Search

Background and Objectives : The HALP (Haemoglobin, Albumin, Lymphocyte and Platelet) score is used to predict the prognosis of different types of cancer. This study aimed to investigate the role of the HALP score in predicting pathological response in early-stage gastric cancer patients. Materials and Methods : This retrospective cohort study was conducted on 118 patients diagnosed with early-stage gastric cancer and subjected to perioperative (FLOT) treatment between 2018 and 2023. The role of the HALP score in predicting the pathological response to perioperative treatment in patients was investigated. Results : The mean age of the 118 patients included in the study was 61.3 ± 11.1 (min = 23; max = 86). In the ROC analysis, the optimum cut-off value for the HALP score in pathological response classification was found to be 28.9 (AUC = 0.710, sensitivity = 56.7%, specificity = 80%, PPV = 86.79%, NPV = 46.15%). The pathological response rate was 69% in all patients, 87% in patients with a HALP score ≥ 28.9, and 52% in patients with a HALP score < 28.9 ( p < 0.001). The probability of pathological response is 6.5 times higher in patients with a HALP score ≥ 28.9. In the Fagan nomogram, when the HALP score was ≥28.9, our pathological response probability estimate (post-test response probability) was found to increase to 64.8% (Positive Likelihood Ratio = 3, Negative Likelihood Ratio = 0.53). In patients with HALP scores ≥ 28.9 and <28.9, progression rates were 16.7% and 47.8%, respectively ( p < 0.001), and median survival times were 45.4 and 30.6 months ( p < 0.001). Conclusions : The HALP score is a useful and easily accessible score for determining pathological responses in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.

Purpose: In advanced breast cancer, endocrine therapy is preferred in the absence of visceral crisis. Cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors (CDKi) are the gold standards. The selection of subsequent treatments after CDKi treatment is still controversial, and the efficacy of everolimus (EVE) combinations is unknown. In this study, we aimed to investigate the efficacy of EVE after CDKi administration in real-life experiences., Method: The study received data from 208 patients from 26 cancer centers. Demographic and histologic features, diagnosis, progression, last visit dates, and toxicities were recorded. This study was a retrospective case series., Results: One hundred and seven patients received palbociclib, while 101 patients received ribociclib as a CDKi. The overall response and disease control rates of EVE combinations were 60% and 88%, respectively. In univariate analysis, the absence of liver metastasis, age > 40 years, better type of response, and immediate treatment after CDKi were related to increased progression-free survival. Liver metastasis and response type were significantly associated with overall survival. In the multivariate analysis, response remained significant in terms of progression-free survival, while response type, liver metastatic disease, and hematologic toxicity were prognostic in terms of overall survival., Conclusion: This study provides evidence of the benefits of EVE combinations after CDKi treatment. EVE combinations may be more appropriate for patients with non-liver metastasis, and the first treatment response shows the benefit of treatment. In addition, immediate treatment after CDKi treatment is more beneficial than later lines of treatment., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: Approximately 20-33% of all cancer patients are treated with acid-reducing agents (ARAs), most commonly proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), to reduce gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms. Palbociclib and ribociclib are weak bases so their solubility depends on different pH. The solubility of palbociclib dramatically decreases to < 0.5 mg/ml when pH is above 4,5 but ribociclibs' solubility decreases when pH increases above 6,5. In the current study, we aimed to investigate the effects of concurrent PPIs on palbociclib and ribociclib efficacy in terms of progression-free survival in metastatic breast cancer (mBC) patients., Patients and Methods: We enrolled hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative mBC patients treated with endocrine treatment (letrozole or fulvestrant) combined palbociclib or ribociclib alone or with PPI accompanying our observational study. During palbociclib/ribociclib therapy, patients should be treated with "concurrent PPIs" defined as all or more than half of treatment with palbociclib/ribociclib, If no PPI was applied, it was defined as 'no concurrent PPI', those who used PPI but less than half were excluded from the study. All data was collected from real-life retrospectively., Results: Our study included 217 patients, 105 of whom received palbociclib and 112 received ribociclib treatment. In the study population CDK inhibitor treatment was added to fulvestrant 102 patients ( 47%), to letrozole 115 patients (53%). In the Palbociclib arm fulvestrant/letrozole ratio was 53.3/46.7%, in the ribociclib arm it was 41.07/58.93%. Of 105 patients who received palbociclib, 65 were on concomitant PPI therapy, 40 were not. Of the 112 patients who received ribociclib, 61 were on concomitant PPI therapy, 51 were not. In the palbociclib group, the PFS of the patients using PPIs was shorter than the PFS of the patients not using (13.04 months vs. unreachable, p < 0.001). It was determined that taking PPIs was an independent predictor of shortening PFS (p < 0.001) in the multivariate analysis, In the ribociclib group, the PFS of the patients using PPIs was shorter than the PFS of the patients not using (12.64 months vs. unreachable, p = 0.003). It was determined that taking PPIs was single statistically independent predictor of shortening PFS (p = 0.003, univariate analysis)., Conclusions: Our study demonstrated that concomitant usage of PPIs was associated with shorter PFS in mBC treated with both ribociclib and especially palbociclib. If it needs to be used, PPI selection should be made carefully and low-strength PPI or other ARAs (eg H2 antagonists, antacids) should be preferred., (© 2022. The Author(s).)