scholarly journals Clinicopathological characteristics, diagnosis and treatment of melanoma in Serbia: The Melanoma Focus Study

2015 ◽  
Vol 72 (4) ◽  
pp. 312-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lidija Kandolf-Sekulovic ◽  
Nada Babovic ◽  
Mirjana Balic ◽  
Borislava Nikolin ◽  
Dejan Nikolic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Metastatic Melanoma ◽  
Clinical Studies ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Stage Iiic ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Melanoma Patients

Background/Aim. Treatment options for metastatic melanoma in Serbia are limited due to the lack of newly approved biologic agents and the lack of clinical studies. Also, there is a paucity of data regarding the treatment approaches in different tertiary centers and efficacy of available chemotherapy protocols. The aim of this study was to obtain more detailed data about treatment protocols in Serbia based on structured survey in tertiary oncology centers. Methods. Data about the melanoma patients treated in 2011 were analyzed from hospital databases in 6 referent oncology centers in Serbia, based on the structured survey, with the focus on metastatic melanoma patients (unresectable stage IIIC and IV). Results. A total of 986 (79-315 in different centers) patients were treated, with 320 (32.45%) newly diagnosed patients. There were 317 patients in stage IIIC/IV, 77/317 aged < 50 years. At the time of diagnosis 47.3% of patients were < 60 years of age (24.2% < 40 years, 23% 50-59 years, 52.6% > 60 years). At initial diagnosis 12.5% of patients were in stage III and 4.5% in stage IV. The most common type was superficial spreading melanoma (50-66%), followed by nodular melanoma (23.5-50%). Apart from the regional and distant lymph node metastases, the most frequent organs involved in stage IV disease were distant skin and soft tissues (12-55%), lungs (19-55.5%), liver (10-60%), and bones (3-10%). The first line therapy in stage IV metastatic melanoma was dacarbazine (DTIC) dimethyl-triazeno-imidozole-carboxamide in 61-93% of the patients, while the second line varied between the centers. Disease control (complete response + partial response + stable disease) was achieved in 25.7% of the patients treated with the first line chemotherapy and 23.1% of the patients treated with the second line therapy, but the duration of response was short, in first-line therapy 6.66 ? 3.36 months (median 6.75 months). More than 90% of patients were treated outside the clinical trials. Conclusion. Based on this survey, there is a large unmet need for the new treatment options for metastatic melanoma in Serbia. The development of national guidelines, and greater involvement in international clinical studies could lead to widening of treatment options for this chemotherapy resistant disease.

Continuous intravenous infusion Rh-endostatin in combination with dacarbazine and cisplatin as the first-line therapy for metastatic melanoma.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e21007-e21007
Author(s):  
Chuanliang Cui ◽  
BIN LIAN ◽  
Xuan Wang ◽  
Zhihong Chi ◽  
Lu Si ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Continuous Infusion ◽  
Metastatic Melanoma ◽  
Intravenous Infusion ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Advanced Melanoma ◽  
Drug Discontinuation ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

