European Multicenter Study on Degradable Starch Microsphere TACE: The Digestible Way to Conquer HCC in Patients with High Tumor Burden

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of transarterial chemoembolization with degradable starch microspheres (DSM-TACE) for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with a high tumor burden ineligible for or failing other palliative therapies, 121 patients from three European centers were included. Kaplan–Meier analysis was used for median overall survival (OS) and time to progression (TTP, mRECIST criteria) in months with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Uni- (UVA) and multivariate (MVA) analyses were performed using the Cox Proportional Hazard Model. The median OS of the study cohort was 15.5 (13.3–18.7) months. The UVA identified HCC lesions ≤10 cm, unilobar involvement, lower Child–Pugh class and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage, absence of vascular invasion, and extrahepatic metastases as factors for prolonged survival. MVA confirmed lesions of ≤10 cm and unilobar disease as independent OS factors. Median TTP was 9.5 (7.6–10.3) months. The best response was achieved after a median of 3 (range: 1–6) treatments with CR/PR/SD/PD in 13.5%/44.5%/25.2%/16.8%, respectively. DSM-TACE was well tolerated with no major clinical adverse events and only limited major laboratory events. Preserved liver function was observed after repetitive DSM-TACE treatments. Repetitive DSM-TACE is a safe, well-tolerated and effective treatment option for HCC patients with high tumor burden ineligible or failing other palliative therapies.

Specific Risk Factors for Fatal Outcome in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: Results from a European Multicenter Study

(1) Background: The aim of our study was to identify specific risk factors for fatal outcome in critically ill COVID-19 patients. (2) Methods: Our data set consisted of 840 patients enclosed in the LEOSS registry. Using lasso regression for variable selection, a multifactorial logistic regression model was fitted to the response variable survival. Specific risk factors and their odds ratios were derived. A nomogram was developed as a graphical representation of the model. (3) Results: 14 variables were identified as independent factors contributing to the risk of death for critically ill COVID-19 patients: age (OR 1.08, CI 1.06–1.10), cardiovascular disease (OR 1.64, CI 1.06–2.55), pulmonary disease (OR 1.87, CI 1.16–3.03), baseline Statin treatment (0.54, CI 0.33–0.87), oxygen saturation (unit = 1%, OR 0.94, CI 0.92–0.96), leukocytes (unit 1000/μL, OR 1.04, CI 1.01–1.07), lymphocytes (unit 100/μL, OR 0.96, CI 0.94–0.99), platelets (unit 100,000/μL, OR 0.70, CI 0.62–0.80), procalcitonin (unit ng/mL, OR 1.11, CI 1.05–1.18), kidney failure (OR 1.68, CI 1.05–2.70), congestive heart failure (OR 2.62, CI 1.11–6.21), severe liver failure (OR 4.93, CI 1.94–12.52), and a quick SOFA score of 3 (OR 1.78, CI 1.14–2.78). The nomogram graphically displays the importance of these 14 factors for mortality. (4) Conclusions: There are risk factors that are specific to the subpopulation of critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Implementation of multilingual support of the European Multicenter Study about Spinal Cord Injury (EMSCI) ISNCSCI calculator

Objectives Since their introduction, electronic International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI) calculators have evolved to powerful tools providing error-free ISNCSCI classifications in education, research and clinical practice. For increased accessibility and dissemination, a multilingual support is mandatory. The aim of this work was to setup a general multilingual framework for the freely available ISNCSCI calculator (https://ais.emsci.org) of the European Multicenter Study about Spinal Cord Injury (EMSCI). Methods The graphical user interface (GUI) and PDF export of the ISNCSCI worksheet were adapted for multilingual implementations. Their language-dependent content was identified. These two steps called internationalization have to be performed by a programmer in preparation of the translations of the English terms into the target language. This step following the internationalization is called localization and needs input by a bi-lingual clinical expert. Two EMSCI partners provided Standard Mandarin Chinese and Czech translations. Finally, the translations are made available in the application. Results The GUI and PDF export of the ISNCSCI worksheet were internationalized. The default language of the calculator is set according to the user’s preferences with the additional possibility for manual language selection. The Chinese as well as a Czech translation were provided freely to the SCI community. Conclusions The possibility of multilingual implementations independent from software developers opens the use of ISNCSCI computer algorithms as an efficient training tool on a larger scale.

Gemcitabine/Nab-Paclitaxel versus FOLFIRINOX in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A European Multicenter Study

Background: Gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GN) and FOLFIRINOX (FFX) are two standard first-line therapies for metastatic pancreatic cancer (PC) but have rarely been compared, especially in patients with locally advanced PC (LAPC). Methods: This is a retrospective European multicenter study including patients with LAPC treated with either GN or FFX as the first-line therapy between 2010 and 2019. Coprimary objectives were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), both estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results: A total of 147 patients (GN: n = 60; FFX: n = 87) were included. Tumor resection rates were similar between the two groups (16.7% vs. 16.1%; p = 1), with similar R0 resection rates (88.9%). Median PFS rates were not statistically different: 9 months (95% CI: 8–13.5) vs. 12.1 months (95% CI: 10.1–14.6; p = 0.8), respectively. Median OS rates were 15.7 months (95% CI: 12.6–20.2) and 16.7 months (95% CI: 14.8–20.4; p = 0.7), respectively. Abdominal pain at the baseline (HR = 2.03, p = 0.03), tumors located in the tail of the pancreas (HR = 4.35, p = 0.01), CA19-9 > 200 UI/L (HR = 2.03, p = 0.004) and tumor resection (HR = 0.37, p = 0.007) were independent prognostic factors for PFS, similarly to OS. CA19-9 ≤ 200 UI/L (OR = 2.6, p = 0.047) was predictive of the tumor response. Consolidation chemoradiotherapy, more often used in the FFX group (11.7% vs. 50.6%; p < 0.001), was not predictive. Conclusion: This retrospective study did not show any difference between GN and FFX as the first-line treatment in patients with LAPC.