Search

Introduction: In the Emilia-Romagna region of Italy, a unique Hub and Spoke model was adopted to recognize BRCA-related breast cancer (BC) patients. Characteristics and outcomes of tumors identified by this model will be presented., Methods: This multicenter retrospective cohort study involved patients diagnosed with BRCA-related BC identified in the Emilia-Romagna region between January 2000 and December 2013. Seven provinces collected data on patient and tumor characteristics; clinical and gene testing information were also registered. Comparisons between BRCA1 and BRCA2 BC were performed. To balance different variants to identify significant predictors of survival, an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis on Cox regression was conducted., Results: From 2000 to 2013, 284 BRCA-related BC were registered (171 BRCA1, 110 BRCA2, and 3 BRCA1 and BRCA2). BRCA1 were diagnosed at an earlier stage compared to BRCA2 (50.1 % vs 30 %, respectively, in stage I, P = 0.0015). BRCA2 patients underwent more up-front surgery (85 % vs. 74.9 %, P = 0.049) and less chemotherapy (69.1 % vs 88.9 %, P = 0.004) than BRCA1 patients. At 11.8 years median follow-up, BRCA1 patients developed more second contralateral BC (P = 0.09), while BRCA2 had more visceral relapses (P = 0.013). No differences in overall survival (OS) between BRCA1 and BRCA2 patients (P = 0.07) were found. An advantage in OS was independently seen for patients who underwent contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (P = 0.0001) and oophorectomy (P < 0.0001)., Conclusions: In conclusion, adopting a homogeneous regional framework provides important information about prevention and treatment strategies of BRCA-related BC and suggests using maximal surgery to improve OS., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest LC: speaker honoraria from Astra Zeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, Gilead, MSD; advisory role for Astra Zeneca, Pfizer, MSD, Amgen, Roche; GC, MV: no conflict of interest to disclose; AT: speaker honoraria from Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, MSD, Seagen, Gilead, Daiichi Sankyo; EB: travel grants from Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, MSD, AstraZeneca, Gilead, Daiichi Sankyo; FT: no conflict of interest to disclose; AM: Honoraria: Eli-Lilly, Pfizer, Macrogenics, Seagen, and Daiichi Sankyo; institutional research funding: Roche, Eli-Lilly; UDG: Advisory Board: MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, Astellas, Sanofi, Bayer, Pfizer, Ipsen, Novartis, and Pharmamar. Institutional Research grants: AstraZeneca, Sanofi, and Roche; GB, VA: no conflict of interest to disclose; CZ: Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events by Roche, Eisai, Novartis, Astrazeneca, Pfizer, Pharmamar, Tesaro, Pierre Fabre, Ist. Gentili, Teva, Seagen, Eli Lilly, Celgene, MSD, GSK, Amgen, Daichii, Support for attending meetings and/or travel by Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, Pharmamar, Tesaro, Pierre Fabre, Ist. Gentili, Celgene, Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board by Roche, Eisai, Novartis, Astrazeneca, Pfizer, Pharmamar, Amgen, Tesaro, QuintilesIms, Eli Lilly, Celgene, MSD, GSK, Daichii, Other financial or non-financial interests by Roche, Novartis, Astrazeneca, Pfizer, Amgen, Tesaro, QuintilesIms, MSD, GSK, Daichii. LC, MD: no conflict of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Background: Immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy significantly improves progression-free survival (PFS) compared to first-line chemotherapy alone in advanced endometrial cancer (EC), with a much larger effect size in microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) cases. New biomarkers might help to select patients who may have benefit among those with a microsatellite-stable (MSS) tumor., Patients and Methods: In a pre-planned translational analysis of the MITO END-3 trial, we assessed the significance of genomic abnormalities in patients randomized to standard carboplatin/paclitaxel without or with avelumab., Results: Out of 125 randomized patients, 109 had samples eligible for