e21007 Background: Immunotherapy and targeted therapy have dramatically improved the survival of advanced melanoma patients (pts), but they show relative lower efficacy in Asian pts especially in acral and mucosal subtypes. Rh-Endostatin (endostar) is a potent endogenous inhibitor of angiogenesis. Previous studies have indicated that endostar combined with dacarbazine (DTIC) was effective in the treatment of metastatic melanoma. To further improve the effectiveness, this study was designed to observe the efficacy and safety of continuous infusion (CIV) of endostar combined with DTIC and cisplatin as the first line therapy for advanced melanoma pts. Methods: Pts with treatment naive, ECOG 0/1, and unresectable stage IIIC or IV melanoma were enrolled. DTIC (250 mg/m2, intravenous infusion, day 1-5), cisplatin (75 mg/m2, intravenous infusion, separated in 3 days) and endostar (15 mg/m2, CIV, day 1-14) were administered in a 28-day cycle until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included disease control rate (DCR) and safety. Results: From January 2016 to May 2018, 64 pts were enrolled and 50 pts were evaluable. 26 pts were female. The median age was 50 years (range 28-71 years) old. 10/64 (15.6%) were primary mucosal and 21/64 (32.8%) were primary acral, 40 pts were at stage IV and 32% pts got BRAF mutation. At the last follow up of Dec 2018, 5 pts achieved partial response and 27 pts got stable disease. The objective response rate was 10%. The DCR was 64%. The median PFS was 6.0 months (95% CI 1.7-10.3 months). The median overall survival was not reached. The most common adverse events were nausea (56.25%), vomiting (31.25%) and leucopenia (29.7%). Grade 3-4 toxicity was few, one got intermittent palpitation and one got atrial fibrillation, which caused drug discontinuation and recovered to normal. Conclusions: Continuous infusion of endostar plus DTIC and cisplatin improved median PFS as the first line therapy for advanced melanoma. This combination therapy was well tolerated and might be recommended as the first line therapy for advanced melanoma. Clinical trial information: NCT03095079.

scholarly journals Patients with non-small-cell lung cancer harbouring a BRAF mutation: a multicentre study exploring clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes in a real-life setting: EXPLORE GFPC 02-14

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
J. B. Auliac ◽  
S. Bayle ◽  
A. Vergnenegre ◽  
H. Le Caer ◽  
L. Falchero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Characteristics ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Nsclc Patients

Background Mutations in BRAF are rare oncogene mutations, found in 2% of non-small-cell lung cancers (nsclcs). Little information is available about the management of patients with BRAF-mutated nsclc, except for those included in clinical trials. We undertook the present study to assess the clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of those patients in a real-life setting.MethodsThis retrospective multicentre observational study included all patients with BRAF-mutated nsclc diagnosed between January 2012 and December 2014.ResultsPatients (n = 59) from 24 centres were included: 57.6% men; mean age: 64.5 ± 14.5 years; 82% with a performance status of 0–1 at diagnosis; smoking status: 40.3% current, 32.6% former; 93% with adenocarcinoma histology; 75% stage iv; 78% with V600E mutations; 2 with EGFR and 2 with ALK co-mutations. Of the stage iv patients, 79% received first-line therapy (14.2% anti-BRAF), and 48% received second-line treatment (23.8% anti-BRAF). Response rate and progression-free survival were, respectively, 51.7% and 8.7 months [95% confidence interval (ci): 6.4 months to 15.2 months] for first-line therapy and 35.3% and 4.1 months (95% ci: 2 months to 10.9 months) for second-line treatments. The 2-year overall survival was 58.5% (95% ci: 45.8% to 74.8%). Outcomes in patients with stage iv nsclc harbouring BRAF V600E mutations (n = 32) did not differ significantly from those of patients with other BRAF mutations.ConclusionsIn this real-world analysis, most nsclc patients with a BRAF mutation were men and current or former smokers. Survival appears to be better in these BRAF-mutated patients than in nsclc patients without an oncogenic driver.

scholarly journals Systematic Literature Review on Global Real-World Treatment Patterns of Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL)

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 5881-5881
Author(s):  
Keri Keri Yang ◽  
Beth Lesher ◽  
Eleanor Lucas ◽  
Tony Caver ◽  
Boxiong Tang
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Real World ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Treatment Patterns ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Third Line

