The real-life efficacy of the second line treatment strategy in advanced pancreas cancer

ABS TRACT Objective: Pancreatic cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death. Despite the introduction of new therapeutic agents, survival rates remain low. Furthermore, few trials have evaluated the options for second-line therapy and the prognostic variables. In this study, we aimed to determine the real-world efficacy and prognostic parameters of second-line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer. Material and Methods: Patients with advanced pancreatic cancer from different centers who received second-line treatment were enrolled in the study. The patients’ demographic, clinical, and pathological characteristics were retrieved retrospectively. Results: A total of 161 patients were enrolled in the study. The majority of the patients (50.3%) received oxaliplatin plus fluoropyrimidine as second-line treatment. The median progression-free survival and overall survival for the entire cohort were 2.5 months and 4.5 months, respectively. In univariate anal-yses, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2, age ≥65 years, hypoalbuminemia, thrombocytosis, presence of metastatic peritoneal disease, elevated alkaline phosphatase and carcinoembryonic antigen levels, and a neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) ≥3 were identified as poor prognostic factors. In multivariable analyses, low albumin level (p=0.031) and high NLR (p=0.05) were found to be independent prognostic factors for overall survival. Conclusion: Pancreatic cancer is a unique malignancy, and advanced disease has a dismal prog-nosis. In univariate analyses, we identified multiple factors that were poor prognostic variables. In particular, the albumin level and NLR were independent prognostic factors for overall survival, and these parameters might be useful in selecting the second-line treatment and pre-dicting the survival of these patients

Tamoxifen in breast cancer survivors with COVID 19: stop or go?

The COVID 19 pandemic threatens human health in many ways. Although vaccines that have completed phase 3 trials are being used today, it is estimated that the risk of infection will continue for a whil

Real-world data on efficacy and safety of first-line alectinib treatment in advanced-stage, ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer patients: A Turkish Oncology Group study

Aims: In this multicenter study, the authors aimed to determine the real-life efficacy and safety of first-line alectinib. Materials & methods: This retrospective trial included advanced-stage, ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer patients who were treated with first-line alectinib in terms of ALK-tyrosine kinase inhibitors, regardless of previous chemotherapy. The co-primary end points were progression-free survival both for all patients and for the treatment-naive population. The secondary end points were overall response rate, overall survival, rate of CNS progression and safety. Results & conclusion: A total of 274 patients (n = 177 for treatment-naive patients) were enrolled in the study. The median progression-free survival was 26 and 28.8 months for all patients and the treatment-naive group, respectively. The overall response rate, CNS progression rate and 1-year overall survival ratio were 77.9, 12.4 and 77%. Alectinib is a highly effective therapy with a favorable safety profile

Efficacy of subsequent treatments in patients with hormone-positive advanced breast cancer who had disease progression under CDK 4/6 inhibitor therapy.

Background There is no standard treatment recommended at category 1 level in international guidelines for subsequent therapy after cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6) based therapy. We aimed to evaluate which subsequent treatment oncologists prefer in patients with disease progression under CDKi. In addition, we aimed to show the effectiveness of systemic treatments after CDKi and whether there is a survival difference between hormonal treatments (monotherapy vs. mTOR-based). Methods A total of 609 patients from 53 centers were included in the study. Progression-free-survivals (PFS) of subsequent treatments (chemotherapy (CT, n:434) or endocrine therapy (ET, n:175)) after CDKi were calculated. Patients were evaluated in three groups as those who received CDKi in first-line (group A, n:202), second-line (group B, n: 153) and >= 3rd-line (group C, n: 254). PFS was compared according to the use of ET and CT. In addition, ET was compared as monotherapy versus everolimus-based combination therapy. Results The median duration of CDKi in the ET arms of Group A, B, and C was 17.0, 11.0, and 8.5 months in respectively; it was 9.0, 7.0, and 5.0 months in the CT arm. Median PFS after CDKi was 9.5 (5.0-14.0) months in the ET arm of group A, and 5.3 (3.9-6.8) months in the CT arm (p = 0.073). It was 6.7 (5.8-7.7) months in the ET arm of group B, and 5.7 (4.6-6.7) months in the CT arm (p = 0.311). It was 5.3 (2.5-8.0) months in the ET arm of group C and 4.0 (3.5-4.6) months in the CT arm (p = 0.434). Patients who received ET after CDKi were compared as those who received everolimus-based combination therapy versus those who received monotherapy ET: the median PFS in group A, B, and C was 11.0 vs. 5.9 (p = 0.047), 6.7 vs. 5.0 (p = 0.164), 6.7 vs. 3.9 (p = 0.763) months. Conclusion Physicians preferred CT rather than ET in patients with early progression under CDKi. It has been shown that subsequent ET after CDKi can be as effective as CT. It was also observed that better PFS could be achieved with the subsequent everolimus-based treatments after first-line CDKi compared to monotherapy ET