Adjuvant nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine in resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: results from a randomized, open-label, phase III trial

Purpose: This randomized, open-label trial compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine with those of gemcitabine for resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01964430). Methods: We assigned 866 treatment-naive patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2) + gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2) or gemcitabine alone to one 30-40 infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of six 28-day cycles. The primary end point was independently assessed disease-free survival (DFS). Additional end points included investigator-assessed DFS, overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: Two hundred eighty-seven of 432 patients and 310 of 434 patients completed nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine and gemcitabine treatment, respectively. At primary data cutoff (December 31, 2018; median follow-up, 38.5 [interquartile range [IQR], 33.8-43 months), the median independently assessed DFS was 19.4 (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 18.8 months (gemcitabine; hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.729 to 1.063; P = .18). The median investigator-assessed DFS was 16.6 (IQR, 8.4-47.0) and 13.7 (IQR, 8.3-44.1) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.694 to 0.965; P = .02). The median OS (427 events; 68% mature) was 40.5 (IQR, 20.7 to not reached) and 36.2 (IQR, 17.7-53.3) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.680 to 0.996; P = .045). At a 16-month follow-up (cutoff, April 3, 2020; median follow-up, 51.4 months [IQR, 47.0-57.0]), the median OS (511 events; 81% mature) was 41.8 (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 37.7 months (gemcitabine; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.687 to 0.973; P = .0232). At the 5-year follow-up (cutoff, April 9, 2021; median follow-up, 63.2 months [IQR, 60.1-68.7]), the median OS (555 events; 88% mature) was 41.8 versus 37.7 months, respectively (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.678 to 0.947; P = .0091). Eighty-six percent (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) and 68% (gemcitabine) of patients experienced grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events. Two patients per study arm died of treatment-emergent adverse events. Conclusion: The primary end point (independently assessed DFS) was not met despite favorable OS seen with nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine

Adjuvant nab-Paclitaxel + Gemcitabine in Resected Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Results from a Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial

PURPOSE This randomized, open-label trial compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine with those of gemcitabine for resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01964430). METHODS We assigned 866 treatment-naive patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2) + gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2) or gemcitabine alone to one 30-40 infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of six 28-day cycles. The primary end point was independently assessed disease-free survival (DFS). Additional end points included investigator-assessed DFS, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS Two hundred eighty-seven of 432 patients and 310 of 434 patients completed nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine and gemcitabine treatment, respectively. At primary data cutoff (December 31, 2018; median follow-up, 38.5 [interquartile range [IQR], 33.8-43 months), the median independently assessed DFS was 19.4 (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 18.8 months (gemcitabine; hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.729 to 1.063; P = .18). The median investigator-assessed DFS was 16.6 (IQR, 8.4-47.0) and 13.7 (IQR, 8.3-44.1) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.694 to 0.965; P = .02). The median OS (427 events; 68% mature) was 40.5 (IQR, 20.7 to not reached) and 36.2 (IQR, 17.7-53.3) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.680 to 0.996; P = .045). At a 16-month follow-up (cutoff, April 3, 2020; median follow-up, 51.4 months [IQR, 47.0-57.0]), the median OS (511 events; 81% mature) was 41.8 (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 37.7 months (gemcitabine; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.687 to 0.973; P = .0232). At the 5-year follow-up (cutoff, April 9, 2021; median follow-up, 63.2 months [IQR, 60.1-68.7]), the median OS (555 events; 88% mature) was 41.8 versus 37.7 months, respectively (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.678 to 0.947; P = .0091). Eighty-six percent (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) and 68% (gemcitabine) of patients experienced grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events. Two patients per study arm died of treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSION The primary end point (independently assessed DFS) was not met despite favorable OS seen with nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine

L'oedème des métastases cérébrales, sa formation, sa mesure et son impact pronostique dans le cadre d’une irradiation en conditions stéréotaxiques

Médecine. Oncologie option RadiothérapieAprès avoir appréhendé les interactions que peuvent avoir les métastases cérébrales avec les cellules de l’immunité, nous avons émis l’hypothèse que l’œdème visible en IRM en séquence FLAIR serait un reflet qualitatif de la réaction immunitaire cérébrale. Pour l’étudier, nous avons mis au point un logiciel de segmentation semi-automatique qui a été validé par une étude de contourage. Grâce aux données recueillies sur une cohorte rétrospective de 182 patients, nous avons fait une étude comparative de plusieurs méthodes d’évaluation de l’œdème. L’épaisseur théorique de l’œdème est apparu être le plus intéressant pour comparer des patients entre eux mais aussi pour sa prise en compte de facteurs confondants. Dans notre recherche de facteurs pronostics de survie sans récidive cérébrale après irradiation stéréotaxique d’une à trois métastases cérébrales, cette épaisseur apparue liée significativement, ainsi que le type histologique de mélanome et la rechute locale.After having apprehended the interactions that brain metastases can have with the cells of the immunity, we hypothesized that visible edema in MRI FLAIR sequence would be a qualitative reflection of the cerebral immune reaction. To study it, we have developed a semi-automatic segmentation software that has been validated by a contouring study. Using data from a retrospective cohort of 182 patients, we conducted a comparative study of several edema evaluation methods. The theoretical thickness of edema appeared to be the most interesting for comparing patients with each other but also for taking into account confounding factors. In our search for prognostic factors for survival without cerebral recurrence after stereotactic irradiation of one to three brain metastases, this thickness appeared significantly related, as well as the histological type of melanoma and local relapse