next-generation sequencing analysis, and 102 had MSI tested. According to The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), there were 29 cases with MSI-H, 26 with MSS TP53 wild type (wt), 47 with MSS TP53 mutated (mut), and 1 case with POLE mutation. Four mutated genes were present in >30% of cases: TP53, PIK3CA, ARID1A, and PTEN. Eleven patients (10%) had a BRCA1/2 mutation (five in MSI-H and six in MSS). High tumor mutational burden (≥10 muts/Mb) was observed in all MSI-H patients, in 4 out of 47 MSS/TP53 mut, and no case in the MSS/TP53 wt category. The effect of avelumab on PFS significantly varied according to TCGA categories, being favorable in MSI-H and worst in MSS/TP53 mut (P interaction = 0.003); a similar non-significant trend was seen in survival analysis. ARID1A and PTEN also showed a statistically significant interaction with treatment effect, which was better in the presence of the mutation (ARID1A P interaction = 0.01; PTEN P interaction = 0.002)., Conclusion: The MITO END-3 trial results suggest that TP53 mutation is associated with a poor effect of avelumab, while mutations of PTEN and ARID1A are related to a positive effect of the drug in patients with advanced EC., (Copyright © 2024 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The BOLERO-2 trial reported efficacy and safety of Everolimus (EVE) and Exemestane (EXE) combination in HR+ advanced breast cancer (ABC) patients. The BALLET trial further evaluated the safety of EVE-EXE in HR+ ABC patients, without reporting efficacy data. Aim of the EVA real-life study was to collect data of efficacy and safety of EVE-EXE combination in the clinical setting, as well as exploring efficacy according to EVE Dose-Intensity (DI) and to previous treatment with Fulvestrant., Patients and Methods: This study aimed to describe the outcome of ABC pts treated with EVE-EXE combination in terms of median duration of EVE treatment and ORR in a real-life setting., Results: From July 2013 to December 2015, the EVA study enrolled 404 pts. Median age was 61 years (33-83). Main metastatic sites were: bone (69.1%), soft tissue (34.7%) and viscera (33.2%). Median number of previous treatments was 2 (1-7). 43.3% of the pts had received Fulvestrant. Median exposure to EVE was 31.0 weeks (15.4-58.3) in the whole population. No difference was observed in terms of EVE exposure duration according to DI (p for trend = 0.27) or type of previous treatments (p = 0.33). ORR and Disease Control Rate (DCR) were observed in 31.6% and 60.7% of the patients, respectively, with the lowest ORRs confined in CHT pre-treated patients or in those who received the lowest DI of EVE. Grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs) were reported in 37.9% of the patients. Main AEs were: stomatitis (11.2%), non-infectious pneumonitis - NIP (3.8%), anaemia (3.8%) and fatigue (3.2%)., Conclusions: The EVA study provided new insights in the use of EVE-EVE combination in HR+ ABC pts many years after the publication of the pivotal trial. The combination is safe and the best response could be obtained in patients receiving the full dose of EVE and/or after hormone-therapy as Fulvestrant in ABC., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Chromatin immunoprecipitation in M14 melanoma cells showed that the protein ERp57 (endoplasmic reticulum protein 57) binds to DNA in the proximity of STAT3 in a subset of STAT3-regulated genes. In the same cells, IL-6 induced a significant increase of the expression of one of these genes, i.e. CRP. Upon depletion of ERp57 by RNA interference, the phosphorylation of STAT3 on tyrosine 705 was decreased, and the IL-6-induced activation of CRP expression was completely suppressed. In vitro experiments showed that ERp57 is also required for the binding of STAT3 to its consensus sequence on DNA. Thus ERp57, previously shown to associate with STAT3 in the cytosol and in the nuclear STAT3-containing enhanceosome, is a necessary cofactor for the regulation of at least a subset of STAT3-dependent genes, probably intervening both at the site of STAT3 phosphorylation and at the nuclear level., (2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)