Introduction: MCL is an aggressive type of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and was reported associated with early relapse and poor long-term survival. Treatment options include chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and molecular targeted therapies. As of 2019, molecular targeted therapies available in the United States indicated for the treatment of MCL include the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib, the immunomodulatory drug lenalidomide (following two previous lines of therapy), and the Burton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKIs) ibrutinib and acalabrutinib (following at least one previous line of therapy). Objective/Methods: To examine the real-world treatment patterns of patients with MCL globally, a systematic literature review was performed (2010-2019) with predefined methodology and inclusion and exclusion criteria. Embase and Medline were searched via ProQuest and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Library. Results: Of the 2207 publications identified, 6 publications (US, n = 4; EU, n = 2) provided information on the first-line treatment of MCL (Table). The most commonly administered first-line treatments were bendamustine-rituximab; high dose cytarabine ± rituximab; and cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin hydrochloride, vincristine sulfate, and prednisone (CHOP) ± rituximab although differences were noted across studies. Most patients received rituximab first-line either in combination with chemotherapy (54.2%-87.5%) or as monotherapy (12.9%-28.9%); although in some studies, rituximab maintenance therapy could not be excluded. The most commonly administered second-line therapies were cytarabine, rituximab monotherapy, and ibrutinib while third-line therapies were rituximab monotherapy, ibrutinib, and temsirolimus. Nine studies provided data on the real-world treatment of MCL with the BTKI ibrutinib (EU, n = 3; US, n = 5; EU/US, n = 1; Table); no real-world studies were identified for acalabrutinib. Six studies enrolled patients only with relapsed or remitting MCL; 3 studies enrolled patients (≤7.5%) who received ibrutinib as first-line therapy. Ibrutinib second-line therapy was administered to 13%-20% of patients and third-line therapy to 21% of patients. Ibrutinib discontinuation rates in 7 studies varied from 38.7%-83.6%. Non-response, including relapse or progression (34.6%-100%), was the main cause of discontinuation, followed by toxicity/adverse events (8.1%-25.6%). Across studies, toxicity/adverse events causing ibrutinib discontinuation included atrial fibrillation, bleeding/hemorrhage, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diarrhea, herpes zoster, infection, leukocytosis/ lymphocytosis, lung cancer, myelodysplastic syndrome, and thrombocytopenia. Two studies provided information on ibrutinib dose reductions (16.4% of patients) and ibrutinib dose interruptions (7.8%-30.2% of patients). Treatment options administered post-ibrutinib included rituximab (52.7%), hyper-CVAD + rituximab (16.7%-25.8%), lenalidomide-based regimens (9.7%-41.5%), and bortezomib-based regimens (8.4%-34.4%). Conclusion: Our analyses showed that most patients with MCL received first-line chemoimmunotherapy, although regimens varied across studies. Approximately 13%-21% of patients received ibrutinib following first-line therapy. Most ibrutinib discontinuation was due to progression followed by toxicity/adverse events. Upon discontinuation of ibrutinib, considerable variation in treatments was seen and no standard therapy identified. Given the limitations of current therapies, there is a need for additional second- and third-line treatments for patients with MCL. Quantitative assessments of clinical endpoints from real-world studies evaluating BTKI therapies are also warranted. Disclosures Yang: BeiGene, Ltd.: Employment. Lesher:Pharmerit: Employment. Lucas:Pharmerit: Employment. Caver:BeiGene, Ltd.: Employment. Tang:BeiGene, Ltd.: Employment.

Endostatin combined with chemotherapy as first-line therapy for stage IV melanoma patients: A phase II clinical study

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e20003-e20003
Author(s):  
C. Cui ◽  
Z. Chi ◽  
X. Yuan ◽  
L. Si ◽  
X. Sheng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sinus Bradycardia ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Phase Ii Clinical Study ◽  
Melanoma Patients ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Stage Iv Melanoma