Brain metastasis formation and irradiation by stereotactic radiation therapy combined with immunotherapy: A systematic review

International audienceIntroductionBrain metastasis (BM) is a complex process that implies immune cells and microglia. Stereotactic radiation therapy (SRT) and immunotherapy (IT) are established to increase the immune response; but their association has never been prospectively studied.Materials and methodsTwo reviewers performed a systematic review in original papers published up to September 2019. We analysed OS, local (mLRF) and regional (mBRF) median disease-free survival in patients with BMs after SRT with and without IT.ResultsUpon 14 studies, eleven concerned melanoma, three concerned lung cancers. SRT-IT showed better OS, mLRF and mBRF than SRT. mBRF was better if SRT was performed with short delay from IT. No higher rates of radionecrosis and haemorrhage were found among groups.ConclusionThis review suggests SRT combined to IT in melanoma is safe and could provide better BRF, suggesting a lymphocytic immune reaction in brain. No improvement trend was found in lung cancer BM

Diagnostic value of fusion of metabolic and structural images for stereotactic biopsy of brain tumors without enhancement after contrast medium injection

Background The heterogeneous nature of glioma makes it difficult to select a target for stereotactic biopsy that will be representative of grade severity on non-contrast-enhanced lesion imaging. The objective of this study was to evaluate the benefit of fusion of metabolic images (PET 18F-DOPA) with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) morphological images for cerebral biopsy under stereotactic conditions of glioma without contrast enhancement. Patients and methods This single-center prospective observational study conducted between January 2016 and April 2018 included 20 consecutive patients (mean age: 45 ± 19.5 years; range, 9–80 years) who underwent cerebral biopsy for a tumor without MRI enhancement but with hypermetabolism on 18F-FDOPA PET (positron emission tomography). Standard 18F-FDOPA uptake value (SUVmax) was determined for diagnosis of high-grade glioma, with comparison to histomolecular results. Results Histological diagnosis was made in all patients (100%). Samples from hypermetabolism areas revealed high-grade glial tumor in 16 patients (80%). For a SUVmax threshold of 1.75, sensitivity was 81.2%, specificity 50%, PPV 86.7% and VPN 40% for diagnosis of high-grade glioma. No significant association between SUVmax and histomolecular mutation was found. Conclusion 18F-FDOPA metabolic imaging is an aid in choosing the target to be biopsied under stereotactic conditions in tumors without MR enhancement. Nevertheless, despite good sensitivity, 18F-FDOPA PET is insufficient for definitive diagnosis of high-grade tumor

Adjuvant nab-Paclitaxel + Gemcitabine in Resected Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Results From a Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial

PURPOSE: This randomized, open-label trial compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine with those of gemcitabine for resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01964430). METHODS: We assigned 866 treatment-naive patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m(2)) + gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2)) or gemcitabine alone to one 30-40 infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of six 28-day cycles. The primary end point was independently assessed disease-free survival (DFS). Additional end points included investigator-assessed DFS, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-seven of 432 patients and 310 of 434 patients completed nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine and gemcitabine treatment, respectively. At primary data cutoff (December 31, 2018; median follow-up, 38.5 [interquartile range [IQR], 33.8-43 months), the median independently assessed DFS was 19.4 (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 18.8 months (gemcitabine; hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.729 to 1.063; P = .18). The median investigator-assessed DFS was 16.6 (IQR, 8.4-47.0) and 13.7 (IQR, 8.3-44.1) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.694 to 0.965; P = .02). The median OS (427 events; 68% mature) was 40.5 (IQR, 20.7 to not reached) and 36.2 (IQR, 17.7-53.3) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.680 to 0.996; P = .045). At a 16-month follow-up (cutoff, April 3, 2020; median follow-up, 51.4 months [IQR, 47.0-57.0]), the median OS (511 events; 81% mature) was 41.8 (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 37.7 months (gemcitabine; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.687 to 0.973; P = .0232). At the 5-year follow-up (cutoff, April 9, 2021; median follow-up, 63.2 months [IQR, 60.1-68.7]), the median OS (555 events; 88% mature) was 41.8 versus 37.7 months, respectively (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.678 to 0.947; P = .0091). Eighty-six percent (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) and 68% (gemcitabine) of patients experienced grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events. Two patients per study arm died of treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSION: The primary end point (independently assessed DFS) was not met despite favorable OS seen with nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine