Comparison of efficacy and safety between simultaneous integrated boost intensity-modulated radiotherapy and standard-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective study

Objective This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of simultaneous integrated boost intensity-modulated radiotherapy (SIB-IMRT) versus standard-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy (SD-IMRT) in the treatment of locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Methods From July 2003 to March 2014, 1748 patients in a single center who received definitive chemoradiotherapy were included in the analysis. A total of 109 patients who underwent SIB-IMRT and fulfilled all inclusion and exclusion criteria were identified as the study group. A total of 266 patients who underwent SD-IMRT (60 Gy/30 fractions, 2 Gy/fraction, 1 time/day, 5 times/week) during the same period were selected as the control group. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the baseline characteristics. Survival status, treatment failure mode, and the occurrence of adverse events were compared between the two groups. Results There were more women and more cervical and upper thoracic cancers (P = 0.038, < 0.001, respectively) in the SIB-IMRT group before case matching. The median progression-free survival (PFS) in the SD-IMRT and SIB-IMRT groups was 22 and 19 months, respectively, and the median overall survival duration was 24 and 22 months, respectively, with χ2 = 0.244 and P = 0.621. After PSM of 1:1, 138 patients entered the final analysis (69 cases from each group). The median PFS of the SD-IMRT group and the SIB-IMRT group was 13 and 18 months, respectively, with χ2 = 8.776 and P = 0.003. The 1‑, 3‑, and 5‑year overall survival rates were 66.7, 21.7, and 8.7% and 65.2, 36.2, and 27.3%, respectively, and the median overall survival duration was 16 and 22 months, respectively, with χ2 = 5.362 and P = 0.021. Treatment failure mode: 5‑year local regional recurrence rates of SD-IMRT and SIB-IMRT were 50.7 and 36.2%, respectively, with χ2 = 2.949 and P = 0.086. The 5‑year distant metastasis rates of the two groups were 36.2 and 24.6%, respectively, with χ2 = 2.190 and P = 0.139. Adverse events: 3 patients experienced grade 4–5 toxicity (2.2%), including one case of grade 4 radiation esophagitis and two cases of grade 5 radiation pneumonitis, all in the SD-IMRT group; 14 patients experienced grade 3 adverse events (10.1%), primarily including radiation esophagitis, radiation pneumonitis, and hematological toxicity. Conclusion The technique of SIB-IMRT was safe and reliable compared with SD-IMRT. In addition, SIB-IMRT had locoregional control advantages and potential survival benefits.

Treatment Outcomes and Relative Dose Intensity of Chemotherapy in Slovene Patients With Advanced Hodgkin Lymphoma

This retrospective study was undertaken to investigate the association of relative dose intensity (RDI) with the outcome of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) patients with advanced stage disease receiving ABVD (doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine) and escalated BEACOPP regimen (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, prednisone). A total of 114 HL patients treated between 2004 and 2013 were enrolled for evaluation. RDI calculations were based on a Hryniuk's model. The association of variables with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) was analysed using univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. The median age of patients was 39 years, majority of patients were males and had stage IV disease. Fifty-four patients received ABVD and 60 received BEACOPP chemotherapy with 24 and 4 deaths, respectively. Patients in BEACOPP group were significantly younger with lower Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) in comparison with ABVD group, making the comparison of groups impossible. In ABVD group, RDI was not significantly associated with OS (p=0.590) or PFS (p=0.354) in a multivariate model where age was controlled. The low number of events prevented the analysis in the BEACOPP group. Patients' age was strongly associated with both OS and PFS: all statistically significant predictors for OS and PFS from univariate analyses (chemotherapy regimen, CCI, RDI) lost its effect in multivariate analyses where age was controlled. Based on our observations, we can conclude that RDI is not associated with the OS or PFS after the age is controlled, neither in all patients combined nor in individual chemotherapy groups.

Changes in Serum Growth Factors during Lenvatinib Predict the Post Progressive Survival in Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Serum growth factor changes and their effect on prognosis during lenvatinib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remain underexplored. The sequential changes in serum growth factors during lenvatinib for unresectable HCC were evaluated in 58 patients using complete clinical data, and preserved serum was used to investigate changes in FGF-19, ANG-2, HGF, VEGF, and EGF. Patients with a complete response (CR), partial response (PR), and stable disease (SD) were evaluated for growth factor changes between the best response and progressive disease (PD) points, classified based on these changes, and evaluated by post progression survival (PPS). A total of 8, 24, 18, and 8 patients showed CR, PR, SD, and PD, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that age, relative dose intensity, and baseline ANG-2 were significantly associated with treatment response. Growth factor changes between the best response and PD points revealed that patients could be classified into four groups based on the EGF, ANG-2, and HGF changes. Although patient characteristics at baseline and PD, their response to lenvatinib, and PFS were similar among those groups, patients with an increase in all growth factors had significantly shorter PPS (median PPS was 553, 323, and 316 versus 173 days in groups 1–4 p = 0.032). We revealed that the evaluation of the changes in growth factors during lenvatinib could predict PPS.

