News and updates in the treatment of localized stage triple-negative breast cancer

Compared to other breast cancer subtypes, triple-negative breast cancer presents a worse prognosis and higher mortality. Even in localized stages, the risk of relapse is high, especially in patients with ≥ cT2 and/or ≥ cN1. We know that those patients who achieve a complete pathologic response after neoadjuvant treatment have better disease-free survival. Therefore, many research efforts have been made to try to optimize neoadjuvant chemo/immunotherapy to increase pathologic complete response rates. The available evidence related to that subject matter is summarized in this article. In the field of adjuvant therapy, the challenge of improving disease-free survival in those patients who do not achieve pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant therapy stands out. The second part of this article will deal with the challenges inherent to this issue

Two-center experience comparing the use of the FLOT4 and CROSS schemes for patients with gastric, esophageal, and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma

Introduction. Gastric (GAD), gastroesophageal junction (GEJA), and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAD) share pathophysiological features. At localized stages, FLOT is used perioperatively for the treatment of GAD and GEJA and CROSS for EAD and some GEJA. Although both therapies have been compared with MAGIC, comparative randomized data on FLOT and CROSS are not yet available. Material andmethods. We retrospectively analyzed and compared 40 patients treated with FLOT and 16 patients treated with CROSS in terms of clinical features and neoadjuvant, surgical, adjuvant, and survival outcomes. Results. At the time of analysis, 65% of patients treated with FLOT4 and 56.3% with CROSS remained in complete remission. Those who progressed after FLOT4 did so mainly at the peritoneal level (25%) and after CROSS at the bone, lymph node, and peritoneal levels (12.5% respectively). Six patients (37.5%) died after CROSS (median OS of 17.5 months; 95% CI 2–41) and 10 (25%) after FLOT4 (median OS 16.5 months; 95% CI 11–22). For the living patients, the median numbers of months from diagnosis to the follow-up cutoff date were 47.5 (95% CI 11–67) and 27 (95% CI 14–44) for CROSS and FLOT4, respectively. There were no significant differences in median OS estimated by Kaplan Meier analysis [FLOT4: 50 ± 4.6 months (95% CI 40.9–59.2); CROSS: 51.2 ± 7 months (95% CI 37.4–65.0; p = 0.79)].  Conclusions. Although we obtained lower pCR rates; TNM downstaging after neoadjuvant therapy, R0 rates, tolerance, PFS, and OS were similar in both groups and comparable with trial results. The adjuvant compliance rate was high with FLOT4. CROSS allows sequencing with nivolumab in PD-L1+ tumors

Advances in multimodal treatment for stage IIIA-N2 non-small cell lung cancer

Background and aim: In stage IIIA-N2 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the accuracy of combined positron-emission tomography/computed tomography imaging (PET-CT), together with mediastinal staging techniques, has led to a wide range of challenging clinical scenarios in terms of therapeutic management. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy followed by consolidation immunotherapy remains the standard of care. In patients with potentially-resectable disease, surgery plays an important role in multimodal therapy. The introduction of targeted therapies and immune-checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized multimodal treatment. In the present article, we review current treatment options and future trends in stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC. Relevance for patients: This article provides insight into the current status of multimodal treatment for NSCLC to support decision-making in routine clinical practice.Sin financiaciónNo data 2020UE

Children living with HIV in Europe: do migrants have worse treatment outcomes?

International audienceTo assess the effect of migrant status on treatment outcomes among children living with HIV in Europe

Evolution over Time of Ventilatory Management and Outcome of Patients with Neurologic Disease∗

OBJECTIVES: To describe the changes in ventilator management over time in patients with neurologic disease at ICU admission and to estimate factors associated with 28-day hospital mortality. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of three prospective, observational, multicenter studies. SETTING: Cohort studies conducted in 2004, 2010, and 2016. PATIENTS: Adult patients who received mechanical ventilation for more than 12 hours. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among the 20,929 patients enrolled, we included 4,152 (20%) mechanically ventilated patients due to different neurologic diseases. Hemorrhagic stroke and brain trauma were the most common pathologies associated with the need for mechanical ventilation. Although volume-cycled ventilation remained the preferred ventilation mode, there was a significant (p < 0.001) increment in the use of pressure support ventilation. The proportion of patients receiving a protective lung ventilation strategy was increased over time: 47% in 2004, 63% in 2010, and 65% in 2016 (p < 0.001), as well as the duration of protective ventilation strategies: 406 days per 1,000 mechanical ventilation days in 2004, 523 days per 1,000 mechanical ventilation days in 2010, and 585 days per 1,000 mechanical ventilation days in 2016 (p < 0.001). There were no differences in the length of stay in the ICU, mortality in the ICU, and mortality in hospital from 2004 to 2016. Independent risk factors for 28-day mortality were age greater than 75 years, Simplified Acute Physiology Score II greater than 50, the occurrence of organ dysfunction within first 48 hours after brain injury, and specific neurologic diseases such as hemorrhagic stroke, ischemic stroke, and brain trauma. CONCLUSIONS: More lung-protective ventilatory strategies have been implemented over years in neurologic patients with no effect on pulmonary complications or on survival. We found several prognostic factors on mortality such as advanced age, the severity of the disease, organ dysfunctions, and the etiology of neurologic disease