Search

Background: We retrospectively investigated the role of (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with primary, localized angiosarcoma. Methods: We selected all patients with primary, localized angiosarcoma, who had received radical surgery between January 2005 and December 2019 at 33 European sarcoma reference centers. The primary objective was to compare the outcome of patients who received (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy versus those who did not, in terms of overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS). To reduce the risk of confounding due to imbalance, a propensity-score matching(PSM) was performed. Finally, subgroups analysis was performed according to tumor site, tumor size (< 50 mm or ≥ 50 mm) and patients predicted 10-years OS according to the nomogram sarculator (two different cutoff-values were applied: ≤ 33% or > 33% and < 60% or ≥ 60%). Results: 362 patients were analyzed: 149 (41.2%; treated group) received (neo) adjuvant chemotherapy and 213 (58.6%; control group) did not. The median follow-up for the OS endpoint was 5.1 years (95% CI: 4.0–5.5). The OS-HR was 0.58 (95%CI: 0.40–0.83; p-value = 0.003) in the univariate analysis and 0.74 (95% CI: 0.38–1.43; p = 0.367) in the PSM analysis. The DFS-HR was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.57–0.98; p-value = 0.036) in the univariate analysis, and 0.91 (95% CI:0.56–1.48; p-value = 0.7) in the PSM analysis. The DMFS-HR was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.55–1.02; p-value = 0.065) in univariate analysis and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.53–1.61; p-value = 0.769) in the PSM analysis. Subgroup analysis revealed no heterogeneity of results in strata of tumor site. On the contrary, there was a trend for heterogeneity according to tumor size and patient's risk of death. For all the endpoints analyzed, patients with tumors smaller than 50 mm or at lower risk of death seem to have no benefit from chemotherapy, while patients with larger tumors or at higher risk of death at 10 years seem to derive substantial benefit. Conclusion: This large, retrospective study suggests that patients affected by > 50 mm and/or high-risk primary, localized angiosarcoma could benefit from (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy.

Importance Thymic carcinoma (TC) is a rare aggressive tumour occurring in adults characterised by one of the lowest tumor mutational burdens (TMB). Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a mutational signature, caused by defects in the DNA MisMatch Repair (MMR) system, that predicts benefit from immunotherapy and causes high TMB. Fragmentary and unstructured evidence of these conditions co-occurring are reported in literature. Objective Review available data on the co-occurrence of these two conditions and determine its frequency in our institute case series. Design We performed a systematic analysis of literature and a retrospective evaluation of all the cases of TET treated at our institution from 2000 to 2020, selecting patients with a medical history of multiple tumours to enhance a priori probability of identifying cases with underlying predisposition. Results Literature yielded 3 cases of patients with MSI TC, for which MMR gene alteration was reported. None of them received immunotherapy. Of 366 patients with TETs treated in our institute, 32 had a medical history of multiple tumours and 25 of 32 (19 thymomas and 6 TCs) had available tissue for MMR analysis. One patient with TC showed a high TMB, and MSI due to MLH1 mutation and was treated in a phase II study with avelumab and axitinib combination obtaining a long-lasting partial response. MLH1 alterations are shared across MSI TC cases. Conclusions and relevance This analysis highlights the usefulness of MSI testing in patients with TC. The observation of cases of TC occurring in patients with Lynch syndrome and the unexpected homogeneity of gene alterations support further investigation.

BackgroundFollowing the introduction of immunotherapy (IO) in the first-line (1L) treatment in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without sensitizing EGFR/ALK mutations, increasing real-world data depict how difficult it is to replicate data from clinical trials to clinical practice, with high rates of early treatment failure. In the context of chemo-IO, our study aims to compare platinum-pemetrexed-pembrolizumab combination to platinum-doublet alone in patients with low PD-L1 (MethodsWe retrospectively collected medical records from patients with stage IV non-squamous NSCLC with PD-L1ResultsOverall, 105 patients were included: 49 in group A and 56 in group B. At data cut-off, median follow-up was 12.4 and 34.8 months, with 32/49 and 52/56 events for progression-free survival (PFS) and 21/49 and 29/56 events for overall survival (OS), respectively. No difference in PFS was observed between group B and group A (6.6 versus 8 months, HR 1.12, 95%CI 0.57-1.40). Patients receiving 1L platinum-doublet had significantly longer OS compared to those receiving chemo-IO (median OS 23.8 vs 14.9 months, HR 0.47, 95% CI 1.15- 3.98, p=0.01). 12 month-OS was 58% (95% CI 44-76%) in group A and 78% (95% CI 68-91%) in group B (p=0.040). Subgroup analysis identified KRAS G12C mutation as potentially affecting PFS in patients receiving chemo-IO (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0-10-0.91). The OS benefit of platinum-doublet was consistent across subgroups, with particular benefit in female sex, liver or pleural metastases, PD-L1 negative. Overall, only 46.9% of patients with progression received subsequent treatment in group A (15/32), compared to 86.5% in group B (45/52, all receiving 2L IO), with no difference in PFS to 2L (group A 3.7months, group B 4.1months, p=0.3).ConclusionsDespite small study population and differential follow-up, our study demonstrates that sequential use of 1L platinum-doublet and 2L IO is not inferior to 1L chemo-IO in non-squamous NSCLC with PD-L1

Recent evidence highlights patients' sex relevance in antitumor immune response through a complex interaction-among hormones, genes, behaviors, and the microbiome-that affects both innate and adaptive immune functions, as well as immune evasion mechanisms. These complex interactions ultimately influence the efficacy and toxicity of immune checkpoint inhibitors in solid tumors.

Proto-oncogene KIT is the gene encoding the receptor tyrosine kinase protein KIT. Activating mutations are found in 2.9% of neoplasms, with the highest prevalence in gastrointestinal stromal tumour. Exon 17 mutations typically alter the kinase activation loop and are relatively rare, representing 11.7% of all activating KIT mutations. Recently, KIT exon 17 mutants turned out to be a potential molecular target for the type 1 kinase inhibitor avapritinib (BLU-285).In this framework, we aimed at investigating the potential activity of avapritinib in mucosal melanoma and thymic carcinoma, two disease histologies with dismal prognosis, currently lacking evidence-based second line treatment options and in which KIT exon 17 activating mutations could represent a relevant therapeutic target.In this series, we report the only four cases of patients affected by exon 17 mutant mucosal melanoma and thymic carcinoma that have been treated in Italy with avapritinib within a Compassionate Use Program. Two patients harboured mucosal melanoma and the other two were diagnosed with thymic carcinoma. We describe a differential activity of avapritinib (3/4 patients responded, 1/4 did not respond), along with possible hypotheses to justify such differences and potential implications for precision oncology.Taken together, the inactivity of imatinib on KIT exon 17 mutations, the general low clinical efficacy of immunotherapy, as well as the consequent formal lack of standard available and active second line systemic treatments in both mucosal melanoma and thymic carcinoma, support the implementation of avapritinib in the therapeutic armamentarium, even though further prospective evidence is warranted.

