roviello ◽  
Raffaele Conca ◽  
Alberto D’Angelo ◽  
Valeria Emma Palmieri ◽  
...  

Background: The phase III MPACT trial demonstrated the superiority of gemcitabine (Gem) combined with Nab-paclitaxel (Nab-P) versus gemcitabine alone in previously untreated patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of Gem/Nab-P in routine clinical practice. Methods: From January 2015 to December 2018, patients with metastatic PDAC receiving firstline treatment with a combination of gemcitabine and Nab-paclitaxel were included in a multicentre retrospective observational study. Exploratory analyses of efficacy, and prognostic and predictive markers, were performed. Results: The cohort comprised 115 patients (median age 65 [range 50-84] years) with good performance status (ECOG PS 0-1). The median overall survival (OS) was 11 months (95% CI; 9-13) and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6 months (95% CI 5-7). Partial response and stable disease were achieved in 44 and 30 patients, respectively, yielding an overall disease control rate (DCR) of 64.3%. Grade 3-4 hematological toxicity frequency was 22.61% for neutropenia, 5.22% for anemia, and 3.48% for thrombocytopenia. Grade 3 asthenia was recorded in 2.61% of patients. No grade 4 non-hematological events were reported. Dose reduction was necessary in 51.3% of the patients. Conclusions: Our results confirm the efficacy and safety of a first-line regimen comprising gemcitabine and Nab-paclitaxel in metastatic PDAC in a real-life population.


2003 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 683-686
Author(s):  
S. Komiyama ◽  
Y. Mizusawa ◽  
M. Onouchi ◽  
K. Takehara ◽  
A. Suzuki ◽  
...  

We experienced a case of recurrent ovarian cancer that responded to weekly docetaxel. The patient had stage IIIC ovarian cancer (poorly differentiated serous adenocarcinoma). After initial remission was achieved by chemotherapy with paclitaxel and carboplatin plus cytoreductive surgery, the disease recurred and irinotecan therapy achieved temporary remission. During maintenance therapy with oral etoposide, the disease recurred again. We then tried five courses of weekly docetaxel therapy and it successfully controlled the disease. The progression-free survival time on weekly docetaxel treatment is now 7 months and the toxicity was extremely low. This patient demonstrates the effectiveness of weekly docetaxel as salvage chemotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer.


2017 ◽  
pp. 1-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Brian Dalton ◽  
Patrick M. Forde ◽  
Hyunseok Kang ◽  
Roisin M. Connolly ◽  
Vered Stearns ◽  
...  

Purpose Tumor genomic profiling for personalized oncology therapy is being widely applied in clinical practice even as it is being evaluated more formally in clinical trials. Given the complexities of genomic data and its application to clinical use, molecular tumor boards with diverse expertise can provide guidance to oncologists and patients seeking to implement personalized genetically targeted therapy in practice. Methods A multidisciplinary molecular tumor board reviewed tumor molecular profiling reports from consecutive referrals at the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins over a 3-year period. The tumor board weighed evidence for actionability of genomic alterations identified by molecular profiling and provided recommendations including US Food and Drug Administration–approved drug therapy, clinical trials of matched targeted therapy, off-label use of such therapy, and additional tumor or germline genetic testing. Results One hundred fifty-five patients were reviewed. Actionable genomic alterations were identified in 132 patients (85%). Off-label therapies were recommended in 37 patients (24%). Eleven patients were treated off-label, and 13 patients were enrolled onto clinical trials of matched targeted therapies. Median progression-free survival of patients treated with matched therapies was 5 months ( 95% CI, 2.9 months to not reached), and the progression-free survival probability at 6 months was 43% (95% CI, 26% to 71%). Lack of locally available clinical trials was the major limitation on clinical actionability of tumor profiling reports. Conclusion The molecular tumor board recommended off-label targeted therapies for a quarter of all patients reviewed. Outcomes were heterogeneous, although 43% of patients receiving genomically matched therapy derived clinical benefit lasting at least 6 months. Until more data become available from precision oncology trials, molecular tumor boards can help guide appropriate use of tumor molecular testing to direct therapy.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 5040-5040
Author(s):  
Pablo Gonzalez Navarro ◽  
Regina García Delgado ◽  
Alicia Bailén Garcia ◽  
Juan Antonio Múñoz Múñoz

