Search

The first-line therapy of patients with RAS wild-type (WT) non-resectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is usually 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy with either bevacizumab or an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). The addition of anti-EGFR antibodies is commonly delayed in clinical practice because of late RAS testing results. Our objective was to evaluate the impact on overall survival (OS) of a delayed anti-EGFR introduction strategy. This study pooled the data of two large retrospective studies. Patients with RAS WT non-resectable mCRC, treated in first line by a doublet chemotherapy with an anti-EGFR introduced with a delay of 2 to 4 cycles, were compared to an anti-EGFR and to an anti-VEGF that was introduced immediately. Patients numbering 305 in the delayed anti-EGFR group, 401 in the immediate anti-EGFR group, and 129 in the immediate anti-VEGF group were analyzed. After propensity scoring, there was no difference between the characteristics of the three groups. Median OS was 28.6 months (95% CI: 23.5-34.1) in the immediate anti-EGFR group, 35.1 (95% CI: 29.9-43.5) in the delayed anti-EGFR group, and 32.4 (95% CI: 25.4-44.8) in the immediate anti-VEGF group. There was no significant difference concerning median OS ( p = 0.24) or progression-free survival ( p = 0.56). This study suggests that delaying the introduction of an anti-EGFR has no deleterious impact on survival compared to the immediate introduction of an anti-VEGF or of an anti-EGFR.

Digestive well-differentiated grade 3 neuroendocrine tumors (NET G-3) have been clearly defined since the 2017 World Health Organization classification. They are still a rare category lacking specific data and standardized management. Their distinction from other types of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) not only lies in morphology but also in genotype, aggressiveness, functional imaging uptake, and treatment response. Most of the available data comes from pancreatic series, which is the most frequent tumor site for this entity. In the non-metastatic setting, surgical resection is recommended, irrespective of grade and tumor site. For metastatic NET G-3, chemotherapy is the main first-line treatment with temozolomide-based regimen showing more efficacy than platinum-based regimen, especially when Ki-67 index <55%. Targeted therapies, such as sunitinib and everolimus, have also shown some positive therapeutic efficacy in small samples of patients. Functional imaging plays a key role for detection but also treatment selection. In the second or further-line setting, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy has shown promising response rates in high-grade NEN. Finally, immunotherapy is currently investigated as a new therapeutic approach with trials still ongoing. More data will come with future work now focusing on this specific subgroup. The aim of this review is to summarize the current data on digestive NET G-3 and explore future directions for their management.

Background : Esophagectomy is recommended after endoscopic resection of an early esophageal cancer when pejorative histoprognostic criteria indicate a high risk of lymph node involvement. Our aim was to analyze the clinical outcomes of a non-surgical, organ preserving management in this clinical setting. Patients and Methods : This retrospective study was performed in two tertiary centers from 2015 to 2020. Patients were included if they had histologically complete resection of an early esophageal cancer, with poor differentiation, lymphovascular invasion or deep submucosal invasion. Endoscopic resection was followed by chemoradiotherapy or follow-up in case of surgical contraindications or patient refusal. Outcome measures were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), cancer specific survival (CSS) and toxicity of chemoradiotherapy. Results : Forty-one patients (36 with squamous cell carcinoma and 5 with adenocarcinomas) were included. The estimated high risk of lymph node involvement was based on poor differentiation (10/41; 24%), lympho-vascular invasion (11/41; 27%), muscularis mucosa invasion or deep sub-mucosal invasion (38/41; 93%). Thirteen patients (13/41; 32%) were closely monitored, and 28 (28/41; 68%) were treated by chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy alone. In the close follow-up group, DFS, OS and CSS were 92%, 92% and 100%, respectively vs. 75%, 79% and 96%, respectively in the chemoradiotherapy group at the end of the follow-up. Serious adverse events related to chemoradiotherapy occurred in 10% of the patients. There were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusions : Our study shows that close follow-up may be an alternative to systematic esophagectomy after endoscopic resection of early esophageal cancer with a predicted high risk of lymph node involvement.