Background: Limited evidence is available on effectiveness of clinicoradiological follow-up of early-stage NSCLC patients. MAGRIT was a phase III adjuvant RCT conducted in surgically resected stage IB-IIIA NSCLC patients, in which all participants had a prospectively defined intensive clinicoradiological follow-up. Methods: At patient-level data, we analyzed detection modality of disease recurrences and new primary lung cancer (i.e. detected by clinicoradiological scheduled exams versus by interim unscheduled exams), features associated with higher risk of locoregional and/or distant recurrence, and recurrence rates over time. Results: In the 2261 patients studied, there was a significant association between the type of recurrence and the modality of detection: 88.4% (95% CI, 84%–91%) of the locoregional recurrences and 93.2% (95% CI, 84%–99%) of the new primary lung cancers were detected by scheduled exams, whereas this was only 68.7% (95% CI, 65%–73%) for distant metastases (p < 0.001). Survival of patients with locoregional recurrence or new primary lung cancer detected by scheduled exams was significantly better as compared with those detected by unscheduled exams (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.36–0.87; p = 0.01). Survival was similarly poor in patients with distant recurrences, both with scheduled and unscheduled detection (3-year survival after recurrence 22.0% and 21.8%, respectively). Recurrence rate was the highest in the first 18 months after surgery—with a peak between month 6 and 12—decreasing thereafter. The hazard of a second primary lung cancer was constant over time. Conclusion: Intensive follow-up is effective in detecting locoregional recurrences and second primary lung cancers, with impact on patients’ survival but did not influence the detection of distant recurrences.

BACKGROUND/AIM The role of anti-PD1/PD-L1 therapy (IO) in NSCLC harboring driver mutations is questionable. This study aimed to examine the efficacy of IO in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a KRAS mutation (KRAS+). PATIENTS AND METHODS We retrospectively identified NSCLC patients harboring KRAS mutation treated with IO in our Institution. We analyzed the results in comparison to non-KRAS patients. RESULTS Among 328 consecutive KRAS+ NSCLC patients, 43 (13.1%) received IO in our Institution. In parallel 117 non-KRAS NSCLC patients treated with IO were selected for comparison. The baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. No significant difference was observed between KRAS+ and non-KRAS patients in terms of mPFS (4.6 vs. 3.3 months, p=0.58) or OS (8.1 vs. 13.0 months, p=0.38). CONCLUSION KRAS mutations seem to be irrelevant for selecting patients for IO that could be therefore considered an effective therapy for NSCLC patients, independently of KRAS status.

Surgery is the best option for patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the rate of local and metastatic recurrences following surgery alone is high, especially in NSCLC patients with N2 lymph node involvement. A recent American study [1] showed that 60% of lung cancers are diagnosed in an advanced stage, and less than 20% are diagnosed in an early, resectable stage. The same study reported the 5-year survival of patients with stage IV NSCLC was 6% compared to 50% in patients with resectable NSCLC depending by stage. The addition of adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy only improves 5-year survival by 5-10%. Recently, immunotherapy with or without chemotherapy and novel targeted therapies have yielded excellent results, in terms of both progression-free survival and overall survival, in advanced NSCLC. Published studies have shown a benefit in using immunotherapy and targeted therapy in both the adjuvant and neoadjuvant settings with many further studies still ongoing. Here we review the published data on immunotherapy and targeted therapy in the adjuvant and neoadjuvant settings in patients with operable NSCLC.

Purpose: We previously demonstrated that sex influences response to immune checkpoint inhibitors. In this article, we investigate sex-based differences in the molecular mechanisms of anticancer immune response and immune evasion in patients with NSCLC. Experimental Design: We analyzed (i) transcriptome data of 2,575 early-stage NSCLCs from seven different datasets; (ii) 327 tumor samples extensively characterized at the molecular level from the TRACERx lung study; (iii) two independent cohorts of 329 and 391 patients, respectively, with advanced NSCLC treated with anti–PD-1/anti–PD-L1 drugs. Results: As compared with men, the tumor microenvironment (TME) of women was significantly enriched for a number of innate and adaptive immune cell types, including specific T-cell subpopulations. NSCLCs of men and women exploited different mechanisms of immune evasion. The TME of females was characterized by significantly greater T-cell dysfunction status, higher expression of inhibitory immune checkpoint molecules, and higher abundance of immune-suppressive cells, including cancer-associated fibroblasts, MDSCs, and regulatory T cells. In contrast, the TME of males was significantly enriched for a T-cell–excluded phenotype. We reported data supporting impaired neoantigens presentation to immune system in tumors of men, as molecular mechanism explaining the findings observed. Finally, in line with our results, we showed significant sex-based differences in the association between TMB and outcome of patients with advanced NSCLC treated with anti–PD-1/PD-L1 drugs. Conclusions: We demonstrated meaningful sex-based differences of anticancer immune response and immune evasion mechanisms, that may be exploited to improve immunotherapy efficacy for both women and men.

In February 2020, Italy became one of the first countries to be plagued by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, COVID-19. In March 2020, the Italian government decreed a lockdown for the whole country, which overturned communication systems, hospital organization, and access to patients and their relatives and carers. This issue had a particular regard for cancer patients. Our Thoracic Oncology Division therefore reorganized patient access in order to reduce the risk of contagion and, at the same time, encourage the continuation of treatment. Our staff contacted all patients to inform them of any changes in treatment planning, check that they were taking safety measures, and ascertain their feelings and whether they had any COVID-19 symptoms. To better understand patients’ fears and expectations of during the pandemic period, we created a nine-question interview, administered from April to May 2020 to 156 patients with lung cancer. Patients were classified by age, sex, comorbidity, disease stage, prior treatment, and treatment type. The survey showed that during the pandemic period some patients experienced fear of COVID-19, in particular: women (55% vs. 33%), patients with comorbidities (24% vs. 9%), and patients who had already received prior insult (radiotherapy or surgery) on the lung (30% vs. 11%). In addition, the patients who received oral treatment at home or for whom intravenous treatment was delayed, experienced a sense of relief (90% and 72% respectively). However, only 21% of the patients were more afraid of COVID-19 than of their cancer, in particular patients with long-term (> 12 months) vs. short-term cancer diagnosis (28% vs. 12.5%, respectively). Furthermore, the quarantine period or even just the lockdown period alone, worsened the quality of life of some patients (40%), especially those in oral treatment (47%). Our data demonstrate how lung cancer patients are more afraid of their disease than of a world pandemic. Also this interview indirectly highlights the clinician’s major guiding principle in correctly and appropriately managing not just the patient’s expectations of their illness and its treatment, but also and especially of the patient’s fears.

