Real life experience of patients with locally advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a Turkish oncology group study

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) and gastric cancer (GC) was shown to improve survival in recent studies. We aimed to share our real-life experience of patients who received NACT to compare the efficacy and toxicity profile of different chemotherapy regimens in our country. This retrospective multicentre study included locally advanced GC and GEJ cancer patients who received NACT between 2007 and 2021. Relation between CT regimens and pathological evaluation were analysed. A total of 794 patients from 45 oncology centers in Turkey were included. Median age at the time of diagnosis was 60 (range: 18-86). Most frequent NACT regimens used were FLOT (65.4%), DCF (17.4%) and ECF (8.1%), respectively. In the total study group, pathological complete remission (pCR) rate was 7.2%, R0 resection rate 86.4%, and D2 dissection rate was 66.8%. Rate of pCR and near-CR (24%), and R0 resection (84%) were numerically higher in FLOT arm (p > 0.05). Patients who received FLOT had also higher chemotherapy-related toxicity rate compared to patients who received other regimens (p > 0.05). Median follow-up time was 16 months (range: 1-154 months). Estimated median overall survival (OS) was 58.4months (95% CI: 35.2-85.7) and disease-free survival (DFS) was 50.7 months (95% CI: 25.4-75.9). The highest 3-year estimated OS rate was also shown in FLOT arm (68%). We still do not know which NACT regimen is the best choice for daily practice. Clinicians should tailor treatment regimens according to patients' multifactorial status and comorbidities for to obtain best outcomes. Longer follow-up period needs to validate our results

Factors affecting the mortality rate of patients with cancer hospitalized with COVID-19: a single center's experience

The main objective is to define the mortality of patients with cancer admitted to our hospital, their clinical and demographic characteristics, investigate the risk of COVID-19 for patients with cancer, and determine factors that affect the mortality rates of patients with cancer dying of COVID-19. A total of 2401 patients were admitted to our hospital with the diagnosis of COVID-19 from March 11th, 2020, to May 31st, 2020. Ninety-two out of a total of 112 cancer patients were included in this study based on the planned inclusion/exclusion criteria. The clinical, demographic, and laboratory features and treatments provided were studied, and their effect on mortality rates was analyzed. In our study the median age of the patients was 67 years, and 55.4% were male. More than half (56.5%) of our patients had metastasis. The mortality rate was 6.2% in the overall population with COVID-19, whereas it was 23.9% in patients with cancer. The mortality rate in patients with metastasis was statistically significantly higher compared with those without metastasis (34.0% vs. 10.3% P = 0.008). The mortality rate in patients still smoking was statistically significantly higher than in non-smokers (37.5% vs. 12.5% P = 0.033). The mortality rates of patients with high average C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and D-dimer levels were statistically significantly higher than in those without, and the mortality rates of patients with lower average albumin and hemoglobin levels were statistically significantly higher than those without (P < 0.001, P = 0.006, P = 0.041, P < 0.001, P < 0.001, and P = 0.028, respectively). Having metastases concurrent with COVID-19 was a statistically significant factor predictive of prognosis. Also, high CRP, ferritin, LDH, and D-dimer, and low albumin and hemoglobin were related to increased mortality rates. The predictive and prognostic role of possible factors related to prognosis is still unknown and further large, multicenter prospective studies are needed to confirm these results

FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel as the first-line chemotherapy in metastatic pancreatic cancer

Pancreas cancer (PCa) is one of the mortal cancer types with ranking as fourth leading cancer death in both sexes together. FOLFIRINOX (FFX) and Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GNP) are approved as first-line metastatic treatment in PCa. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes, treated with FFX and GNP as first-line metastatic PCa. Medical records of patients diagnosed with metastatic PCa, from January 2010 to December 2020 were analyzed. This study was a retrospective cohort, multi-institution analysis. The focus of the present study was to compare the efficiency of FFX and GNP chemotherapy combinations in the first-line treatment of PCa. Efficacy had been measured by progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). 182 patients diagnosed with PCa receiving metastatic first-line treatment were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups one hundred and three (56.6%) patients treated with FFX and seventy-nine (43.4%) patients treated with GNP. Patients in the FFX group were younger and had a better ECOG performance status. Overall response rate (ORR) was 69.9% in FFX and 37.9% in GNP group (p: 0.000). Disease control rate (DCR) was 73.7% in patients treated with FFX and 39.2% in GNP group (p: 0.000). The median PFS was 8.3 months (FFX 9.1 vs. GNP 6.7, HR = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.16-0.38) the median OS was 12.2 months (FFX 14.1 vs. GNP 9.6, HR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.31-0.72). Guidelines recommend both FFX and GNP regimens as a first-line treatment of metastatic PCa. In clinical routine, it is still unclear which regiment is more effective. The present study showed increased survival parameters with FFX versus GNP with similar toxicity profiles

