Adjuvant chemotherapy is not associated with improved survival for all high-risk factors in stage II colon cancer

Adjuvant chemotherapy can be considered in high-risk stage II colon cancer comprising pT4, poor/undifferentiated grade, vascular invasion, emergency surgery and/or <10 evaluated lymph nodes (LNs). Adjuvant chemotherapy administration and its effect on survival was evaluated for each known risk factor. All patients with high-risk stage II colon cancer who underwent resection and were diagnosed in the Netherlands between 2008 and 2012 were included. After stratification by risk factor(s) (vascular invasion could not be included), Cox regression was used to discriminate the independent association of adjuvant chemotherapy with the probability of death. Relative survival was used to estimate disease-specific survival. A total of 4,940 of 10,935 patients with stage II colon cancer were identified as high risk, of whom 790 (16%) patients received adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with a pT4 received adjuvant chemotherapy more often (37%). Probability of death in pT4 patients receiving chemotherapy was lower compared to non-recipients (3-year overall survival 91% vs. 73%, HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.28-0.66). The relative excess risk (RER) of dying was also lower for pT4 patients receiving chemotherapy compared to non-recipients (3-year relative survival 94% vs. 85%, RER 0.36, 95% CI 0.17-0.74). For patients with only poor/undifferentiated grade, emergency surgery or <10 LNs evaluated, no association between receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy and survival was observed. In high-risk stage II colon cancer, adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with higher survival in pT4 only. To prevent unnecessary chemotherapy-induced toxicity, further refinement of patient subgroups within stage II colon cancer who could benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy seems indicated

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy and its impact on health-related quality of life among ovarian cancer survivors:Results from the population-based PROFILES registry

Objective This study assessed the prevalence and risk factors of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, and its impact on health-related quality of life among ovarian cancer survivors, 2–12 years after diagnosis. Methods Women (n = 348) diagnosed with ovarian cancer between 2000 and 2010, as registered by the Dutch population-based Eindhoven Cancer Registry, were eligible for participation. A questionnaire, including the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-OV28 measures, containing 3 items about neuropathy, was returned by 191 women (55%). Recurrence and chemotherapy data were obtained from medical records. Results Of all 191 women, the 129 women who received chemotherapy more often reported having tingling hands/feet and feeling numbness in fingers/toes, specifically 51% reported “a little” to “very much” of these symptoms vs. about 27% who did not receive chemotherapy. Women reporting more neuropathy symptoms reported lower levels of functioning and overall quality of life. They also reported more symptoms of fatigue, nausea/vomiting, pain, dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, and financial problems. Moreover, women reporting more neuropathy symptoms had experienced the disease and treatment more often as being a burden and were more worried about their health, had more gastrointestinal and hormonal symptoms, hair loss and more other chemotherapy side effects. Linear regression analyses showed that more cycles of chemotherapy, more recurrences and a shorter period since last treatment were associated with a higher neuropathy score. Conclusion Neuropathy symptoms were experienced by 51% of women with ovarian cancer who received chemotherapy even up to 12 years after the end of treatment, and this seriously affected their HRQoL. Keywords: Cancer, Oncology, Ovarian cancer, Chemotherapy, Neuropathy, Neurotoxicity Health-related quality of life Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropath

Web-Based Return of Individual Patient-Reported Outcome Results Among Patients With Lymphoma: Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: There has been a cultural shift toward patient engagement in health, with a growing demand from patients to access their results. OBJECTIVE: The Lymphoma Intervention (LIVE) trial is conducted to examine the impact of return of individual patient-reported outcome (PRO) results and a web-based self-management intervention on psychological distress, self-management, satisfaction with information, and health care use in a population-based setting. METHODS: Return of PRO results included comparison with age- and sex-matched peers and was built into the Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Initial Treatment and Long-Term Evaluation of Survivorship registry. The self-management intervention is an adaptation of a fully automated evidence-based intervention for breast cancer survivors. Patients with lymphoma who completed the web-based questionnaire were equally randomized to care as usual, return of PRO results, and return of PRO results plus self-management intervention. Patients completed questionnaires 9 to 18 months after diagnosis (T0; n=227), 4 months (T1; n=190), 12 months (T2; n=170), and 24 months (T3; n=98). RESULTS: Of all invited patients, 51.1% (456/892) responded and web-based participants (n=227) were randomly assigned to care as usual (n=76), return of PRO results (n=74), or return of PRO results and access to Living with lymphoma (n=77). Return of PRO results was viewed by 76.7% (115/150) of those with access. No statistically significant differences were observed for psychological distress, self-management, satisfaction with information provision, and health care use between patients who received PRO results and those who did not (P>.05). Use of the self-management intervention was low (2/76, 3%), and an effect could therefore not be determined. CONCLUSIONS: Return of individual PRO results seems to meet patients' wishes but had no beneficial effects on patient outcome. No negative effects were found when individual PRO results were disclosed, and the return of individual PRO results can therefore be safely implemented in daily clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR5953; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/5790. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s13063-017-1943-2