In this coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) era, when pneumonitis occurs in patients with lung cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), a major challenge is to make a rapid and correct differential diagnosis among drug-induced pulmonary toxicity, tumour progression, and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)–induced pneumonitis. While waiting for polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing results, an accurate evaluation of the symptoms and serologic features can help us make a first diagnostic hypothesis and quickly start correct treatment. Physicians need a collaborative effort to develop and share a common database reporting clinical (anosmia, dysgeusia), serologic, and radiologic data in ICI-treated patients with lung cancer developing interstitial disease to create an evidence-based clinical diagnostic algorithm. This tool will continue to be helpful when we emerge from the pandemic crisis into a world in which COVID-19 may not have been eradicated to better select the target population requiring the most resource-consuming PCR tests.

A novel coronavirus causing severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), named SARS-CoV-2, was identified at the end of 2019. The spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has progressively expanded from China, involving several countries throughout the world, leading to the classification of the disease as a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). According to published reports, COVID-19 severity and mortality are higher in elderly patients and those with active comorbidities. In particular, lung cancer patients were reported to be at high risk of pulmonary complications related to SARS-CoV2 infection. Therefore, the management of cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic is a crucial issue, to which national and international oncology organizations have replied with recommendations concerning patients receiving anticancer treatments, delaying follow-up visits and limiting caregiver admission to the hospitals. In this historical moment, medical oncologists are required to consider the possibility to delay active treatment administration based on a case-by-case risk/benefit evaluation. Potential risks associated with COVID-19 infection should be considered, considering tumor histology and natural course, disease setting, clinical conditions, and disease burden, together with the expected benefit, toxicities (e.g., myelosuppression or interstitial lung disease), and response obtained from the planned or ongoing treatment. In this study, we report the results of proactive measures including social media, telemedicine, and telephone triage for screening patients with lung cancer during the COVID-19 outbreak in the European Institute of Oncology (Milan, Italy). Proactive management and containment measures, applied in a structured and daily way, has significantly aided the identification of advance patients with suspected symptoms related to COVID-19, limiting their admission to our cancer center; we have thus been more able to protect other patients from possible contamination and at the same time guarantee to the suspected patients the immediate treatment and evaluation in referral hospitals for COVID-19.

Background Results of several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) testing the combination of an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) plus an anti-angiogenic drug in advanced EGFR-mutated non–small cell lung cancer were reported. Methods We first report a systematic review and meta-analysis of all RCTs to estimate effectiveness and toxicity of this new therapeutic approach compared with first-generation EGFR-TKI monotherapy. Subsequently, we present a network meta-analysis comparing the combination of an EGFR-TKI plus an anti-angiogenic drug with 2 new treatment options: combination of an EGFR-TKI plus chemotherapy or new EGFR-TKIs of second or third generation as monotherapy. Results Five RCTs were included in the first meta-analysis. The progression-free survival (PFS) was statistically significantly larger in patients treated with an EGFR-TKI plus an anti-angiogenic drug compared with EGFR-TKI monotherapy: the pooled PFS–hazard ratio (HR) was 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.51 to 0.69). The pooled median-PFS was 17.8 months (95% CI = 16.5 to 19.3 months) for the combination vs 11.7 months (95% CI = 11.1 to 12.7 months) for EGFR-TKI as monotherapy. No statistically significant differences between the 2 treatment arms were observed in overall survival or objective response rate. The rate of grade equal or higher than 3 adverse events was statistically significantly higher in patients treated with EGFR-TKI plus an anti-angiogenic drug: the pooled-relative risk was 1.72 (95% CI = 1.43 to 2.06). Ten RCTs were included in the network meta-analysis. All 3 experimental treatments were associated with a statistically significant improvement in PFS compared with first-generation EGFR-TKIs. When compared to each other, none of the 3 experimental treatments were statistically significantly associated with larger PFS or lower rate of grade 3 or higher adverse events. Conclusion Patients with EGFR-mutated non small-cell lung cancer derived clinically meaningful larger PFS benefit from the addition of an anti-angiogenic drug to a first-generation EGFR-TKI at the cost of an increase of toxicities.

Background In our previous works, we demonstrated that patients’ sex affects the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with several advanced solid tumors. Here, we assessed the sex-based heterogeneity of efficacy of anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (anti-PD-1)/anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (anti-PD-L1) given as monotherapy, for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) expressing high PD-L1 levels, to evaluate if available evidence supports this therapeutic option for both women and men. Methods We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis including all randomized, controlled trials testing anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 drugs in monotherapy, as first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC expressing high PD-L1 levels. The primary endpoint was the difference in efficacy of anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 drugs versus chemotherapy, between men and women, measured in terms of the difference in overall survival (OS) log [hazard ratio (HR)] reported in male and female study participants. Results We analyzed four randomized, controlled trials, including 1672 patients, of whom 1224 (73.2%) were men and 448 (26.8%) were women. The pooled OS-HR comparing anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 versus chemotherapy was 0.59 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.50-0.69] for men and only 0.84 (95% CI, 0.64-1.10) for women. The pooled ratio of the OS-HRs reported in men versus women was 0.71 (95% CI, 0.52-0.98; P-heterogeneity: 0.04), indicating a significantly greater effect for men. No heterogeneity among single-study estimates was observed in either male patients (Q = 2.39, P = 0.50, I2 = 0%) or in female patients (Q = 1.13, P = 0.50, I2 = 0%). Conclusion Evidence available indicates anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 monotherapy as highly effective in men but not in women, even in NSCLCs expressing high PD-L1 levels. Prospective trials testing sex-based tailored immunotherapy strategies are needed., Highlights • Sex-based heterogeneity of efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors. • Sex-tailored immunotherapy strategies. • NSCLC expressing high PD-L1 levels.

