Clinical benefit of systemic therapies for recurrent ovarian cancer-ESMO-MCBS scores

BACKGROUND: Licensed systemic treatment options for platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer are platinum-based chemotherapy and maintenance treatment with bevacizumab and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. For platinum-resistant disease, several non-platinum options are available. We aimed to assess the clinical benefit of these treatments according to the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO)-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A PubMed search was carried out including all studies evaluating systemic treatment of recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer, from 1990 onwards. Randomised trials with an adequate comparator and design showing a statistically significant benefit of the study arm were independently scored by two blinded observers using the ESMO-MCBS. RESULTS: A total of 1127 papers were identified, out of which 61 reported results of randomised trials of sufficient quality. Nineteen trials showed statistically significant results and the studied treatments were graded according to ESMO-MCBS. Only three treatments showed substantial benefit (score of 4 on a scale of 1-5) according to the ESMO-MCBS: platinum-based chemotherapy with paclitaxel in the platinum-sensitive setting and the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy in the platinum-resistant setting. The WEE1 inhibitor adavosertib (not licensed) also scores a 4, based on a recent small phase II study. Assessment of quality-of-life data and toxicity using the ESMO-MCBS showed to be complex, which should be taken into account in using this score for clinical decision making. CONCLUSION: Only a few licensed systemic therapies for recurrent ovarian cancer show substantial clinical benefit based on ESMO-MCBS scores. Trials demonstrating overall survival benefit are sparse

Gemetastaseerd plaveiselcelcarcinoom na niertransplantatie

Transplant patients have a higher risk of developing advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. In case of metastasized or locally advanced disease when curative surgery or radiotherapy is not possible, immune therapy is an option. However, there is a risk of organ rejection due to boosted immune response. We describe a case where complete remission of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma with pulmonary metastasis in a kidney transplant patient has been achieved with cemiplimab with preservation of transplant function.</p

Clinical benefit of controversial first line systemic therapies for advanced stage ovarian cancer - ESMO-MCBS scores

Background . The magnitude of clinical benefit scale (MCBS) was introduced by the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) to quantify the clinical benefit of therapeutic regimens and to prioritise therapies. It distinguishes curative from palliative treatments and ranks their benefit based on overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), quality of life (QoL) and toxicity. Objective of this study on the first line treatment of ovarian cancer was to evaluate the evidence for the current standard of care using the ESMO-MCBSv1.1 with an emphasis on controversial therapeutic options: intraperitoneal chemotherapy, dose-dense paclitaxel and bevacizumab. Methods: Phase III trials, published since 1992, investigating first line systemic treatment of Federation Internationale de Gynecologie et d'Obstetrique (FIGO) stage IIB-IV epithelial ovarian cancer were included. Since most studies included patients with FIGO stage IV disease or incomplete debulking, all treatments were judged to be palliative. Treatments were graded 5 to 1 on the ESMO-MCBSv1.1, where grades 5 and 4 represent a high level of clinical benefit. Results: 55 studies met the inclusion criteria. ESMO-MCBS scores were calculated for eleven studies that showed a statistically significant benefit of the experimental treatment. Intraperitoneal (ip) cisplatin scored a 4 and 3, but two other studies were negative and therefore not scored on the ESMO-MCBS. Dose-dense paclitaxel showed substantial clinical benefit in one study (score 4), but three studies were negative. Addition of bevacizumab also scored a 4 in one study subgroup including high-risk patients but a 2 in another trial with a larger study population. Conclusion: Based on ESMO-MCBS scores, dose-dense paclitaxel and intraperitoneal chemotherapy cannot be recommended as standard treatment. Bevacizumab should be considered only in the high-risk population. The ESMO-MCBSv1.1. helps to summarise reported studies on controversial treatment regimens, and identifies their weaknesses

Effectiveness and toxicity of lenvatinib in refractory thyroid cancer:Dutch real-life data

Objective: The SELECT trial showed progression-free survival (PFS) benefit for lenvatinib for advanced radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer (RAI-refractory or RR-DTC) patients, on which current clinical practice is based. We assessed whether the effectiveness and toxicity of lenvatinib in real-life clinical practice in the Netherlands were comparable to the pivotal SELECT trial. Methods: From three Dutch centres Electronic Health Records (EHRs) of patients treated in the lenvatinib compassionate use program or as standard of care were reviewed and checked for SELECT eligibility criteria. Baseline characteristics, safety, and efficacy measures were compared and PFS and overall survival (OS) were calculated. Furthermore, PFS was compared to estimates of PFS reported in other studies. Results: A total of 39 DTC patients with a median age of 62 years were analysed. Of these, 27 patients (69%) did not fulfil the SELECT eligibility criteria. The most common grade >= 3 toxicities were hypertension (n = 11, 28%), diarrhoea (n = 7, 18%), vomiting (n = 4, 10%), and gallbladder disease (n = 3, 8%). Median PFS and median OS were 9.7 (95% confidence interval (CI): 4.0-15.5) and 18.3 (95% CI: 4.9-31.7) months, respectively, response rate was 38% (95% CI: 23-54%). PFS in the Dutch real-life situation was comparable to previous real-life studies, but inferior to PFS as shown in the SELECT trial (P = 0.04). Conclusions: PFS in our non-trial population was significantly shorter than in the SELECT trial population. In the interpretation of results, differences in the real-life population and the SELECT study population regarding patient characteristics should be taken into account

The Influence of Gestational Diabetes on Neurodevelopment of Children in the First Two Years of Life: A Prospective Study

10.1371/journal.pone.0162113PloS one119e0162113GUSTO (Growing up towards Healthy Outcomes

Palbociclib dose reductions and the effect on clinical outcomes in patients with advanced breast cancer

Background: This study aimed to provide insights into the real-world use of palbociclib, dose reductions, and drug effectiveness in (older) patients with advanced breast cancer (BC). Patients and methods: Patients with advanced BC treated with palbociclib from 2017 to 2020 were included. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate time to next treatment (TTNT) and overall survival (OS) for patients with or without dose reductions. These clinical outcomes were also compared in subgroup analyses for older patients (≥70 years) and younger patients (<70 years) and for patients discontinuing palbociclib early (<4 administrations). Results: A total of 598 patients with advanced BC were included, with a median age of 64 years. Palbociclib dose reductions occurred in 33% of all patients. Early discontinuation of palbociclib without dose reductions occurred in 23% of the patients. Patients who required a palbociclib dose reduction were older (median age 67 years vs. 63 years). Patients with dose reductions had a significantly higher TTNT of 16.9 vs. 11.4 months (p < 0.001) and median OS of 29.7 vs. 21.9 months (p = 0.003) compared to patients without dose reductions. The TTNT in older patients was significantly longer (16.9 vs. 11.6 months, p = 0.013) than younger patients, but OS was similar (20.7 vs. 26.7 months, p = 0.051). Conclusion: Palbociclib dose reductions occurred in real-world practice similarly to the PALOMA-3 trial. Patients with dose reductions had no poorer outcomes compared to patients not requiring a dose reduction. Older patients treated with palbociclib had more frequent dose reductions, but this did not appear to affect OS