Translating the ABC-02 trial into daily practice: outcome of palliative treatment in patients with unresectable biliary tract cancer treated with gemcitabine and cisplatin

BACKGROUND: Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is an uncommon cancer with an unfavorable prognosis. Since 2010, the standard of care for patients with unresectable BTC is palliative treatment with gemcitabine plus cisplatin, based on the landmark phase III ABC-02 trial. This current study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with unresectable cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder cancer in daily practice that meet the criteria for the ABC-02 trial in comparison to patients who did not. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with unresectable BTC between 2010 and 2015 with an indication for gemcitabine and cisplatin were included. We divided these patients into three groups: (I) patients who received chemotherapy and met the criteria of the ABC-02 trial, (II) patients who received chemotherapy and did not meet these criteria and (III) patients who had an indication for chemotherapy, but received best supportive care without chemotherapy. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS) and secondary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: We collected data of 208 patients, of which 138 (66.3%) patients received first line chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin. Median OS of 69 patients in group I, 63 patients in group II and 65 patients in group III was 9.6 months (95%CI = 6.7-12.5), 9.5 months (95%CI = 7.7-11.3) and 7.6 months (95%CI = 5.0-10.2), respectively. Median PFS was 6.0 months (95%CI = 4.4-7.6) in group I and 5.1 months (95%CI = 3.7-6.5) in group II. Toxicity and number of dose reductions (p = .974) were comparable between the two chemotherapy groups. CONCLUSION: First-line gemcitabine and cisplatin is an effective and safe treatment for patients with unresectable BTC who do not meet the eligibility criteria for the ABC-02 trial. Median OS, PFS and treatment side effects were comparable between the patients who received chemotherapy (group I vs. group II)

Mobilization of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells in mice

Animal models have added significantly to our understanding of the mechanism(s) of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cell (HSPC) mobilization. Such models suggest that changes in the interaction between the HSPC and the hematopoietic microenvironmental 'niche' (cellular and extracellular components) are critical to the process. The increasing availability of recombinant proteins (growth factors, cytokines, chemokines), antibodies, drugs (agonists and antagonists), and mutant and genetically modified animal models [gene knock-in (KI) and knock-out (KO)] continue to add to the tools available to better understand and manipulate mobilization processes.</p

Survival of patients with deficient mismatch repair metastatic colorectal cancer in the pre-immunotherapy era

Contains fulltext : 230109.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)BACKGROUND: Metastatic colorectal cancer patients with deficient mismatch repair (dMMR mCRC) benefit from immunotherapy. Interpretation of the single-arm immunotherapy trials is complicated by insignificant survival data during systemic non-immunotherapy. We present survival data on a large, comprehensive cohort of dMMR mCRC patients, treated with or without systemic non-immunotherapy. METHODS: Two hundred and eighty-one dMMR mCRC patients (n = 54 from three prospective Phase 3 CAIRO trials; n = 227 from the Netherlands Cancer Registry). Overall survival was analysed from diagnosis of mCRC (OS), from initiation of first-line (OS1) and second-line (OS2) systemic treatment. Cox regression analysis examined prognostic factors. As comparison for OS 2746 MMR proficient mCRC patients were identified. RESULTS: Of 281 dMMR patients, 62% received first-line and 26% second-line treatment. Median OS was 16.0 months (13.8-19.6) with antitumour therapy and 2.5 months (1.8-3.5) in untreated patients. OS1 was 12.8 months (10.7-15.2) and OS2 6.2 months (5.4-8.9) in treated dMMR patients. Treated dMMR patients had a 7.6-month shorter median OS than pMMR patients. CONCLUSION: Available data from immunotherapy trials lack a control arm with standard systemic treatment. Given the poor outcome compared to the immunotherapy results, our data strongly suggest a survival benefit of immunotherapy in dMMR mCRC patients