Engineered cytokine products represent promising agents for the treatment of immunogenic tumors, such as malignant melanoma, in addition to immune checkpoint inhibitors. Here we describe the results of a controlled, randomized phase II clinical trial, aimed at assessing the therapeutic potential of L19IL2, a fully human fusion protein consisting of the L19 antibody specific to the alternatively spliced extra-domain B of fibronectin, fused to human interleukin-2 in advanced metastatic melanoma. In one arm, patients received dacarbazine (DTIC; 1000mg/m2 of body surface on day 1 of 21-day cycles) as single agent, while in two other arms L19IL2 (22.5 million international units of IL2 equivalents) was added, based on two different schedules of administration. In total, 69 patients with stage IV melanoma were enrolled (24 in the dacarbazine arm, 23 and 22 in the other combination arms, respectively) and 67 received treatment. Analyses of efficacy results show a statistically significant benefit in terms of overall response rate and median progression-free survival for patients receiving L19IL2 in combination with DTIC, compared to DTIC as single agent. In light of these results, further clinical investigations with L19IL2 (alone or in combination with other agents) are warranted.

Immunotherapy is a new standard first-line treatment for non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) with high programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression (≥ 50%) and second-line treatment regardless of PD-L1 status, though not all patients benefit from this approach. Much effort is ongoing to identify robust prognostic and predictive biomarkers of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors, overcoming PD-L1 that appears limited in its ability to discriminate patient candidates to this new class of anticancer agents. The purpose of this research study is to identify potential new biomarkers for immunotherapy in lung cancer.Fifty-three consecutive patients with advanced NSCLC treated with nivolumab were enrolled in the study. All the patients received a blood analysis looking for the relationship between different populations of baseline white blood cells and granulocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells (Gr-MDSC) detected by flow cytometry, to identify and characterize patients with poor likelihood of benefit from nivolumab in NSCLC second-line setting, regardless of clinical feature and PDL1 expression.Univariate analysis showed that high baseline levels of Gr-MDSC and low baseline CD8/Gr-MDSC ratio are associated with significantly better (P = 0.02) response to immunotherapy treatment. Log-rank tests suggested a significant improvement in OS and PFS with high baseline levels of Gr-MDSC levels (≥ 6 cell/μl), low absolute neutrophil count ( 5840/μl), high eosinophil count ( 90 /μl), and NLR 3. The multivariate analysis showed a statistically significant improvement for PFS (P = 0.003) and OS (P = 0.05) in favour of the identified good prognostic Gr-MDSC-linked asset group, compared with the poor prognosis group.The role of Gr-MDSC appears interesting as a potential biomarker in NSCLC patients receiving immune-checkpoint inhibitors. Further analyses are needed to confirmed and study in deep the role of these particular cells and their role in cancer response and progression during ICI therapy.

HER2 mutations are uncommon molecular mutations in nonesmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (4%). Tyrosine kinase inhibitors, such as erlotinib or gefitinib, have demonstrated promising results in patients with advanced NSCLC who harbor epidermal growth factor receptor mutations. Human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2/ERBB2/neu) is a member of the ERBB family of tyrosine kinase receptors, and is activated by homodimerisation or heterodimerisation with other ERBB receptors. It is possible that NSCLC patients with HER2 mutations could benefit from targeted therapy. There are some data on afatinib and trastuzumab activity in this subgroup of patients. There are no data on the efficacy of immunotherapy in patients harboring epidermal growth factor receptor or ERB2 mutations. The results of CheckMate 057 suggested that, among patients harboring druggable mutations, better outcomes were achieved with docetaxel treatment than with nivolumab (84 patients). We report the first case of a patient with a HER2 mutation treated with nivolumab: this case suggests that nivolumab has strong activity even in patients with targeting biomarkers, in particular with advanced HER2-positive lung cancer.

e21114 Background: Patients (pts) with advanced B3 thymoma (B3T) and thymic carcinoma (TC) resistant to chemotherapy have limited treatment options. Treatment with Anti-PD1 showed not negligible toxicity and limited activity, and anti-VEGFR drugs obtained limited and short lasting antitumor responses. No data on combined anti-PD1/PD-L1 with antiangiogenic drugs are available in B3T/TC. We report preliminary results on safety and activity of avelumab combined with axitinib in this pts population. Methods: The CAVEATT is a single arm, multicentric, phase II trial in immunotherapy-naive pts with advanced B3T or TC, progressing after at least one line of platinum based chemotherapy. Prior therapy with antiangiogenic drugs is allowed. Pts received Avelumab 10 mg/kg iv every 2 weeks and Axitinib 5 mg twice a day until progression or toxicity. The primary objective of the study is overall response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1; secondary endpoints include ORR by irRC and ITMIG, and QoL by EORTC QLQ-C30. An interim futility analysis is planned after the enrollment of the first 18 patients. If at least 5 out of 18 patients will obtain a PR, the accrual will continue to reach the total number of 33 pts, according with a Simon’s minimax design. Tumor and blood samples are collected at baseline and whenever feasible at disease progression, to identify predictive biomarkers of response and mechanisms of resistance to treatment. Results: 1 pt with B3T and 12 with TC were enrolled from April 2019 to January 2020. Median age was 59 years (range 33-77). 8 pts received ≥2 previous line of therapies, and 6 pts were pretreated with an antiangiogenic drug. The median follow-up was 5.1 months. 10 pts were evaluable for response. The proportions of patients who achieved a partial response (PR) or a stable disease (SD) were respectively 40% (95% CI 17%–69%) and 60% (95% CI 30%–83%). The median PFS was 7.9 months (95% CI 2.5–NA) 12 pts were evaluable for toxicity. Treatment-related adverse events (AE) of grade 1 or 2 occurred in 7 (58%) pts, and the most common was diarrhea (3 pts). Grade ≥3 AEs occurred in 2 (17%) pts: 1 had G3 hyperthension and 1 G3 hand foot syndrome, both leading to axitinib drug reduction. No immune-related AEs (irAEs) were observed. No patient stopped treatment for toxicity, 5 pts stopped for progressive disease, and 8 pts are still on treatment. Conclusions: Preliminary results suggest promising antitumor activity and a good toxicity profile of the combination of axitinib and avelumab in pts with advanced B3T and TC. Accrual is ongoing to reach the target of 33 pts Clinical trial information: 2017-004048-38 .

