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.Breast Cancer Consortiu

Real-life experience of patients with sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma: a multicenter retrospective study [2]

Sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma (sRCC) is a rare variant of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and is associated with a poor prognosis. We reviewed the outcomes of patients from oncology centers in Turkey. Our aim is to share our real-life experi-ence and to contribute to the literature. The demographic and clinical features, treatment, and survival outcomes of 148 patients with sRCC were analyzed. The median age at the time of diagnosis was 58 years (range: 19-83 years). Most patients (62.8%) had clear-cell histology. Most patients were in the intermediate Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) risk group (67.6%) and were stage 4 at the time of diagnosis (63.5%). The most common sites of metastasis were the lung (60.1%), lymph nodes (47.3%), and bone (35.8%). The patients received a median of two lines (range: 0-6) of treatment. The most common side effects were fatigue, hematological side effects, hypertension, and hypothyroidism. The median follow-up was 20.9 months (range: 1-162 months). The median overall survival (OS) was 30.8 months (95% confidence interval: 24.9-36.7 months). In multivariate analysis, high MSKCC scores, sarcomatoid differentiation rates >50%, having stage 4 disease, and having lung metastasis at the time of diagnosis were independent factors for poor prognosis affecting OS. No difference was observed between patients who received tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) as the first or second-line treatments. Similarly, no difference between TKI and immunotherapy as the second-line treatment. In conclusion, sRCC is a rare variant of RCC with a poor prognosis and response to treatment. Larger-scale prospective studies are needed to define an optimal treatment approach for longer survival in this aggressive variant.Financial support was received from the Mediterranean Oncology Association (Akdeniz Onkoloji Dernegi-AOD) for the statistical analysis of the study.Mediterranean Oncology Association (Akdeniz Onkoloji Dernegi-AOD

The real-life efficacy and safety of osimertinib in pretreated advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients with T790M mutation: A Turkish Oncology Group Study

Introduction Osimertinib, an irreversible third-generation EGFR-TKI, is the standard of care for second-line treatment of T790M-mutant advanced NSCLC patients whose disease progressed after first-line EGFR-TKI therapy. In this multicenter study, we aimed to determine the real-life efficacy and safety of Osimertinib in pretreated advanced NSCLC patients with T790M mutation. Materials and methods This retrospective trial included advanced T790M-mutant pretreated NSCLC patients who received Osimertinib from 24 different centers in Turkey. Primary endpoint was time-to-treatment discontinuation (TTD). Secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results Of 163 patients, 68.7% had EGFR exon 19 deletion and 22.7% had exon 21 L858R mutation. Osimertinib was given as second-line treatment in 96 patients (58.9%) and third-line in 48 patients (29.4%). After median of 13-month follow-up, median TTD was 21.6 months with an 82.2% ORR. Estimated median OS was 32.1 months. Grade 3-4 adverse events were seen in 11.7% of the patients. Conclusion Osimertinib is a highly effective option in second- or third-line treatment of NSCLC patients with T790M mutation, 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