Impact of remoteness and rurality on the treatment and survival of patients with glioblastoma in the north of Scotland

Peer reviewe

CompARE: study protocol for a phase III randomised controlled platform trial comparing alternative regimens for escalating treatment of intermediate and high-risk oropharyngeal cancer

BACKGROUND: Patients with intermediate and high-risk oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) have poorer response to standard treatment and poorer overall survival compared to low-risk OPC. CompARE is designed to test alternative approaches to intensified treatment for these patients to improve survival. METHODS: CompARE is a pragmatic phase III, open-label, multicenter randomised controlled trial with an adaptive multi-arm, multi-stage design and an integrated QuinteT Recruitment Intervention. Eligible OPC patients include those with human papillomavirus (HPV) negative, T1-T4, N1-N3 or T3-4, N0, or HPV positive N3, T4, or current smokers (or ≥ 10 pack years previous smoking history) with T1-T4, N2b-N3. CompARE was originally designed with four arms (one control [arm 1] and three experimental: arm 2-induction chemotherapy followed by arm 1; arm 3-dose-escalated radiotherapy plus concomitant cisplatin; and arm 4-resection of primary followed by arm 1). The three original experimental arms have been closed to recruitment and a further experimental arm opened (arm 5-induction durvalumab followed by arm 1 and then adjuvant durvalumab). Currently recruiting are arm 1 (control): standard treatment of 3-weekly cisplatin 100 mg/m2 or weekly 40 mg/m2 with intensity-modulated radiotherapy using 70 Gy in 35 fractions ± neck dissection determined by clinical and radiological assessment 3 months post-treatment, and arm 5 (intervention): one cycle of induction durvalumab 1500 mg followed by standard treatment then durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks for a total of 6 months. The definitive and interim primary outcome measures are overall survival time and event-free survival (EFS) time, respectively. Secondary outcome measures include quality of life, toxicity, swallowing outcomes, feeding tube incidence, surgical complication rates, and cost-effectiveness. The design anticipates that after approximately 7 years, 84 required events will have occurred to enable analysis of the definitive primary outcome measure for this comparison. Planned interim futility analyses using EFS will also be performed. DISCUSSION: CompARE is designed to be efficient and cost-effective in response to new data, emerging new treatments or difficulties, with the aim of bringing new treatment options for these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN ISRCTN41478539 . Registered on 29 April 2015

Radiotherapy plus cisplatin or cetuximab in low-risk human papillomavirus-positive oropharyngeal cancer (De-ESCALaTE HPV):an open-label randomised controlled phase 3 trial

Background The incidence of human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive oropharyngeal cancer, a disease affecting younger patients, is rapidly increasing. Cetuximab, an epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor, has been proposed for treatment de-escalation in this setting to reduce the toxicity of standard cisplatin treatment, but no randomised evidence exists for the efficacy of this strategy. Methods We did an open-label randomised controlled phase 3 trial at 32 head and neck treatment centres in Ireland, the Netherlands, and the UK, in patients aged 18 years or older with HPV-positive low-risk oropharyngeal cancer (non-smokers or lifetime smokers with a smoking history of <10 pack-years). Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1: 1) to receive, in addition to radiotherapy (70 Gy in 35 fractions), either intravenous cisplatin (100 mg/m(2) on days 1, 22, and 43 of radiotherapy) or intravenous cetuximab (400 mg/m(2) loading dose followed by seven weekly infusions of 250 mg/m(2)). The primary outcome was overall severe (grade 3-5) toxicity events at 24 months from the end of treatment. The primary outcome was assessed by intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN33522080. Findings Between Nov 12, 2012, and Oct 1, 2016, 334 patients were recruited (166 in the cisplatin group and 168 in the cetuximab group). Overall (acute and late) severe (grade 3-5) toxicity did not differ significantly between treatment groups at 24 months (mean number of events per patient 4.8 [95% CI 4.2-5.4] with cisplatin vs 4.8 [4.2-5.4] with cetuximab; p=0.98). At 24 months, overall all-grade toxicity did not differ significantly either (mean number of events per patient 29.2 [95% CI 27.3-31.0] with cisplatin vs 30.1 [28.3-31.9] with cetuximab; p=0.49). However, there was a significant difference between cisplatin and cetuximab in 2-year overall survival (97.5% vs 89.4%, hazard ratio 5.0 [95% CI 1.7-14.7]; p=0.001) and 2-year recurrence (6.0% vs 16.1%, 3.4 [1.6-7.2]; p=0.0007). Interpretation Compared with the standard cisplatin regimen, cetuximab showed no benefit in terms of reduced toxicity, but instead showed significant detriment in terms of tumour control. Cisplatin and radiotherapy should be used as the standard of care for HPV-positive low-risk patients who are able to tolerate cisplatin. Funding Cancer Research UK. Copyright (c) 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license