Abstract Abstract 5040 Clinical Experience with Azacitidine In Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) in Spain Pablo González Navarro 1*, Regina García Delgado 2*, Alicia Bailén Garcia 3*, Juan Antonio Muñoz Muñoz 4* 1MD, PhD. Hospital San Cecilio, 18014 Granada, Spain, Teléfono: 958023600 [email protected]; 2Hospital Virgen De La Victoria, Málaga, Spain; 3Hospital Carlos Haya, Málaga, Spain; 4MD, PhD. Hospital Universitario Puerta del Mar, Cádiz, Spain Introduction: Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) is a clonal disorder of hematopoietic stem cells often occurring in elderly patients. In the new WHO classification, CMML has been reclassified as a myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative disease. CMML has been subdivided in two subclasses: CMML-1:<5% blasts in peripheral blood and 5–9% blasts in bone marrow, and CMML-2: <10% blasts in peripheral blood and 10–19% blasts in bone marrow (Greco et al. Mediterr J Hematol Infect Dis.2011). Azacitidine (AZA) is an hypomethylating agent approved in Europe for the treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes, with an intermediate to high risk of progressing to AML or death; chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) and AML that has developed from a myelodysplastic syndrome (prescribing information EMEA 2011). Until its approval in May 2009, AZA was used in Spain under compassionate use in clinical trials. AZA produce a direct decrease of DNA methyltransferase activity, reverting aberrant DNA methylation and increasing the expression of silenced genes, leading to celular differentiation and/or apoptosis (Greco et al. Mediterr J Hematol Infect Dis. 2011). Materials and Methods: We report the results of a retrospective, longitudinal, multicenter Spanish study of 27 patients to assess the effectiveness of AZA to treat CMML. We present results of: Response, Overall Response, Overall Survival and Progression Free Survival. Results: Eighteen of the patients (69.23%) had Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia (CMML) type 1 and nine (30.77%) CMML type 2. Median age at diagnosis was 69 years. Male/female ratio: 19/8. ECOG performance status score 1–2 was 78%, twenty patients (74%) received an initial dose of 75 mg/m2 of AZA, whereas three patients (11%) received 50mg/ m2. The mean number of cycles received was 8.32, 95%IC (5.91; 10.73). Overall response to treatment was 53% (CR+PR+HI+mCR): 14.81% complete response, 7.4% partial response, 3,7% Medular complete response and 29,62% Hematological Improvement. In addition, 18,51% had stable disease. Thirty-six percent of patients were alive at the end of treatment with AZA. Median Overall Survival and Progression Free Survival were 17.47 months (95%CI 9.33, upper limit not reached) and 10.97 (95%IC 3.97, 17.47) respectively (Figure 1, 2). Conclusion: Our results show that AZA is an active drug in the treatment of patients with CMML, with similar response rates in the published literature. More data from this study and further investigation with different clinical trials are needed to confirm these outcomes as well as safety and effectiveness of this treatment. Disclosures: García Delgado: Celgene and Novartis: Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4267-4267
Author(s):  
Pongtep Viboonjuntra ◽  
Arnuparp Lekhakula ◽  
Kanchana Chansung ◽  
Chittima Sirijerachai ◽  
Pimjai Niparuck ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction : To date, the ELN recommendation and NCCN guidelines are the principle mile stones to follow up the treatment response and to make the decision of TKIs switching. However, in real life practice, many factors influence changing the real switching date from the date had an indication. This study aims to analyze the impact of early switching to second line TKI, nilotinib, in real life practice, for the CML patients who failed, had sub-optimal response or were intolerant to imatinib. Methods : This prospective study was conducted through 7 medical centers in Thailand between 1st of September 2009 and 31st of August 2011. Adult CML patients of age ≥ 18 years old, in chronic and accelerated phase, who had failure, suboptimal response or intolerance to imatinib, based on ELN 2009 guideline, were included and were eligible with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily. Prospective data collection for 24 months of each patient was performed. The main objective was to identify the impact of early switching to nilotinib on major molecular response (MMR). The other objectives were to observe the efficacy of nilotinib including overall survival, progression free survival and the safety. The survival results were presented as Kaplan-Meier survival curves. For the comparison of the treatment groups, the Kaplan-Meier estimator with the corresponding log-rank test for equality of survivor functions across treatment group was applied. Results : The final 108 cases were analysed. The median age was 47 (17-79) years with the proportion of male to female of 1.4:1 respectively. The median duration of the prior imatinib treatment was 18 months (2-142 months). The median duration between the date of indication and the date of real switching was 3.1 months (0-62.8 months) with 50% changing less than 3 months, 26.9% between 3 months and 12 months, and 23.1% changing longer than 12 months. The indication of switching included 63.6% failure to imatinib, 29% intolerance to imatinib and 7.4% suboptimal to imatinib. On the nilotinib switching, 70.4% completed 24 months follow-up, and 29.6% discontinued treatment mostly because of unsatisfactory results or adverse events. Evaluation was made every 3 months based on 2009 ELN recommendation. At 3 months, 57%, 20%, and 8% of the patients achieved CHR, CCyR and MMR, respectively. Those who did not achieve CHR at 3 months never achieved MMR, while 86 % of those who achieved CCyR at 3 months achieved MMR. All CML achieving