Subjects referred to genetic counselling for cancer may have heightened perceptions of illness and death, even though they are healthy and this may cause anxiety and reluctance to follow through with consultation. We investigated such perceptions before and after counselling and genetic testing for cancer in a cohort of Italian women. We sought to understand the situation of the women referred by designing questionnaires administered to women at high risk of breast and/or ovarian cancer (those who had had a pathogenic mutation identified in a family member via diagnostic testing). We also assessed women after the diagnosis of breast cancers, but free of disease, to help determine risks in their families. The first questionnaires were administered before initial counselling, and the second were completed within 20 days after the counselling. When a genetic test was proposed, the individual was asked to fill in a third questionnaire; the final questionnaire was administered after the person had received the results of the genetic test. We evaluated 204 subjects. Before counselling, 89 % of the subjects were worried about their risk of disease, 52 % felt “different” because of their personal and family history, and 39 % declared that their life choices were influenced by their fear of cancer. After counselling, 82 % of the subjects felt more relived about their pre-existing fears and stated that this process of being seen in a clinic with genetic expertise had clarified the meaning of disease risk for them, and for 50 %, this experience had positively influenced their life choices. Thirty percentage of the subjects had a positive test; all of them felt safer in being cared for by specifically trained staff. Fifty percentage had a less informative test (e.g. “wild-type” gene found); 84 % of them were not worried by the uncertainty, and overall, 96 % considered counselling to be very useful. Candidates for genetic counselling frequently had heightened their perception of being ill, which influenced their ability to make life decisions. Genetic counselling often improves this perception, especially in subjects who have negative tests and this knowledge facilitates their life plans. After testing, most women felt satisfied and safer because of being properly followed by professionally trained and sympathetic staff. In conclusion, knowledge of the real individual risk, the presence of a professional team, and the possibility of entering a programme of controlled screening enable patients rather than living in fear and uncertainty to be less anxious about their state of health and to live with the knowledge that they are doing everything possible to care for themselves, aided by a specialized team, and that, if necessary, they would be able to take part in investigational studies.

The discovery of ALK rearrangement in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) triggered rapid clinical development of a family of specific drugs targeting this alteration, called ALK inhibitors. Despite high rate of responses, the vast majority of patients treated with first-generation ALK inhibitor crizotinib will ultimately develop disease progression. The second-generation ALK inhibitor, ceritinib, is an oral, small-molecule that inhibits the ALK kinase activity with a potency 20-fold greater than crizotinib, being able to tackle some of the principal mechanisms of resistance to crizotinib. Evidences from five large prospective clinical trials have so far showed impressive activity of ceritinib in ALK inhibitor pretreated and naive NSCLC patients. This review will focus on the preclinical and clinical data available regarding ceritinib pharmacology, clinical efficacy and safety profile.

We report the case of a man with an advanced nonkeratinizing squamous cell thymic carcinoma harboring c-KIT exon 13 missense mutation K642E. This aberration is rare and has never been described previously in patients with thymic cancers. It has been found in a small number of cases of gastrointestinal stromal tumor and also in several cases of acral and mucosal melanomas. Some of the patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor or melanoma harboring this rare mutation have had a tumor response when treated with imatinib. In contrast, in our case, the mutation was associated with primary resistance to full doses of imatinib but, at the same time, it was not a cause of resistance to sorafenib.

Background: Classification of lung carcinoids into typical and atypical is a diagnostic challenge since no immunohistochemical tools are available to support pathologists in distinguishing between the two subtypes. A differential diagnosis is essential for clinicians to correctly discuss therapy, prognosis and follow-up with patients. Indeed, the distinction between the two typical and atypical subtypes on biopsies/cytological specimens is still unfeasible and sometimes limited also after radical surgeries. By comparing the gene expression profile of typical (TC) and atypical carcinoids (AC), we intended to find genes specifically expressed in one of the two subtypes that could be used as diagnostic markers. Methods: Expression profiling, with Affymetrix arrays, was performed on six typical and seven atypical samples. Data were validated on an independent cohort of 29 tumours, by means of quantitative PCR and immunohistochemistry (IHC). Results: High-throughput gene expression profiling was successfully used to identify a gene signature specific for atypical lung carcinoids. Among the 273 upregulated genes in the atypical vs typical subtype, GC (vitamin D-binding protein) and CEACAM1 (carcinoembryonic antigen family member) emerged as potent diagnostic markers. Quantitative PCR and IHC on a validation set of 17 ACs and 12 TCs confirmed their reproducibility and feasibility. Conclusions: GC and CEACAM1 can distinguish between TC and AC, defining an IHC assay potentially useful for routine cytological and histochemical diagnostic procedures. The high sensitivity and reproducibility of this new diagnostic algorithm strongly support a further validation on a wider sample size. Gene expression microarrays can be used to identify signatures specific for tumour subtypes, allowing the classification into categories with a potential impact on clinical practice. In lung cancer, expression profiling unravelled interesting aspects regarding early diagnosis

The identification of EGFR mutations and their respectively tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), changed dramatically treatment and survival of patients with EGFR-positive lung cancer. Nowadays, different EGFR TKIs as afatinib, erlotinib and gefitinib are approved worldwide for the treatment of NSCLC harbouring EGFR mutations, in particular exon 19 deletions or exon 21 (Leu858Arg) substitution EGFR mutations. In first-line setting, when comparing with platinum-based chemotherapy, these target drugs improves progression-free survival, response rate and quality of life. Unfortunately, the development of different mechanism of resistance, limits the long term efficacy of these agents. The most clear mechanism of resistance is the development of EGFR Thr790Met mutation. Against this new target, different third-generation EGFR-mutant-selective TKIs, such as osimertinib, rociletinib and olmutinib, showed a great activity. In this review, we summarize the scientific evidences about biology, evaluation and treatment on NSCLC with EGFR T790M mutation.

Acknowledgements section was missing.

The development of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) changed dramatically the history of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring EGFR sensitive mutations. Several randomized prospective trials confirmed the superiority of these target agents about survival and response rate when comparing with platinum-based chemotherapy. Knowledge about EGFR mutations increased gradually during the development of target agents and different clinical trials. EGFR mutations cannot be considered all equal, but different entities should be considered in our clinical practice: exon 19 deletions, exon 21 mutation (L858R) and uncommon mutation (exon 20, exon 18 and double mutation). Nowadays, we dispose of three different EGFR TKIs (afatinib, erlotinib and gefitinib) approved for the treatment for first-line treatment of patients di NSCLC carrying EGFR, that was compared only by indirect analysis, producing data not always clear and convincing. This research highlight is an overview of data about EGFR TKIs in first-line setting, focusing on differences about exon 19 deletions and L585R mutation in patients treated with different TKIs. In addition, we report the preliminary results of the first head-to-head randomized clinical trial between two different EGFR TKIs, the LUX-Lung 7 (LL7) that compared afatinib and gefitinib showing interesting results.