A multi-centre survey reveals variations in the standard treatments and treatment modifications for head and neck cancer patients during Covid-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND: The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated rapid changes to the practice of head and neck oncology. This survey was conducted to assess the pre-Covid-19 pandemic standard of practice for head and neck oncology patients and the treatment modifications introduced during the Covid-19 pandemic in UK. METHODOLOGY: The UK National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) Head and Neck Clinical Studies Group initiated a multi-centre survey using questionnaire to investigate the effect on feeding tube practice, radiotherapy (RT) fractionation and volumes, use of chemotherapy in the neo-adjuvant, adjuvant and palliative setting, the use of immunotherapy in the palliative setting, access to radiology and histopathology services, availability of surgical procedures. RESULTS: 30 centres were approached across UK; 23 (76.7%) centres responded and were included in the survey. There were differences in the standard practices in feeding tube policy, RT dose and fractionation as well as concurrent chemotherapy use. 21 (91%) participating centres had at least one treatment modification. 15 (65%) centres initiated a change in radical RT; changing to either a hypofractionation or acceleration schedule. For post-operative RT 10 centres (43.5%) changed to a hypofractionation schedule.12 (52.2%) centres stopped neo-adjuvant chemotherapy for all patients; 13 (56.5%) centres followed selective omission of chemotherapy in concurrent chemo-radiotherapy patients, 17 (73.9%) centres changed first-line chemotherapy treatment to pembrolizumab (following NHS England’s interim guidance) and 8 (34.8%) centres stopped the treatment early or offered delays for patients that have been already on systemic treatment. The majority of centres did not have significant changes associated with surgery, radiology, histopathology and dental screening. CONCLUSION: There are variations in the standard of practice and treatment modifications for head and neck cancer patients during Covid-19 pandemic. A timely initiative is required to form a consensus on head and neck cancer management in the UK and other countries

The use of pembrolizumab monotherapy for the management of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) in the UK.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium,provided the original work is properly cited.© 2024 The Authors. International Journal of Cancer published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of UICC.Pembrolizumab has received approval in the UK as first-line monotherapy for recurrent and/or metastatic HNSCC (R/M HNSCC) following the results of the KEYNOTE-048 trial, which demonstrated a longer overall survival (OS) in comparison to the EXTREME chemotherapy regimen in patients with a combined positive score (CPS) ≥1. In this article, we provide retrospective real-world data on the role of pembrolizumab monotherapy as first-line systemic therapy for HNSCC across 18 centers in the UK from March 20, 2020 to May 31, 2021. 211 patients were included, and in the efficacy analysis, the objective response rate (ORR) was 24.7%, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.6-6.1), and the median OS was 10.8 months (95% CI 9.0-12.5). Pembrolizumab monotherapy was well tolerated, with 18 patients having to stop treatment owing to immune-related adverse events (irAEs). 53 patients proceeded to second-line treatment with a median PFS2 of 10.2 months (95% CI: 8.8-11.5). Moreover, patients with documented irAEs had a statistically significant longer median PFS (11.3 vs. 3.3 months; log-rank p value = <.001) and median OS (18.8 vs. 8.9 months; log-rank p value <.001). The efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab first-line monotherapy for HNSCC has been validated using real-world data

Vinblastine monotherapy induction prior to radiotherapy for patients with intracranial germinoma during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Patients with localized intracranial germinoma have excellent survival. Reducing treatment burden and long-term sequelae is a priority. Intensive inpatient chemotherapy (e.g., carboPEI = carboplatin/etoposide/ifosfamide) has been effectively employed to reduce radiotherapy treatment volume/dose. Outpatient-based carboplatin monotherapy is associated with excellent outcomes in metastatic testicular seminoma (an identical pathology), and successful vinblastine monotherapy induction (with 77% tumor volume reduction after just two weekly vinblastine doses) has recently been reported in an intracranial germinoma patient. METHODS: Adapted UK guidelines for germ cell tumor management were distributed during the COVID-19 pandemic, including nonstandard treatment options to reduce hospital visits and/or admissions. This included vinblastine monotherapy for intracranial germinoma (6 mg/m2 intravenously, or 4 mg/m2 for moderate count suppression, delivered weekly). We describe two such patients treated using this approach. RESULTS: A 30-year-old male with a localized pineal tumor received 12-week vinblastine induction, with >60% volume reduction, prior to definitive radiotherapy. A 12-year-old female with a metastatic suprasellar tumor and progression at all sites of disease whilst awaiting proton radiotherapy received two vinblastine doses with good early response, including 36% primary tumor volume reduction. The patients tolerated vinblastine well. CONCLUSION: Patients with intracranial germinoma have excellent outcomes, and reduction of late effects remains a priority. The description of vinblastine monotherapy in these intracranial germinoma patients warrants further exploration