MMR at 3 months had sustained MMR throughout the study period (24 months). Imatinib suboptimal response had better outcome than imatinib failure and imatinib intolerance groups. A preliminary analysis of BCR-ABL mutation was performed on 90 cases, and mutations were found on 21 cases. Two of them were T315I which were excluded from the study. The cases with mutation had poorer response to treatment than those without mutation. There was one case with initial G250E mutation developing T315I mutation after treatment with nilotinib. At 24 months, one case progressed to accelerated phase and 3 cases progressed to blastic transformation. The 2-year overall survival and 2-year progression-free survival and were 98.9% and 96.9% (figure 1 and 2), respectively. The interquatile analysis was done to identify the groups of cumulative MMR according to the duration between the date of indication and the date of real switching to nilotinib. The patients who switched to nilotinib within 12 months after date of indication could have a greater chance to achieved MMR than those who switched treatment later than 12 months (p(log-rank) = 0.002) (figure 3). Skin rash, musculoskeletal pain, and infection were the three most common non-hematologic adverse events, However, most of them were grade 1-2, except for 4 cases with grade 3-4 infections. Grade 3-4 hematologic adverse events included thrombocytopenia (12%), neutropenia (11%), anemia (5%) and leucopenia (4%), and most of them were manageable. Although biochemical abnormalities were commonly found, most of them were mild. Conclusions : Nilotinib, as a second line treatment showed excellent efficacy and tolerability. Indication for nilotinib treatment, initial mutation status and depth of response at 3 months after treatment can predict outcomes of the patients. However, the patients will have a greater chance to achieve MMR if they switched to nilotinib within 12 months after the date of indication for changing. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4775-4775
Author(s):  
Ernesto Pérez Persona ◽  
Ariane Unamunzaga Cilaurren ◽  
Ana Vega Gonzalez de Viñaspre ◽  
Itziar Oiartzabal Ormategui ◽  
Ana Santamaría Lopez ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Over the last few years, novel agents-based combinations have been incorporated into the treatment of MM patients, particularly in relapse setting. However, these novel combinations have been evaluated in clinical trials and patients included represent a selected population. Patients in real life are usually older with comorbidities and disabilities and not allowed to be included in the trials, so, in real setting, is expected worse outcomes and shorter survival. The information about treatment burden in real life is scarce. The aim of our study was to analyze the outcome of MM patients in the real life outside clinical trials, in terms of treatment lines in a single institution setting, and to analyze the influence of comorbidities on the treatment burden. Material and methods: Medical records of MM patients treated at Txagorritxu hospital (Spain) between 2009 and January 2017 were retrospectively evaluated with the aim of mapping the course of patients as well as to investigate the factors that influence treatment-decisions at different stages of the disease. Results: 176 patients with MM were diagnosed from jan-2009 to jan-2017. Baseline patient's characteristics are presented in Table 1. The median age at diagnosis was 71 years (range 33.2-93), main of the patients where non-transplant eligible newly diagnosed MM (NTENDMM): 114 (65%). With a median follow-up of 25 months, 90.6% of newly diagnosed MM patients transplant-eligible (TENDMM) remain alive versus 65% NTENDMM patients (p value: 0.000)(figure 1). Overall, patients received a median of 2 lines of treatment, it should be noted that 86% of patients had received 3 or less lines of treatment and only 14% of the patients could receive more than 3 lines of therapy. To better evaluate treatment burden, we focused on deceased patients. At the time of analysis, 19% of TENDMM (12 patients) and 51.4% of in NTENDMM (57 patients) has died with a median time to death of 29.6 months and 18 months to death, respectively. Median lines of therapy for death patients TENDMM was 3.5 (range 1-8), with a 75 percentile of 5 lines of therapy, by contrast, death NTENDMM patients received a median of 2 lines of therapy (range: 1-6), with an 80 percentile of 3 lines of therapy (figure 2). In order to evaluate the influence of comorbidities in treatment burden for NTENDMM patients, CIRS score was estimated retrospectively. Median CIRS score was 5.5 (1-19). CIRS scale did not predict progression free survival (PFS) among the different groups: CIRS <4: 23.4 months; CIRS4-8: 25.1 months and CIRS> 8: 30.6 months (p: 0.819), however, interestingly CIRS scale predicted overall survival (OS): CIRS <4: 48 moths; CIRS4-8: 50.8 months and CIRS> 8: 12.3 months, (p: 0.012) (figure 2). Analyzing treatment burden for each CIRS score group 63% of patients with CIRS> 8 received only one line of treatment before death, compared to 39.5% and 37.5% of patients with CIRS4-8 and CIRS <4, respectively. Conclusion: Although the impressive progress in the management of relapse/refractory MM patients in recent years, half of the patients, particularly those not suitable to received an autologous transplant, will be able to received only 2 lines of treatment before dying. In fact, an adequate comorbidity assessment could select patients that will only need only one line of treatment. To the best of our known, this is the first study that correlate treatment burden according to comorbidities at diagnostic. This study could guide strategies adapted according to the comorbidity of the patients. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominique Berton ◽  
Anne Floquet ◽  
Willy Lescaut ◽  
Gabriel Baron ◽  
Marie-Christine Kaminsky ◽  
...  

