Androgen deprivation therapy for androgen receptor-positive advanced salivary duct carcinoma:A nationwide case series of 35 patients in The Netherlands

Background: Salivary duct carcinoma, an aggressive subtype of salivary gland cancer, is mostly androgen receptor-positive. Only limited data are available on androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Methods: Patients with advanced androgen receptor-positive salivary duct carcinoma treated with first-line ADT were retrospectively evaluated for clinical benefit (ie, partial response [PR] and stable disease, progression-free survival [PFS] and overall survival [OS]). The OS was compared with patients with advanced salivary duct carcinoma who received best supportive care. Results: Thirty-four of 35 patients who were ADT-treated were evaluable: 6 patients had a PR (18%) and 11 had stable disease (32%) leading to a clinical benefit ratio of 50%. The median PFS for the ADT-treated patients was 4 months and the median duration of clinical benefit was 11 months. The median OS was 17 months versus 5 months in 43 patients receiving best supportive care (P=.02). Conclusion: We recommend ADT in advanced androgen receptor-positive salivary duct carcinoma given its response and clinical benefit

89Zr-DFO-durvalumab PET/CT before durvalumab treatment in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer

In this PD-L1 ImagiNg to prediCt durvalumab treatment response in SCCHN (PINCH) study, we performed 89Zr-DFO-durvalumab (anti- PD-L1 [programmed death ligand 1]) PET/CT in patients with recurrent or metastatic (R/M) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) before monotherapy durvalumab treatment. The primary aims were to assess safety and feasibility of 89Zr-DFO-durvalumab PET imag-ing and predict disease control rate during durvalumab treatment. Sec-ondary aims were to correlate 89Zr-DFO-durvalumab uptake to tumor PD-L1 expression, 18F-FDG uptake, and treatment response of individ-ual lesions.Methods: In this prospective multicenter phase I-II study (NCT03829007), patients with incurable R/M SCCHN underwent base-line 18F-FDG PET and CT or MRI. Subsequently, PD-L1 PET imaging was performed 5 d after administration of 37 MBq of 89Zr-DFO-durvalumab. To optimize imaging conditions, dose finding was per-formed in the first 14 patients. For all patients (n = 33), durvalumab treatment (1,500 mg/4 wk, intravenously) was started within 1 wk after PD-L1 PET imaging and continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (maximum, 24 mo). CT evaluation was assessed according to RECIST 1.1 every 8 wk. PD-L1 expression was deter-mined by combined positive score on (archival) tumor tissue. 89Zr-DFO-durvalumab uptake was measured in 18F-FDG-positive lesions, primary and secondary lymphoid organs, and blood pool.Results: In total, 33 patients with locoregional recurrent (n = 12) or metastatic SCCHN (n = 21) were enrolled. 89Zr-DFO-durvalumab injection was safe. A dose of 10 mg of durvalumab resulted in highest tumor-to-blood ratios. After a median follow-up of 12.6 mo, overall response rate was 26%. The disease control rate at 16 wk was 48%, with a mean duration of 7.8 mo (range, 1.7-21.1). On a patient level, 89Zr-DFO-durvalumab SUVpeak or tumor-to-blood ratio could not predict treatment response (hazard ratio, 1.5 [95% CI, 0.5-3.9; P = 0.45] and 1.3 [95% CI, 0.5-3.3; P = 0.60], respectively). Also, on a lesion level, 89Zr-DFO-durvalumab SUVpeak showed no substantial correlation to treatment response (Spearman p, 0.45; P = 0.051). Lesional 89Zr-DFO-durvalumab uptake did not correlate to PD-L1 combined positive score but did correlate to 18F-FDG SUVpeak (Spearman p, 0.391; P = 0.005).Conclusion: PINCH is the first, to our knowledge, PD-L1 PET/CT study in patients with R/M SCCHN and has shown the feasibility and safety of 89Zr-DFO-durvalumab PET/CT in a multicenter trial. 89Zr-DFO-durvalumab uptake did not correlate to durvalumab treat-ment response.Radiolog