Plinabulin and Pegfilgrastim in Combination for the Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia in Patients with Breast Cancer (PROTECTIVE-2): A Randomized Trial

PurposePlinabulin is a non-granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) novel small molecule with both anticancer and myeloprotective effects. Single-agent plinabulin is myeloprotective in the first week of the chemotherapy cycle, and pegfilgrastim in the second week. We assessed the efficacy and safety of the combination of plinabulin and pegfilgrastim for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) following chemotherapy.MethodsThis randomized, open-label, Phase 2 trial enrolled patients with breast cancer. All received docetaxel 75 mg/m2, doxorubicin 50 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 on Day 1. In the combined therapy cohort, patients received plinabulin 20 mg/m2 on Day 1 and 1.5, 3, or 6 mg pegfilgrastim on Day 2. The primary objective was to establish the recommended Phase 3 dose (RP3D). Secondary endpoints included absolute neutrophil count (ANC) nadir, relative dose intensity (RDI), and incidence of adverse events including neutropenia and bone pain.ResultsIn total, 115 patients were randomized and evaluated. The combination therapy at the RP3D (plinabulin 20 mg/m2 and pegfilgrastim 6 mg) was well-tolerated and had superior CIN prevention in terms of Grade 4 and Grade 3/4 neutropenia frequency, absolute neutrophil count (ANC) nadir, higher relative dose intensity (RDI), less bone pain, and less toxicity burden when compared with pegfilgrastim 6 mg alone.ConclusionPlinabulin combined with pegfilgrastim at the RP3D (plinabulin 20 mg/m2 Day 1 and pegfilgrastim 6 mg Day 2) had more favorable efficacy, safety, and tolerability profiles and lower bone pain incidence than did pegfilgrastim alone.Trial information Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04227990Date registered: January 14, 2020 Retrospectively registered

Implications for Efficacy and Safety of Total Dose and Dose-Intensity of Neoadjuvant Gemcitabine-Cisplatin in Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: Three-Week Versus Four-Week Regimen

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy is standard care prior to radical cystectomy in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). OBJECTIVE: To assess efficacy and safety of two commonly used neoadjuvant schedules with different total doses and dose-intensities of gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC). METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively from all patients treated between 2010 and 2018 with neoadjuvant chemotherapy according to clinical routine at seven centres in Sweden and Denmark. Patients in Sweden received three cycles of a 4-week schedule (GC-4w: cisplatin 70 mg/m2 day 1, gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 15, q 28 days) and in Denmark four cycles of a 3-week schedule (GC-3w: cisplatin 70 mg/m2 day 1, gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 days 1, 8, q 21 days). Primary endpoint was pathological response at cystectomy (pT0N0 and < pT2N0). RESULTS: A total of 251 patients were treated with GC-4w and 455 with GC-3w. pT0N0 was significantly higher for patients treated with GC-3w compared to GC-4w, 46% versus 32% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.80; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16–2.80; P = 0.009); and for < pT2N0 60% versus 47% (aOR 1.08; 95% CI 0.70–1.66; P = 0.743). There were no significant differences between GC-4w and GC-3w regarding survival parameters. GC-3w patients discontinued treatment more frequently and showed a higher degree of neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS: A significantly higher complete response-rate was observed in the patient group treated with the more cisplatin-dose-intense 3-week schedule. The side-effect profile was in favor of the 4-week approach while relapse-free and overall survival were similar.

Clinical Outcomes of Secondary Prophylactic Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factors in Breast Cancer Patients at a Risk of Neutropenia with Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide-Based Chemotherapy

Doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC)-based chemotherapy has been a standard regimen for early-stage breast cancer (ESBC) with an intermediate risk (10–20%) of febrile neutropenia (FN). Secondary prophylaxis of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is considered in patients receiving AC-based chemotherapy; however, relevant studies are limited. Here, we retrospectively reviewed the electronic medical records of 320 patients who completed adjuvant AC-based chemotherapy from September 2016 to September 2020. Approximately 46.6% of the patients developed severe neutropenic events (SNE) during AC-based chemotherapy. Secondary prophylaxis of G-CSF reduced the risk of recurrent SNE (p < 0.01) and the relative dose intensity (RDI) < 85% (p = 0.03) in patients who had experienced SNE during AC-based chemotherapy. Age ≥ 65 years (p = 0.02) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) or aspartate aminotransferase (AST) > 60 IU/L (p = 0.04) were significant risk factors for RDI < 85%. The incidences of FN, grade 4 neutropenia, unscheduled hospitalization, and interruption to the dosing regimen were reduced in patients administered secondary prophylaxis with G-CSF (before vs. after administration: FN, 19.4% vs. 4.6%; grade 4 neutropenia, 86.1% vs. 14.8%; unscheduled hospitalization, 75.9% vs. 11.1%; interruption to the dosing regimen, 18.5% vs. 8.3%). This study indicated the importance of active intervention of G-CSF use to prevent recurrent SNE and improve clinical outcomes in patients with breast cancer who receive AC-based chemotherapy.