e20003 Background: To observe the efficacy and safety of rh-endostatin injection (Endostar) combined with chemotherapy as first line therapy for stage IV melanoma patients. Methods: From March 2007-March 2008, 20 metastatic melanoma patients were enrolled. Endostar (15 mg d1–14) combined with dacarbazine (250 mg/m2 d1–5) or temozolomide (300 mg d 1–5) and fotemustine (100 mg/m2 d6) were given every 28days. Response, toxicity and progression free survival(PFS) were analyzed. Results: Among 20 evaluable cases, with mean cycle 2.7±0.80, four achieved partial response, six stable disease, with response rate 20.0% (4/20) and clinical benefit rate 50.0% (10/20). The median PFS reached 4.5 months (95% CI: 3.85–6.9 months), overall survival 8.5 months (95% CI: 5.62–8.54 months), with 6 months PFS rate 35% (7/20), and 6 months survival rate 65% (13/20). The Grade 3/4 toxicity was mainly myelosuppression, 40% (8/20). One patient ceased the treatment because of sinus bradycardia. Conclusions: Endostar combined with chemotherapy show its efficacy on melanoma patients and may prolong PFS. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Best supportive care in combination with polychemotherapy versus best supportive care alone as second-line therapy in stage IV metastatic melanoma (DeCOG MM-PAL 8)

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8567-8567
Author(s):  
J. Ulrich ◽  
U. Trefzer ◽  
W. Tilgen ◽  
D. Schadendorf ◽  
M. Kaatz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Supportive Care ◽  
Metastatic Melanoma ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Best Supportive Care ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

8567 Background: To date, there is no evidence of survival benefit from randomized trials in stage IV metastatic melanoma (MM) after disease progression to first-line therapy. Therefore, we initiated a phase III trial to evaluate the impact on survival of polychemotherapy in patients (pts.) receiving best supportive care (BSC) as second-line therapy. Methods: This prospective multicenter controlled study was conducted by the Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group (DeCOG) with 13 participating centers. Pts. with stage IV MM disease between 18 and 75 yrs. and a Karnofsky performance status (KPS) > 60 with progression after first-line chemotherapy or chemo-immunotherapy were offered to choose between polychemotherapy + BSC or BSC alone. Pts. were required to have adequate renal, liver and bone marrow function. The regimen consisted of cisplatin (50 mg/m2), vindesine (3 mg/m2) and dacarbacin (450 mg/m2) given on day 1 and 8 every 28 days (CVD). Reevaluation according to WHO response criteria were performed every 2 cycles. Primary endpoint was the median overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were overall response rate (OR) (only CVD arm) and quality of life (QOL). Results: Between 1/02 and 8/06 120 pts. were recruited, a minority of 35 pts. (29%) chose the BSC arm (A) and 85 (71%) the CVD + BSC arm (B). Five pts. were ineligible, and thus 115 pts. treated per protocol. There was a significant lower KPS in arm A at study entry. At the time of data analysis, 85% of the pts. had died from melanoma. There was no siginificant difference (p=0.093) in median OS between the two arms, 9.0 [95% CI: 3,9–14,1] months in arm A and 8.0 [95% CI: 6,5–9,5] months in arm B. The OR in arm B was 7.5% (2 CR, 3 PR). Conclusions: Polychemotherapy (CVD) + BSC as second-line therapy in stage IV MM does not improve overall survival as compared to BSC alone. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals 1338. Analysis of Prescription Guideline Adherence in Pediatric Outpatient Pneumonia Treatment

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S680-S681
Author(s):  
Carly Heck ◽  
Judith Martin ◽  
Marcia Kurs-Lasky
Keyword(s):  
Drug Allergy ◽  
Health Concern ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Comparison Results ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Recommended Therapy