COVID-19 vaccination: the VOICE for patients with cancer

Pathogenesis and treatment of chronic pulmonary disease

Decalcification of Breast Cancer Bone Metastases with EDTA Does Not Affect ER, PR, and HER2 Results

In metastatic breast cancer (MBC), expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) guides treatment selection. In case of bone-only metastatic disease, ER, PR, and HER2 status assessment may be hampered by decalcification. We aimed to determine the optimal decalcification method, and to study discordance of receptor expression between paired primary breast tumors and optimally decalcified bone metastases. First, decalcification was simulated using acetic acid, hydrochloric/formic acid, and EDTA on 12 primary breast carcinomas. ER, PR, and HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) and HER2 in situ hybridization (ISH) were assessed, before and after the 3 decalcification methods. EDTA was considered t

Lesion detection by [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab and [18F]FDG-PET/CT in patients with newly diagnosed metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Purpose: The main objective of this preliminary analysis of the IMaging PAtients for Cancer drug selecTion (IMPACT)-renal cell cancer (RCC) study is to evaluate the lesion detection of baseline contrast-enhanced CT, [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab-PET/CT and [18F]FDG-PET/CT in detecting ccRCC lesions in patients with a good or intermediate prognosis metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) according to the International Metastatic Database Consortium (IMDC) risk model. Methods: Between February 2015 and March 2018, 42 newly diagnosed mccRCC patients with good or intermediate prognosis, eligible for watchful waiting, were included. Patients underwent CT, [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab-PET/CT and [18F]FDG-PET/CT at baseline. Scans were independently reviewed and lesions of ≥10 mm and lymph nodes of ≥15 mm at CT were analyzed. For lesions with [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab or [18F]FDG-uptake visually exceeding background uptake, maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) were measured. Results: A total of 449 lesions were detected by ≥1 modality (median per patient: 7; ICR 4.25–12.75) of which 42% were in lung, 22% in lymph nodes and 10% in bone. Combined [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab-PET/CT and CT detected more lesions than CT alone: 91% (95%CI: 87–94) versus 56% (95%CI: 50–62, p = 0.001), respectively, and more than CT and [18F]FDG-PET/CT combined (84% (95%CI:79–88, p < 0.005). Both PET/CTs detected more bone and soft tissue lesions compared to CT alone. Conclusions: The addition of [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab-PET/CT and [18F]FDG-PET/CT to CT increases lesion detection compared to CT alone in newly diagnosed good and intermediate prognosis mccRCC patients eligible for watchful waiting

Feedback preferences of patients, professionals and health insurers in integrated head and neck cancer care

Background: Audit and feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes are the most often used interventions to change behaviour of professionals and improve quality of health care. However, limited information is available regarding preferred feedback for patients, professionals and health insurers. Objective: Investigate the (differences in) preferences of receiving feedback between stakeholders, using the Dutch Head and Neck Audit as an example. Methods: A total of 37 patients, medical specialists, allied health professionals and health insurers were interviewed using semi-structured interviews. Questions focussed on: “Why,” “On what aspects” and “How” do you prefer to receive feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes?. Results: All stakeholders mentioned that feedback can improve health care by creating awareness, enabling self-reflection and reflection on peers or colleagues, and by benchmarking to others. Patients prefer feedback on the actual professional practice that matches the health care received, whereas medical specialists and health insurers are interested mainly in health care outcomes. All stakeholders largely prefer a bar graph. Patients prefer a pie chart for patient-reported outcomes and experiences, while Kaplan-Meier survival curves are preferred by medical specialists. Feedback should be simple with firstly an overview, and 1-4 times a year sent by e-mail. Finally, patients and health professionals are cautious with regard to transparency of audit data. Conclusions: This exploratory study shows how feedback preferences differ between stakeholders. Therefore, tailored reports are recommended. Using this information, effects of audit and feedback can be improved by adapting the feedback format and contents to the preferences of stakeholders