Introduction: Bevacizumab-containing therapy is considered a standard-of-care front-line option for stage IIIB–IV ovarian cancer based on results of randomized phase 3 trials. The multicenter non-interventional ENCOURAGE prospective cohort study assessed treatment administration and outcomes in the French real-world setting.Patients and Methods: Eligible patients were aged ≥ 18 years with planned bevacizumab-containing therapy for newly diagnosed ovarian cancer. The primary objective was to assess the safety profile of front-line bevacizumab in routine clinical practice; secondary objectives were to describe patient characteristics, indications/contraindications for bevacizumab, treatment regimens and co-medications, follow-up and monitoring, progression-free survival, and treatment at recurrence. In this non-interventional study, treatment was administered as chosen by the investigator and participation in the trial had no influence on the management of the disease.Results: Of 1,290 patients screened between April 2013 and February 2015, 468 were eligible. Most patients (86%) received bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks or equivalent, typically with carboplatin (99%) and paclitaxel (98%). The median duration of bevacizumab was 12.2 (range 0–28, interquartile range 6.9–14.9) months; 8% of patients discontinued bevacizumab because of toxicity. The most common adverse events were hypertension (38% of patients), fatigue (35%), and bleeding (32%). There were no treatment-related deaths. Most physicians (90%) reported blood pressure measurement immediately before each bevacizumab infusion and almost all (97%) reported monitoring for proteinuria before each bevacizumab infusion. Median progression-free survival was 17.4 (95% CI, 16.4–19.1) months. The 3-year overall survival rate was 62% (95% CI, 58–67%). The most commonly administered chemotherapies at recurrence were carboplatin and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin.Discussion: Clinical outcomes and tolerability with bevacizumab in this real-life setting are consistent with randomized trial results, notwithstanding differences in the treated patient population and treatment schedule.Clinical Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier NCT01832415.


1985 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
pp. 769-775 ◽  
Author(s):  
E Z Ezdinli ◽  
J R Anderson ◽  
F Melvin ◽  
J H Glick ◽  
T E Davis ◽  
...  

One hundred twenty-eight patients with purely nodular lymphocytic poorly differentiated lymphoma (NLPDL) without any prior therapy, entered on Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group protocol EST 2474, were analyzed for response, progression-free and overall survival. The restaged complete response rates with cyclophosphamide-prednisone (CP) (moderate regimen) of 54% compared favorably with those of the more intensive regimens; cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine and prednisone (COPP) (56%) and BCNU, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (BCVP) (53%). The toxicity of the regimens decreased from BCVP to COPP to CP. The median survival rate for the entire group was 7.8 years. Estimated progression-free survival at five years by regimen was COPP, 57%; BCVP, 26%; CP, 22% (P = .02). No other prognostic parameter significantly affected progression-free survival. In spite of the better progression-free survival of COPP-treated patients, the overall survival rates with the different induction regimens were similar. Maintenance therapy for patients in complete response at the end of induction therapy with periodic BCVP reinduction did not significantly affect the disease-free or overall survival. Cyclophosphamide-prednisone is a minimally toxic regimen effective in the treatment of NLPDL, but COPP, in view of its acceptable toxicity in this patient population and apparent superiority in providing a longer disease-free state, deserves further testing.


2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 429-429
Author(s):  
Peter J. Goebell ◽  
Lothar Mueller ◽  
Friedrich Overkamp ◽  
A. Lueck ◽  
Michele Vogt ◽  
...  

429 Background: During the last few years, several efficacious therapeutic options have been developed for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Due to the variety of multiple new targeted therapeutic options evidence based solely on randomized clinical trails is lacking. Registry data represents an important supplement providing insight into the treatment course and evidence on various outcomes. However, results provided by registry data may be influenced by many factors such as patient characteristic and comorbidities. Matched-pair analyses provide an interesting tool to compare different treatment options. Material & Methods: Over 100 oncology and urology outpatient centers in Germany are actively participating in this registry. The enrolment of the first 1000 mRCC patient data-sets with a maximum follow-up of three years has recently been completed. Among other information, data on patient and tumor characteristics, all systemic antineoplastic treatments, dosages, as well as response rates, progression free survival and overall survival are documented. Results: At the start of systemic therapy mean age were 66.2 years for male and 69.0 years for female patients, respectively. For all patients at least one comorbidity was indicated (Charlson Comorbidity Index 1.0). More than 94% of patients had metastases at inclusion. Investigating the most prominent TKIs used in sequential treatment in the registry, we identified time from initial diagnosis to treatment start as one of the most important factors predicting overall survival. Surprisingly, when controlling for this factor in a matched-pair analysis together with age, gender and risk, outcome in terms of progression-free survival appears to be similar in first line treatment with either Sunitinib or Sorafenib. Conclusions: Registry data can provide missing pieces of evidence on treatment outcomes. The registry demonstrates once more its hypothesis generating character and thus adds to the body of evidence as established from clinical trials. A direct comparison of efficacy can only be provided by clinical trails whereas registry data represent effectiveness of real-life treatment.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document