Introduction Mutations of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) have been proven to predict activity of the EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKI), gefitinib and erlotinib. Although the "common" EGFR mutations, such as the L858R point mutation in exon 21 and the in-frame deletional mutation in exon 19, have been definitively associated with response to EGFR-TKIs, the correlation with response to treatment for many other rarer mutations is still unclear. In this study, we report the results of treating patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer harboring rare EGFR mutations treated with EGFR-TKIs. Methods The frequency of rare mutations has been investigated in 681 cases of non-small cell lung cancer screened between 2006 and 2010. Mutations in exons 18 and 20, uncommon mutations in exons 19 and 21, and/or the presence of different mutations in a single tumor (complex mutations) were considered rare. Results EGFR mutations were detected in 99 tumors (14.5%). Eighteen cases carried rare mutations, and 10 of these patients were treated with erlotinib or gefitinib. The clinical outcome was described case by case with references to the literature. Of note, we found two EGFR mutations never identified before and one of unknown response to EGFR-TKIs. Conclusions Gefitinib and erlotinib have different antitumor activity according to the type of the EGFR mutation borne. Report of cases harboring rare mutations can support the decision-making process in this subset of patients.

Purpose: NGR-hTNF exploits the tumor-homing peptide asparagine-glycine-arginine (NGR) for selectively targeting TNF-α to an aminopeptidase N overexpressed on cancer endothelial cells. Preclinical synergism with cisplatin was displayed even at low doses. This study primarily aimed to explore the safety of low-dose NGR-hTNF combined with cisplatin in resistant/refractory malignancies. Secondary aims included pharmacokinetics (PKs), pharmacodynamics, and activity. Experimental Design: NGR-hTNF was escalated using a doubling-dose scheme (0.2–0.4–0.8–1.6 μg/m2) in combination with fixed-dose of cisplatin (80 mg/m2), both given intravenously once every three weeks. PKs and circulating TNF-receptors (sTNF-Rs) were assessed over the first three cycles. Results: Globally, 22 patients (12 pretreated with platinum) received a range of one to ten cycles. Consistently with the low-dose range tested, maximum-tolerated dose was not reached. No dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed at 0.2 (n = 4) and 0.4 μg/m2 (n = 3). One DLT (grade 3 infusion-related reaction) was observed at 0.8 μg/m2. This dose cohort was expanded to six patients without further DLTs. No DLTs were noted also at 1.6 μg/m2 (n = 3). NGR-hTNF exposure increased dose-proportionally without apparent PK interactions with cisplatin. No shedding of sTNF-Rs was detected up to 0.8 μg/m2. At the dose level of 0.8 μg/m2, expanded to 12 patients for activity assessment, a platinum-pretreated lung cancer patient achieved a partial response lasting more than six months and five patients maintained stable disease for a median time of 5.9 months. Conclusions: The combination of NGR-hTNF 0.8 μg/m2 with cisplatin 80 mg/m2 showed favorable toxicity profile and promising antitumor activity. Clin Cancer Res; 17(7); 1964–72. ©2011 AACR.

Background: Patients invited to take part in a clinical trial may evoke an archetype on which they may base their decision of adherence to participation, instead of on the study itself. Methods: A 17-item, multiple choice questionnaire was developed, tested and then administered to 102 Italian-speaking patients with advanced lung or breast cancers who had never been exposed to participation in a trial. Results: The questionnaire was answered by all patients. Eighty-five percent were positive about trial participation. Demographic factors did not influence patients’ willingness to participate. Trust in the investigator (76%) or in the institute (64%) and hope of receiving a new chance for cure (78%) were cited as reasons to accept participation. A minority was concerned by potential conflicts of interest (31%) or the thought of being ‘guinea pigs’ (36%), and feared that doctors were interested in advancing their own research, even though there were more efficient drugs available (28%). Fifty percent feared receiving a little-known medicine, and 76% considered that a thorough explanation of toxicity/safety of the proposed treatment helped them decide. Conclusion: Several prejudices, fears and some hopes have been captured by the questionnaire. Understanding such specifics will improve patient information leading patients to a more conscious motivation in deciding whether to participate in a clinical trial.

Background The combination of capecitabine and vinorelbine is a potentially valuable treatment regimen for patients with advanced-stage breast cancer. The drugs are easy to administer and do not cause significant alopecia. In order to identify the spectrum of toxicity of a regimen containing 2 drugs, we conducted an extended phase I study aimed at defining maximum tolerated doses, recommended doses, safety, and efficacy in patients with pretreated advanced-stage breast cancer. Patients and Methods Forty-nine patients with advanced-stage breast cancer were treated with escalating doses of oral capecitabine from 500 mg/m 2 to 1375 mg/m 2 twice daily on days 1-14 and escalating doses of vinorelbine from 12.5 mg/m 2 to 25 mg/m 2 intravenously (I.V.) on days 1 and 3 every 3 weeks. Almost all patients (90%) had received ≥ 3 previous treatments for metastatic disease (anthracyclines, 76%; 5-flourouracil, 76%; taxanes, 29%). Results Dose level 9 (capecitabine 1250 mg/m 2 twice daily on days 1-14 and vinorelbine 22.5 mg/m 2 I.V. on days 1 and 3) was identified as the maximum tolerated dose. The most frequent clinical adverse events were nausea (78%), asthenia (59%), constipation (51%), mucositis (47%), and hand-foot syndrome (41%). The majority of events were mild to moderate; the only grade 4 clinical adverse events were diarrhea, fever, and thromboembolism, each of which occurred in 1 patient (2%) at dose level 8. Objective confirmed responses were observed in 18 patients (37%), including 1 complete response (2%) and 17 partial responses (35%). Disease was stable in an additional 10 patients (20%), with a median duration of 6.3 months (range, 4-24 months). Conclusion The combination of the 2 drugs is very well tolerated and effective, especially considering the previous exposure to chemotherapy. The recommended dose for further phase II studies should be capecitabine 1250 mg/m 2 twice daily on days 1-14 and vinorelbine 22.5 mg/m 2 I.V. on days 1 and 3.

The anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody nivolumab is clinically active in a variety of tumor types including squamous (sq) and non-squamous (non-sq) NSCLC in second-line, where randomized phase III trials have shown a survival benefit. However, no predictive/prognostic or dynamic biomarkers have been found so far to correlate with clinical benefit in patients treated with anti-PD-1 antibodies. The aim of the present study is to investigate the potential role of baseline peripheral blood cell counts in relation to survival and response rate in NSCLC patients treated with nivolumab in a second-line setting. From July to May 2016 we evaluated 45 patients with Sq (n = 10) and non-Sq (n = 35) NSCLC, previously treated with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, who received nivolumab 3 mg/kg IV on day 1 of each 2 week treatment cycle. Clinical characteristics (T-Stage, lymph nodes involvement, M-Stage) were assessed. Total numbers of white blood cells, myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs, including both monocytic [Mo-MDSC]) and polymorphonuclear [PMN-MDSC] types), regulatory T cells (T-regs), and serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) were assessed. Endpoints were correlations with objective response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS, categorized as ≤ 3 or > 3 months) and overall survival (OS). Tumor response was assessed using RECIST criteria, version 1.1, at week 9 and every 6 weeks thereafter until disease progression. Statistical investigations were based on univariate analyses by the Wilcoxon rank test. The median PFS of the overall study population was 3 months. Data about PMN-MDSCs (identified by flow cytometry as Lin-CD15+CD14-CD11b+HLA-DRlow/-), Mo-MDSCs (Lin-CD14-CD11b+HLA-DRlow/-) and absolute eosinophil count (AEC) were available in 37/45 patients (82% of treated patients). Baseline absolute numbers of PMN-MDSCs, Mo-MDSCs and AEC were greater in patients with a good prognosis (PFS > 3 months) and a better RR. In particular, among patients with shorter PFS and lower RR, the median numbers of PMN-MDSCs, Mo-MDSCs and AEC were significantly lower than those detected in patients with longer PFS (4 vs 13 cell/µl, p=0.01; 4 vs 21 cell/µl, p=0.06; 55 vs 155 cell/µl; p=0.02, respectively). Our data suggest that a baseline blood signature characterized by low levels of PMN-MDSCs, Mo-MDSCs and AEC is associated with a poor clinical outcome (median PFS ≤ of 3 months and low RR) in 67.6% of patients treated with nivolumab. In contrast, patients with high levels of these three biomarkers showed a median PFS significantly longer than 3 months and a higher RR. The OS analysis is ongoing, and further studies have been planned to understand whether this signature has a biomarker potential also in chemotherapy-naïve, first line NSCLC patients. Citation Format: Patrizia Mancuso, Antonio Passaro, Valentina Labanca, Sara Gandini, Gianluca Spitaleri, Elena Guerini, Massimo Barberis, Cristina Noberasco, Ester del Signore, Alessia Pochesci, Chiara Catania, Filippo De Marinis, Francesco Bertolini. Baseline myeloid-derived suppressor cell and eosinophil cell counts predict clinical efficacy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with nivolumab in second line [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 2635. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-2635

Introduction Recent data show that EGFR pathway and its inhibition maintain their role after progression of disease during EGFR TKI therapy in NSCLCs. We conducted a retrospective study with the aim of evaluating efficacy and feasibility of prosecution of EGFR TKI therapy beyond focal progression associated to locoregional radiotherapy. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the data of all NSCLC patients treated with EGFR TKIs in our institution from 2004 to 2012. We included in the analysis patients that after a focal disease progression, meant as a single lesion RECIST progression, have been treated with definitive locoregional radiotherapy, associated to continuation of EGFR TKI therapy until further progression. Results 15 out of 147 patients (10%) satisfied inclusion criteria. The median progression free survival, measured from the date of focal progression until further progression of disease or death by any cause, was 10,9 months (range 3–32 months). The corresponding 6 and 12 months PFS rates were 73% and 33%, respectively. Conclusion The longer disease control observed in our patients suggests that continuation of EGFR TKI beyond focal progression associated to a locoregional treatment is an efficacious therapeutic strategy.

10053Background: More than 40% of NSCLCs are diagnosed in patients older than 70 years. Elderly have more comorbidities and are less tolerant to chemio-radiotherapies than younger but targeted trea...

Author Summary Background. Molecular alterations of the PI3K and Ras pathways often occur in human cancer. In this trial, the pharmacokinetics, toxicity, and activity of two drugs inhibiting these pathways—everolimus and sorafenib—were investigated. Methods. Thirteen patients with progressing solid tumors were treated with everolimus and sorafenib, according to a 3+3 scheme. Patients were selected on the basis of immunohistochemical expression of tumor molecular targets, including phospho-AKT, -p70S6K, and -ERK1/2. Results. The daily recommended dose identified was 2.5 mg of everolimus and 600 mg of sorafenib. Dose-limiting toxicities included grade 3 asthenia and hand-foot skin reaction. No grade 4 adverse events were observed. The most frequent grade 3 toxicities were hypophosphatemia (30.8%), alanine aminotransferase level increase, asthenia, and anorexia (14%). No pharmacokinetic interactions were identified between everolimus and sorafenib. Of 12 evaluable patients, we observed 2 partial responses, with greater than 10% shrinkage in an additional 5 patients. Objective responses were observed in one patient with a thymoma and in one patient with a lung adenocarcinoma. Tumor shrinkage that did not qualify as a partial response was seen in an abdominal leiomyosarcoma and in adenoid cystic carcinomas. Conclusion. The combination of everolimus and sorafenib is safe. The tumor activity observed in different tumor types could be the result of the combined action of these drugs as well as the molecular selection of the treated population. Further research is warranted to better investigate drugs simultaneously blocking the PI3K and the Ras pathways and to refine patient selection.

The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of histology and site of analysis (primary tumor versus lymph node) on the expression of genes involved in gemcitabine and cisplatin activity in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Excision repair cross-complementing-1 (ERCC1), human equilibrative nucleoside transporter-1 (hENT1), deoxycytidine kinase (dCK), 5'-nucleotidase (5'-NT), cytidine deaminase (CDA) and ribonucleotide-reductase regulatory subunits (RRM1 and RRM2) were analyzed by quantitative-reverse transcription-PCR in 88 microdissected samples from 69 chemonaive patients. The results showed different patterns of expression for all studied genes, suggesting a possible stratification of the patients. No difference was observed between primary tumor and lymph node metastasis, as well as in adenocarcinoma and squamous-cell carcinoma specimens, while we found a correlation between the CDA-A79C polymorphism and gene expression levels. These data suggest a similar genetic susceptibility to gemcitabine-cisplatin regimens for squamous cell and adenocarcinoma and support the use of both lymph node and primary tumor for the expression profiling of NSCLC.