Vinblastine monotherapy induction prior to radiotherapy for patients with intracranial germinoma during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background: Patientswith localized intracranial germinoma have excellent survival. Reducing treatment burden and long-term sequelae is a priority. Intensive inpatient chemotherapy (e.g., carboPEI = carboplatin/etoposide/ifosfamide) has been effectively employed to reduce radiotherapy treatment volume/dose. Outpatient-based carboplatin monotherapy is associated with excellent outcomes in metastatic testicular seminoma (an identical pathology), and successful vinblastine monotherapy induction (with 77% tumor volume reduction after just two weekly vinblastine doses) has recently been reported in an intracranial germinoma patient. Methods: Adapted UK guidelines for germ cell tumor management were distributed during the COVID-19 pandemic, including nonstandard treatment options to reduce hospital visits and/or admissions. This included vinblastine monotherapy for intracranial germinoma (6 mg/m2 intravenously, or 4 mg/m2 for moderate count suppression, delivered weekly). We describe two such patients treated using this approach. Results: A 30-year-old male with a localized pineal tumor received 12-week vinblastine induction, with &gt;60% volume reduction, prior to definitive radiotherapy. A 12-year-old female with a metastatic suprasellar tumor and progression at all sites of disease whilst awaiting proton radiotherapy received two vinblastine doses with good early response, including 36% primary tumor volume reduction. The patients tolerated vinblastine well. Conclusion: Patients with intracranial germinoma have excellent outcomes, and reduction of late effects remains a priority. The description of vinblastine monotherapy in these intracranial germinoma patients warrants further exploration.</p

Centralised recist assessment and clinical outcomes with lenvatinib monotherapy in recurrent and metastatic adenoid cystic carcinoma

Adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC) is a rare cancer of secretory glands. Recurrent or metastatic (R/M) ACC is generally considered resistant to cytotoxic chemotherapy. Recent phase II studies have reported improved objective response rates (ORR) with the use of the multi-kinase inhibitor lenvatinib. We sought to evaluate real-world experience of R/M ACC patients treated with lenvatinib monotherapy within the UK National Health Service (NHS) to determine the response rates by Response Evaluation Criteria of Solid Tumour (RECIST) and clinical outcomes. Twenty-three R/M ACC patients from eleven cancer centres were included. All treatment assessments for clinical decision making related to drug therapy were undertaken at the local oncology centre. Central radiology review was performed by an independent clinical trial radiologist and blinded to the clinical decision making. In contrast to previously reported ORR of 12–15%, complete or partial response was not observed in any patients. Eleven patients (52.4%) had stable disease and 5 patients (23.8%) had progression of disease as the best overall response. The median time on treatment was 4 months and the median survival from discontinuation was 1 month. The median PFS and OS from treatment initiation were 4.5 months and 12 months respectively. Multicentre collaborative studies such as this are required to evaluate rare cancers with no recommended standard of care therapy and variable disease courses

The UK Divide: Does having a Pembrolizumab-Chemotherapy option in head and neck cancer matter? Real-world experience of first-line palliative pembrolizumab monotherapy and pembrolizumab-chemotherapy combination in Scotland

Aims: The Scottish Medical Consortium recently approved first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in the palliative setting, contrasting with the decision made by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, who approved monotherapy alone in England and Wales. The aim of this study was to provide real-world performance data for first-line pembrolizumab-containing treatments for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in the palliative setting in Scotland. Materials and methods: We analysed the electronic records of patients who started pembrolizumab-containing treatment between 1 March 2020 and 30 September 2021. Outcomes included overall survival, progression-free survival (PFS), the duration of response and the disease control rate. Data were compared with the KEYNOTE-048 study and clinical factors were evaluated for association with survival. Results: Our cohort included 91 patients (median follow-up 10.8 months). Patient characteristics were similar to those in the KEYNOTE-048 study, although our cohort had a higher proportion of patients with newly diagnosed, non-metastatic disease. For patients receiving monotherapy (n = 76), 12- and 24-month overall survival were 45% and 27%, respectively. For patients receiving pembrolizumab–chemotherapy (n = 15), 12-month overall survival was 60% (24-month overall survival had not yet been reached). Experiencing one or more immune-related adverse event (irAE; versus no irAEs), of any grade, was associated with favourable overall survival and PFS for patients receiving monotherapy in both univariable Log-rank analysis (median overall survival 17.4 months versus 8.6 months, respectively, P = 0.0033; median PFS 10.9 months versus 3.0 months, respectively, P &lt; 0.0001) and multivariable analysis (Cox proportional hazards regression: overall survival hazard ratio 0.31, P = 0.0009; PFS hazard ratio 0.17, P &lt; 0.0001). Conclusion: Our real-world data support the KEYNOTE-048 study findings and the value of combination treatment options. Additionally, our data show that irAEs of any grade, as reported in routine clinical records, are associated with better outcomes in this patient group, adding to the growing body of evidence showing that irAEs are generally a positive marker of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor response