SEOM-GEINO clinical guidelines for high-grade gliomas of adulthood (2022)

High-grade gliomas (HGG) are the most common primary brain malignancies and account for more than half of all malignant primary brain tumors. The new 2021 WHO classification divides adult HGG into four subtypes: grade 3 oligodendroglioma (1p/19 codeleted, IDH-mutant); grade 3 IDH-mutant astrocytoma; grade 4 IDH-mutant astrocytoma, and grade 4 IDH wild-type glioblastoma (GB). Radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy (CTX) are the current standard of care for patients with newly diagnosed HGG. Several clinically relevant molecular markers that assist in diagnosis and prognosis have recently been identified. The treatment for recurrent high-grade gliomas is not well defined and decision-making is usually based on prior strategies, as well as several clinical and radiological factors. Whereas the prognosis for GB is grim (5-year survival rate of 5-10%) outcomes for the other high-grade gliomas are typically better, depending on the molecular features of the tumor. The presence of neurological deficits and seizures can significantly impact quality of life

Expert consensus to optimize the treatment of elderly patients with luminal metastatic breast cancer

Most patients diagnosed with luminal metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who are seen in oncology consultations are elderly. MBC in elderly patients is characterized by a higher percentage of hormone receptor (HR) expression and a lower expression of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). The decision regarding which treatment to administer to these patients is complex due to the lack of solid evidence to support the decision-making process. The objective of this paper is to review the scientific evidence on the treatment of elderly patients with luminal MBC. For this purpose, the Oncogeriatrics Section of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), the Spanish Breast Cancer Research Group (GEICAM) and the SOLTI Group appointed a group of experts who have worked together to establish consensus recommendations to optimize the treatment of this population. It was concluded that the chronological age of the patient alone should not guide therapeutic decisions and that a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) should be performed whenever possible before establishing treatment. Treatment selection for the elderly population should consider the patient's baseline status, the expected benefit and toxicity of each treatment, and the impact of treatment toxicity on the patient's quality of life and functionality

SEOM-GEINO clinical guideline of systemic therapy and management of brain central nervous system metastases (2021)

Central nervous system (CNS) dissemination is a severe complication in cancer and a leading cause of cancer-related mortality. Brain metastases (BMs) are the most common types of malignant intracranial tumors and are reported in approximately 25% of patients with metastatic cancers. The recent increase in incidence of BMs is due to several factors including better diagnostic assessments and the development of improved systemic therapies that have lower activity on the CNS. However, newer systemic therapies are being developed that can cross the blood-brain barrier giving us additional tools to treat BMs. The guidelines presented here focus on the efficacy of new targeted systemic therapies and immunotherapies on CNS BMs from breast, melanoma, and lung cancers

Defining the optimal sequence for the systemic treatment of metastatic breast cancer

Metastatic breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease that presents in varying forms, and a growing number of therapeutic options makes it difficult to determine the best choice in each particular situation. When selecting a systemic treatment, it is important to consider the medication administered in the previous stages, such as acquired resistance, type of progression, time to relapse, tumor aggressiveness, age, comorbidities, pre- and post-menopausal status, and patient preferences. Moreover, tumor genomic signatures can identify different subtypes, which can be used to create patient profiles and design specific therapies. However, there is no consensus regarding the best treatment sequence for each subgroup of patients. During the SABCC Congress of 2014, specialized breast cancer oncologists from referral hospitals in Europe met to define patient profiles and to determine specific treatment sequences for each one. Conclusions were then debated in a final meeting in which a relative degree of consensus for each treatment sequence was established. Four patient profiles were defined according to established breast cancer phenotypes: pre-menopausal patients with luminal subtype, post-menopausal patients with luminal subtype, patients with triple-negative subtype, and patients with HER2-positive subtype. A treatment sequence was then defined, consisting of hormonal therapy with tamoxifen, aromatase inhibitors, fulvestrant, and mTOR inhibitors for pre- and post-menopausal patients; a chemotherapy sequence for the first, second, and further lines for luminal and triple-negative patients; and an optimal sequence for treatment with new antiHER2 therapies. Finally, a document detailing all treatment sequences, that had the agreement of all the oncologists, was drawn up as a guideline and advocacy tool for professionals treating patients with this disease

Challenging Endocrine Sensitivity of Hormone Receptor-Positive/HER2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer with the Combination of Eribulin and Endocrine Therapy: The REVERT Study

Background: Luminal advanced breast cancer (ABC) patients eventually progress on endocrine therapy. REVERT aimed to explore whether eribulin could restore endocrine sensitivity in a randomized, non-comparative phase II trial. Methods: Aromatase inhibitor (AI)-resistant patients with luminal ABC were randomized 1:1 to receive eribulin +/− AI. Patients were stratified by prior cyclin-dependent kinases 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) treatment. The primary endpoint was an investigator-assessed overall response rate (ORR) according to RECIST version 1.1 in the eribulin + AI arm. An interim analysis was planned with 11 evaluable patients according to a two-stage Simon design. Results: Twenty-two patients were enrolled (15 eribulin + AI arm; 7 eribulin arm). The trial was terminated early in March 2021, with eight (36.4%) patients still on treatment. ORR was 26.7% in the eribulin + AI arm (95% CI, 7.8–55.1%; p = 0.0541). In the eribulin arm, two (28.6%) patients had an objective response (95% CI, 3.7–71.0%). The difference between the study arms was not significant (p = 0.918). The addition of AI to eribulin also failed to show improvement in other efficacy endpoints. A significant interaction between the treatment arm and previous CDK4/6i treatment was observed for ORR (p = 0.018) and progression-free survival (p = 0.084). Overall, the toxicity profile was consistent with the known safety profile of eribulin. No treatment-related deaths were reported. Conclusion: Eribulin + AI does not seem to improve outcomes compared with eribulin monotherapy in patients with AI-resistant luminal ABC. This chemo–endocrine approach deserves further investigation after progression to CDK4/6i-based therapy

Defining the optimal sequence for the systemic treatment of metastatic breast cancer.

Metastatic breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease that presents in varying forms, and a growing number of therapeutic options makes it difficult to determine the best choice in each particular situation. When selecting a systemic treatment, it is important to consider the medication administered in the previous stages, such as acquired resistance, type of progression, time to relapse, tumor aggressiveness, age, comorbidities, pre- and post-menopausal status, and patient preferences. Moreover, tumor genomic signatures can identify different subtypes, which can be used to create patient profiles and design specific therapies. However, there is no consensus regarding the best treatment sequence for each subgroup of patients. During the SABCC Congress of 2014, specialized breast cancer oncologists from referral hospitals in Europe met to define patient profiles and to determine specific treatment sequences for each one. Conclusions were then debated in a final meeting in which a relative degree of consensus for each treatment sequence was established. Four patient profiles were defined according to established breast cancer phenotypes: pre-menopausal patients with luminal subtype, post-menopausal patients with luminal subtype, patients with triple-negative subtype, and patients with HER2-positive subtype. A treatment sequence was then defined, consisting of hormonal therapy with tamoxifen, aromatase inhibitors, fulvestrant, and mTOR inhibitors for pre- and post-menopausal patien ts; a chemotherapy sequence for the first, second, and further lines for luminal and triple-negative patients; and an optimal sequence for treatment with new antiHER2 therapies. Finally, a document detailing all treatment sequences, that had the agreement of all the oncologists, was drawn up as a guideline and advocacy tool for professionals treating patients with this disease