Abstract Background Background: Antibiotic resistance is a major public health concern. A modifiable intervention is outpatient antibiotic stewardship. The goal of this study was to review the electronic health records (EHR) of children diagnosed with community acquired pneumonia (CAP) to compare patients who received non-guideline concordant therapy with those prescribed recommended therapy. Methods Methods: This was a retrospective chart review of 300 children (6 months to 6 years old) with an outpatient diagnosis of CAP between July 2017 and June 2019. 45 Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh (CHP) and UPMC Children’s Community Pediatrics (CCP) practices were included. CHP practices are academic-based with trainees involved in visits, while CCP practices do not include trainees. First-line recommended therapy was defined as amoxicillin, second-line therapy as azithromycin or amoxicillin-clavulanate, and all other prescriptions were defined as other. Patients prescribed first-line therapy were compared to patients with second-line therapy or other. If first-line therapy was not prescribed, the EHR was manually reviewed for justification. If drug allergy was listed, the medication allergy and type of reaction were recorded. Results Results: In this study the minority of children (43%) were prescribed first-line therapy. This group was younger (57 vs. 63 months of age), more likely to be Non-white (80%), and seen at the CHP locations than those prescribed non-guideline concordant therapy. The average symptom duration was shorter, heart rate and respiratory rate were higher and the presence of fever was more common in the first-line therapy group. Justification for non-guideline therapy was most often reported as to provide coverage for atypical organisms. The most common drug allergy recorded was amoxicillin, and urticaria with unknown timing was the most common type of reaction. Demographics Comparison Results Justification for Second-line / Other Therapy and Drug Allergy Results Conclusion This project observed a high proportion of children being prescribed non-guideline concordant therapy for a diagnosis of CAP. Age, race, practice location, and severity of illness measures showed a statistically significant difference between groups. This study highlights the importance of education which reviews the current guidelines and the most likely pathogens for children with CAP. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Survival of Patients With Advanced Colorectal Cancer Improves With the Availability of Fluorouracil-Leucovorin, Irinotecan, and Oxaliplatin in the Course of Treatment

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (7) ◽  
pp. 1209-1214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Axel Grothey ◽  
Daniel Sargent ◽  
Richard M. Goldberg ◽  
Hans-Joachim Schmoll
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Advanced Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cytotoxic Agents ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

Purpose Fluorouracil (FU)-leucovorin (LV), irinotecan, and oxaliplatin administered alone or in combination have proven effective in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). Combination protocols using FU-LV with either irinotecan or oxaliplatin are currently regarded as standard first-line therapies in this disease. However, the importance of the availability of all three active cytotoxic agents, FU-LV, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin, on overall survival (OS) has not yet been evaluated. Materials and Methods We analyzed data from seven recently published phase III trials in advanced CRC to correlate the percentage of patients receiving second-line therapy and the percentage of patients receiving all three agents with the reported median OS, using a weighted analysis. Results The reported median OS is significantly correlated with the percentage of patients who received all three drugs in the course of their disease (P = .0008) but not with the percentage of patients who received any second-line therapy (P = .19). In addition, the use of combination protocols as first-line therapy was associated with a significant improvement in median survival of 3.5 months (95% CI, 1.27 to 5.73 months; P = .0083). Conclusion Our results support the strategy of making these three active drugs available to all patients with advanced CRC who are candidates for such therapy to maximize OS. In addition, our findings suggest that, with the availability of effective salvage options, OS should no longer be regarded as the most appropriate end point by which to assess the efficacy of a palliative first-line treatment in CRC.

Modeling sequential systemic therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in the era of immunotherapy: What comes next?

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 324-324
Author(s):  
Ciro Celsa ◽  
Giuseppe Cabibbo ◽  
Marco Enea ◽  
Salvatore Battaglia ◽  
Giacomo Emanuele Maria Rizzo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Survival Data ◽  
Survival Curve ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Lifetime Horizon ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Sequential Strategy