Efficacy and safety of trastuzumab emtansine in older patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer: a real-world study

Introduction: Ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) is an antibody-drug conjugate and its survival advantage has been shown in advanced human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer. However, clinical trials underrepresent patients > 65 years of age, leading to a lack of information in this population. We analyzed the real-world outcomes of older women who were treated with T-DM1 therapy. Methods: We performed a multicenter, observational, retrospective analysis of patients aged > 65 years treated with T-DM1. A total of 93 patients from 10 cancer centers were involved in the study. Our goal was to determine the survival, response rates, and toxicity profile in T-DM1-treated patients, as well as the factors that influence survival. Results: Median follow-up was 12.2 months. Objective response rate was 29%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 8.47 and 15.0 months, respectively. In multivariate analysis, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score 2 was found to be an independent prognostic factor for worse PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.81, p = 0.032) and OS (HR 2.33, p = 0.006). Any adverse event (AE) was seen in 92.5% of patients; grade 3 or 4 AEs were seen in 30.1%. Dose reduction or treatment discontinuation rates were 11.8% and 6.5%, respectively. Conclusion: The efficacy of T-DM1 was acceptable and it was generally well-tolerated among older patients with advanced HER2-positive breast cancer

Real-life comparison of the afatinib and first-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors in nonsmall cell lung cancer harboring EGFR exon 19 deletion: a Turk Oncology Group (TOG) study

Background The new second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have superior survival outcome and worse toxicity profile when compared with first-generation TKIs according to the results of clinical trials. However, there are limited studies that investigate the efficacy and safety of the new generation TKIs in real-world patients. Thus, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the afatinib, an irreversible inhibitor of ErbB family receptor, and first-generation TKIs in real-world patients

Real life experience of patients with locally advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a Turkish oncology group study

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) and gastric cancer (GC) was shown to improve survival in recent studies. We aimed to share our real-life experience of patients who received NACT to compare the efficacy and toxicity profile of different chemotherapy regimens in our country. This retrospective multicentre study included locally advanced GC and GEJ cancer patients who received NACT between 2007 and 2021. Relation between CT regimens and pathological evaluation were analysed. A total of 794 patients from 45 oncology centers in Turkey were included. Median age at the time of diagnosis was 60 (range: 18-86). Most frequent NACT regimens used were FLOT (65.4%), DCF (17.4%) and ECF (8.1%), respectively. In the total study group, pathological complete remission (pCR) rate was 7.2%, R0 resection rate 86.4%, and D2 dissection rate was 66.8%. Rate of pCR and near-CR (24%), and R0 resection (84%) were numerically higher in FLOT arm (p > 0.05). Patients who received FLOT had also higher chemotherapy-related toxicity rate compared to patients who received other regimens (p > 0.05). Median follow-up time was 16 months (range: 1-154 months). Estimated median overall survival (OS) was 58.4months (95% CI: 35.2-85.7) and disease-free survival (DFS) was 50.7 months (95% CI: 25.4-75.9). The highest 3-year estimated OS rate was also shown in FLOT arm (68%). We still do not know which NACT regimen is the best choice for daily practice. Clinicians should tailor treatment regimens according to patients' multifactorial status and comorbidities for to obtain best outcomes. Longer follow-up period needs to validate our results

Real-world outcomes of pazopanib in metastatic soft tissue sarcoma: a retrospective Turkish oncology group (TOG) study

Aim: Description of patient characteristics, effectiveness and safety in Turkish patients treated with pazopanib for metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Patients and methods: This multicenter study is based on retrospective review of hospital medical records of patients (≥ 18 years) treated with pazopanib for non-adipocytic metastatic STS at 37 Oncology clinics across Turkey. Objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated with further analysis of data on the three most common histological subtypes (leiomyosarcoma [LMS], undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma [UPS], synovial sarcoma [SS]) in the cohort. Results: Data of 552 adults (57.6% women, median age: 52 years) were analyzed. DCR and ORR were 43.1% and 30.8%, respectively. Median PFS was 6.7 months and OS was 13.8 months. For LMS, UPS and SS, median PFSs were 6.1, 5.9 and 7.53 months and median OSs were 15.03, 12.87 and 12.27 months, respectively. ECOG ≥ 2 was associated with poor PFS and OS. Liver metastasis was only a factor for progression. Second-line use of pazopanib (vs. front-line) was associated with better PFS, its use beyond third line predicted worse OS. Adverse events (AE) occurred in 82.7% of patients. Most common AEs were fatigue (58.3%) and anorexia (52.3%) which were graded as ≥ 3 in 8.2% and 7.4% of patients, respectively. Conclusion: Pazopanib is effective and well-tolerated in treatment of non-adipocytic metastatic STS. Its earlier use (at second-line), good performance status may result in better outcomes. Worldwide scientific collaborations are important to gain knowledge on rarer STS subtypes by conducting studies in larger patient populations