Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with muscle-invasive urothelial bladder cancer candidates for curative surgery: A prospective clinical trial based on cisplatin feasibility

Background: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy demonstrated a survival benefit versus cystectomy alone in muscle-invasive urothelial bladder cancer. Despite this advantage, preoperative chemotherapy is not widely employed. When patients are unfit for cisplatin-based regimen, they are often candidates for immediate surgery. In our study, patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The principal objective was the rate of complete pathological response (PCR). Secondary end-points were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity. Patients and Methods: Patients (n=72) with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-1, clinical stage cT3-4, and/or N+ muscle-invasive bladder cancer were enrolled. The chemotherapy regimen was established according to the cisplatin feasibility. Thirty patients were treated with cisplatin/gemcitabine (Gem) and 42 with carboplatin/Gem. Results: The rate of PCR was 29.2%, 36% with cisplatin-based treatment and 23.8% with carboplatin (p=0.3574). DFS and OS were longer in PCR patients, while no difference was reported between cisplatin/Gem and Carboplatin/Gem groups. Conclusion: Our results confirm the prognostic value of PCR in neoadjuvant chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. When the patients are not fit for cisplatin, a carboplatin/Gem regimen represents a valid option because of comparable long-term outcome. When cisplatin is not feasible, the exclusion of a preoperative treatment is not justified

Association of IL-8 and eNOS polymorphisms with clinical outcomes in bevacizumab-treated breast cancer patients: an exploratory analysis

BACKGROUND: The role of bevacizumab in metastatic breast cancer is controversial. Identification of predictive biomarkers could help to select patients who really benefit from it. We evaluated the association of angiogenesis-related gene polymorphisms with the treatment outcome of bevacizumab in metastatic breast cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: eNOS-786T/C and -894G/T, IL-8-251T/A genomic polymorphisms were assessed in 31 metastatic breast cancer patients treated with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in the first-line setting. Testing for association between each polymorphism and treatment outcome was performed. RESULTS: Patients with IL-8 251 AA genotype showed a significantly lower progression-free survival in each combination comparison: "TT" vs "AA" (13 vs 8 months; p = 0.008); TT vs TA vs AA (13 vs 11 vs 8 months; p = 0.02); TT vs TA +AA (13 vs 11 months; p = 0.01); TT + TA vs AA (12 vs 8 months; p = 0.01) and a lower overall survival when compared with TT +TA genotype (26 vs 51 months, p = 0.04). Patients carrying eNOS 894 TT genotype showed a statistically significant lower progression-free survival than patients with GG genotype (11.5 vs 26.5 months; p = 0.04) with no differences in the overall survival. No association with response rate was found with any of the polymorphisms analyzed. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that IL-8 251T/A and eNOS-894 G/T polymorphisms might have a role in predicting treatment outcome of bevacizumab in metastatic breast cancer. Our results are hypothesis generating and need to be confirmed in larger clinical trials

Clinical nutrition in surgical oncology: Young AIOM-AIRO-SICO multidisciplinary national survey on behalf of NutriOnc research group

Malnutrition is a common condition in cancer patients which is usually associated with functional limitations, as well as increased morbidity and mortality. Based on the support of the young sections of Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM), Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) and Italian Society of Surgical Oncology (SICO) merged into the NutriOnc Research Group, we performed a multidisciplinary national survey with the aim to define the awareness of nutritional issues among healthcare professionals delivering anticancer care. The questionnaire was organized in four sections, as follows: Knowledge and practices regarding Nutritional Management of cancer patients; Timing of screening and assessment of Nutritional Status; Nutritional Treatment and prescription criteria; Immunonutrition and educational topics. The modules focused on esophagogastric, hepato-bilio-pancreatic and colorectal malignancies. Overall, 215 physicians completed the survey. As regards the management of Nutritional Status of cancer patients, many responders adopted the ERAS program (49.3%), while a consistent number of professionals did not follow a specific validated nutritional care protocol (41.8%), mainly due to lack of educational courses (14.5%) and financial support (15.3%). Nearly all the included institutions had a multidisciplinary team (92%) to finalize the treatment decision-making. Cancer patients routinely underwent nutritional screening according to 57.2% of interviewed physicians. The timing of nutritional assessment was at diagnosis (37.8%), before surgery (25.9%), after surgery (16.7%), before radiochemotherapy (13.5%) and after radiochemotherapy (7%). Most of the responders reported that nutritional status was assessed throughout the duration of cancer treatments (55.6%). An important gap between current delivery and need of nutritional assessment persists. The development of specific and defined care protocols and the adherence to these tools may be the key to improving nutritional support management in clinical practice