324 Background: Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab represents the new best performing first-line approach for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC). However, the best sequential strategy after every first-line failure (for progression or intolerance) remains elusive, and options for retreating patients failing Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab with multi-kinase inhibitors (MKI) or immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) are yet undefined. Methods: We developed a Markov model to analyze simulated-Overall Survival (s-OS) of second-line ICIs or MKIs after first-line Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab over a lifetime horizon. For first-line therapy, PFS of Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab was extracted from Imbrave 150 trial and it was used as endpoint since it is not influenced by post-progression survival. For second-line retreatment, pooled OS of MKIs (Regorafenib and Cabozantinib), or ICIs (Nivolumab and Pembrolizumab) were adopted. Survival estimates for sequential settings considered the proportion of patients who did not receive second-line therapy due to death during first-line therapy. Individual patient survival data were extracted from PFS and OS Kaplan-Meier curves of RESORCE trial for Regorafenib, CELESTIAL trial for Cabozantinib, CheckMate-040 for Nivolumab and Keynote-240 for Pembrolizumab. Each reconstructed survival curve was inspected for accuracy and was compared with originally published curves. Results: First-line Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab followed by second-line ICIs turned on from the model as the best sequential strategy (median s-OS 24 months; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 23-26 months) and extends survival when compared Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab followed by MKIs (median s-OS 20 months; 95% CI 19-21 months). Conclusions: To our knowledge and given the absence of adequately designed sequential RCTs, this is the first model to date which suggests, with a proper methodological approach, an accurate estimate of outcome of patients with u-HCC treated by sequential systemic therapies. In patients with u-HCC failing first-line treatment, modelling estimates of s-OS for each retreatment strategies may assist in choosing the most promising sequences in order to plan appropriate RCTs.

Pan-cancer evaluation of homologous repair deficiency somatic mutations and response to first-line anti-neoplastic therapy.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10535-10535
Author(s):  
Jessica A Lavery ◽  
Samantha Brown ◽  
Gregory J. Riely ◽  
Philippe L. Bedard ◽  
Ben Ho Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Somatic Mutations ◽  
De Novo ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Major Mechanism ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Oncogenic Mutation ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Response To Chemotherapy

10535 Background: Homologous recombination is a major mechanism of defective DNA repair, but it remains uncertain whether homologous repair deficient (HRD) tumors have favorable prognosis or are more/less likely to respond to treatment than tumors lacking such mutations. Objective: To determine whether lung (NSCLC) and colorectal (CRC) HRD+ tumors have better survival or response to chemotherapy than HRD- tumors. Methods: Patients with de novo stage IV NSCLC or CRC who had next generation sequencing (NGS) between 2015-2018 from one of four cancer centers were identified. Records were curated using the PRISSMM framework to ascertain treatment, overall survival (OS) and progression free survival based on imaging (PFS-I) and oncologists’ notes (PFS-M). Each NSCLC or CRC tumor was categorized as HRD+ if NGS revealed an oncogenic/likely oncogenic mutation in: ATM, BAP1, BARD1, BLM, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CHEK2, FAM175A, FANCA, FANCC, NBN, PALB2, RAD50, RAD51, RAD51C, RTEL1, or MRE11A based on the OncoKB database. The tumor was categorized as HRD- if no oncogenic mutation in any of these genes was evident and HRD indeterminate (HRD?) if no mutation was identified but the panel did not include all genes. OS, PFS-I and PFS-M from start of first line therapy were reported by HRD status. The percentage with a good response to first line therapy (≥2x the median) and exceptional response (≥3x the median) was estimated for each endpoint. Results: For NSCLC 4% were HRD+, 59% HRD- and 37% HRD?. For CRC there were 5% HRD+, 60% HRD- and 35% HRD?. There were no significant differences for any survival endpoint between patients who were HRD+ vs HRD- in univariable analyses. The proportion of good and exceptional responders to first line systemic chemotherapy also did not vary by HRD status, though patients with HRD+ CRC were potentially more likely to be exceptional responders. Similarly, no differences between HRD+ and HRD- tumors were apparent for the subgroup receiving platinum containing therapy. Conclusions: NSCLC and CRC patients with somatic mutations in HRD oncogenic genes did not differ from patients lacking such a mutation with respect to OS or PFS. CRC patients with HRD+ tumors may be more likely to be exceptional responders, but sample sizes are limited. By May, the analysis will include breast and pancreatic cancer cases.[Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document