Background: despite the fact that the combination of gemcitabine (GCB) and docetaxel shows an increased benefit for disease-free survival and overall survival compared to GCB alone in patients with soft-tissue sarcoma, GCB mono-chemotherapy should be considered as a preferable option with respect to the combination because of its lower toxicity profile and the possibility of it being administered continuously for a long time period. Case report: we report a clinical case of a woman with advanced high-grade uterine leiomyosarcoma, refractory to ifosfamide, doxorubicin and trabectedin, who experienced a sustained and progressive response to GCB alone. Conclusions: GCB given as mono-chemotherapy can obtain long-lasting tumour control in patients heavily pre-treated with various chemotherapeutic regimes for uterine LMS and should be considered as a possible option for this subset of patients.

The development of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) is largely driven by mutations in the KIT and PDGFRα genes. Imatinib mesylate is an oral small molecular tyrosine kinase inhibitor that mainly targets abl, c-KIT, and PDGFRα. Imatinib achieves disease control in approximately 70%–85% of patients with advanced GIST, and the median progression-free survival is 20–24 months. The efficacy of imatinib correlates with tumor kinase mutational status (exon 11 mutations mainly), and some mutations are known to be responsible for primary and secondary imatinib resistance. Beyond these, there are many other mutations that are considered rare and are associated with unknown clinical behavior. In the literature, there are poor and inconsistent data about the inhibitor sensitivity of mutations occurring in the activation-loop domain encoded by exon 17. In this article, we focus on a case of a patient suffering from GIST, harboring an extremely rare KIT activation-loop domain mutation (exon 17 mutation pN822K) treated with imatinib. A review of the literature is also presented.

Fulvestrant ('Faslodex') is an oestrogen receptor (ER) antagonist with no agonist effects. The drug was administered to heavily pre-treated patients with advanced breast cancer (ABC). Patients received Fulvestrant after disease progression (PD) on a previous endocrine treatment or as maintenance treatment after chemotherapy.Fifty-seven postmenopausal women with ER and/or progesterone receptor-positive ABC resistant to previous endocrine treatments prospectively received fulvestrant 250 mg via intramuscular injection q 28.Twenty-seven patients received fulvestrant after PD and 30 received it as maintenance therapy after chemotherapy. All patients received fulvestrant as second-up to eight-line endocrine treatment for ABC. One patient (2%) had a partial response (PR) and 24 patients (42%) had stable diseaseor =12 weeks (SD), including 11 patients who had SDor =24 weeks. Thirty-two patients (56%) had de novo PD. Clinical benefit (CB; PR + SDor =24 weeks) occurred in 12 patients (21%). Patients treated as maintenance and treated upon PD had 0 and 4% PR, 43 and 41% SD (including 20 and 19% SDor =24 weeks), 57 and 55% PD, respectively. Overall, median time to progression (TTP) was 3 months. No differences in CB rate (20% vs. 23%), TTP (3 months vs. 3 months) and time to treatment failure (3 months vs. 3 months) were observed between patients receiving fulvestrant as maintenance therapy and those treated at PD on prior endocrine treatment. No grade 2-4 NCI-CTC toxicity was recorded.Fulvestrant treatment was associated with prolonged CB and was well tolerated in this group of heavily pre-treated patients with ABC. The outcomes appeared to be similar for patients treated upon PD and those receiving fulvestrant as maintenance therapy.

Summary Background In a previous phase I dose-escalation study, we showed a weekly administration of paclitaxel (TAX) and gemcitabine (GEM) to be active and very well tolerated in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, with the lack of interaction between drugs. The dose of GEM 1500mg/m 2 and TAX 100mg/m 2 was selected for phase II studies due to its predictable kinetic behaviour and less severe thrombocytopenia. Patients and methods Fifty-four chemo-naive patients with advanced NSCLC (53 patients: stage IV) received TAX (100mg/m 2 i.v. infusion over 1h) followed by GEM 1500mg/m 2 over 30min) on days 1, 8, 15 and 21 of a 28-day cycle. Results The objective response rate was 46% (95% CI 32–61), median OS of 10.4ms (95% CI 6.5–4.3), and a 1-year survival rate of 53%. Grades 3 and 4 haematological toxicity consisted of non-febrile neutropenia and thrombocytopenia in 13 and 4% of the cycles, respectively. Grade 3 non-haematological toxicities were observed in three patients (asthenia, diarrhoea and neuropathy), and were always reversible. Conclusions This weekly schedule of TAX and GEM is highly active in chemo-naive NSCLC patients and confirms the low toxicity profile already observed in a previous phase I study.

We developed and pilot tested a 12-item questionnaire, to approach the issue of patients’ perception on efficacy of oral chemotherapy. An additional question was on ‘trade-off’ between treatment efficacy and the ease of oral administration. The motivating underlying hypothesis was that oral drugs might be perceived by patients as less effective than when drugs were delivered by injection. The questionnaire was given to 59 patients with advanced breast cancer who received oral chemotherapy. Ninety-percent of patients considered clear and completed the questionnaire. Oral chemotherapy was positively viewed by most patients, perceiving it as advantageous (58%), able to help them feel less ill (77%) and to reduce the effort in coping with the disease (67%). The most important feeling elicited was the sense of freedom. Younger patients (

The aim of the study was to evaluate the activity of cisplatin (CDDP) plus vinorelbine (VNR) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) progressing after paclitaxel plus gemcitabine. Treatment consisted of CDDP 80 mg/m 2 administered on day 1 and VNR 25 mg/m 2 administered on day 1 and 8, repeated every 3 weeks. Nine patients who relapsed after partial response and eight patients refractory to prior CT received a minimum of two treatment cycles: three patients achieved a PR (18%; 95% CI: 4–43%), four had stable disease and 10 had disease progression. All responses were observed among the nine patients responsive to prior treatment. Median survival was 35 weeks. No patients required dose-reduction, treatment discontinuation or delay because of toxicity. Our results indicate a reasonable antitumor efficacy and no relevant toxicity of a second-line CDDP-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. We recommend the use of this regimen for patients not refractory to primary treatment.