Search

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (panNETs) are rare neoplasms with challenging disease management. We aimed to evaluate the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR) in chemotherapy-naïve patients with unresectable or metastatic Grade (G) 1-2 panNETs treated with everolimus in the routine care in Greece.This was a multicenter, prospective, observational study. Eligible patients were recently (≤4 weeks) initiated on treatment with everolimus and were followed for up to 48 months.Nineteen eligible patients (mean age 55.1 years) were enrolled. All patients had metastatic disease and 84.2% had G2 panNET. Everolimus was initiated in combination with somatostatin analogues in 84.2% of the patients. The mean everolimus treatment duration was 21.5 months. The median Kaplan-Meier-estimated PFS was 20.4 months (95% confidence interval=14.1-41.5). The ORR was 27.8%. The rate of everolimus-related adverse events was 84.2% (Grade ≥3: 31.6%).Everolimus displayed clinical benefit and a predictable safety profile in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Background Tumor molecular profile analysis by Next Generation Sequencing technology is currently widely applied in clinical practice and has enabled the detection of predictive biomarkers of response to targeted treatment. In parallel with targeted therapies, immunotherapies are also evolving, revolutionizing cancer therapy, with Programmed Death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), Microsatellite instability (MSI), and Tumor Mutational Burden (TMB) analysis being the biomarkers employed most commonly. Methods In the present study, tumor molecular profile analysis was performed using a 161 gene NGS panel, containing the majority of clinically significant genes for cancer treatment selection. A variety of tumor types have been analyzed, including aggressive and hard to treat cancers such as pancreatic cancer. Besides, the clinical utility of immunotherapy biomarkers (TMB, MSI, PD-L1), was also studied. Results Molecular profile analysis was conducted in 610 cancer patients, while in 393 of them a at least one biomarker for immunotherapy response was requested. An actionable alteration was detected in 77.87% of the patients. 54.75% of them received information related to on-label or off-label treatment (Tiers 1A.1, 1A.2, 2B, and 2C.1) and 21.31% received a variant that could be used for clinical trial inclusion. The addition to immunotherapy biomarker to targeted biomarkers’ analysis in 191 cases increased the number of patients with an on-label treatment recommendation by 22.92%, while an option for on-label or off-label treatment was provided in 71.35% of the cases. Conclusions Tumor molecular profile analysis using NGS is a first-tier method for a variety of tumor types and provides important information for decision making in the treatment of cancer patients. Importantly, simultaneous analysis for targeted therapy and immunotherapy biomarkers could lead to better tumor characterization and offer actionable information in the majority of patients. Furthermore, our data suggest that one in two patients may be eligible for on-label ICI treatment based on biomarker analysis. However, appropriate interpretation of results from such analysis is essential for implementation in clinical practice and accurate refinement of treatment strategy.

Background: Tumor molecular profile is of great importance for the detection of biomarkers of response to targeted treatment due to the increased availability, with concomitant reduction of cost, of Next Generation Sequencing technology (NGS). In parallel to targeted therapies’, immunotherapies are also evolving, revolutionizing cancer therapy, with Programmed Death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), Microsatellite Instability (MSI), and Tumor Mutational Burden (TMB) analysis being the biomarkers employed most commonly.Methods: In the present study, a 161 gene NGS panel, containing the majority of clinically significant genes for cancer treatment selection, was used for tumor molecular profile analysis. A variety of tumor types have been analyzed, including aggressive and hard to treat cancers such as pancreatic cancer. Besides, the clinical utility of immunotherapy biomarkers (TMB, MSI, PD-L1), was also studied.Results: Molecular profile analysis was conducted in 610 cancer patients, while in 393 of them a at least one biomarker for immunotherapy response was requested. At least one actionable alteration was detected in 77.70% of the patients. 54.59% of them received information related to on-label or off-label treatment (Tiers 1A.1, 1A.2, 2B, and 2C.1) and 21.31% received a variant that could be used for clinical trial inclusion. The addition to immunotherapy biomarker to targeted biomarkers’ analysis in 191 cases increased the number of patients with an on-label treatment recommendation by 22.40%, while an option for on-label or off-label treatment was provided in 71.35% of the cases. Conclusions: Tumor molecular profile analysis by NGS is a first-tier methodology for a variety of tumor types, which provides critical information for treatment decision making in cancer patients. Importantly, simultaneous analysis for targeted therapy and immunotherapy biomarkers could lead to a better tumor characterization and provide actionable information in the majority of patients. Moreover, our results indicate that one in two patients is eligible for ICI treatment based on the biomarkers’ analysis. However, when these analyses are performed, the challenge is their implementation in clinical practice. Multidisciplinary patient management is critical to the refinement of the strategy incorporating such information.

Objective: To investigate the resource use and costs associated with the management of metastatic anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors (ALK+) NSCLC in Greece. Methods: The resource use was based on the outcomes of a Delphi panel with seven oncologists and unit costs derived from officially published sources. Results: The average per patient cost in the current treatment pathway (chemotherapy, crizotinib, chemotherapy, palliative care) was estimated at €67,391. The average per patient cost in future scenario 1 (crizotinib, ceritinib, chemotherapy, palliative care) was estimated at €104,571 (treatment duration 26 months) while in future scenario 2 (chemotherapy, ceritinib, chemotherapy, palliative care) was estimated at €134,215 (treatment duration 29.3 months). Conclusion: Ceritinib as second line treatment leads to an increase in total costs reflecting the longer survival