Search

Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become part of cancer treatments. Their main side effects are immune-related adverse events (irAEs). So far, there has been no recommendation regarding routine vaccinations during ICIs treatment. Clinicians are aware of the risk of irAEs increases in this specific situation. The aim of this review of literature is to summarize the main studies about vaccination and ICIs interactions., Methods: A systematic assessment of literature articles was performed by searching in PubMed (MEDLINE), and major oncology meeting following PRISMA guidelines., Results: This review highlights the lack of literature. Indeed, most of the studies published were about influenza vaccination. Vaccination for patients under ICIs causes a humoral response and seems to be associated with an increase rate of seroconversion. Interestingly vaccination may provoke irAEs in ICIs-treated patients. So far, inactivated vaccines have not been contraindicated during ICI treatment., Conclusion: Larger prospective studies are needed in order to define a consensus on the use of vaccines under immunotherapy., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Phase II clinical trials are a cornerstone of the development in experimental treatments They work as a "filter" for phase III trials confirmation. Surprisingly the attrition ratio in Phase III trials in oncology is significantly higher than in any other medical specialty. This suggests phase II trials in oncology fail to achieve their goal. Objective The present study aims at estimating the quality of reporting in published oncology phase II clinical trials., Data Sources: A literature review was conducted among all phase II and phase II/III clinical trials published during a 5-year period (2010-2015)., Study Eligibility Criteria: All articles electronically published by three randomly-selected oncology journals with Impact-Factors>4 were included: Journal of Clinical Oncology, Annals of Oncology and British Journal of Cancer., Intervention: Quality of reporting was assessed using the Key Methodological Score., Results: 557 articles were included. 315 trials were single-arm studies (56.6%), 193 (34.6%) were randomized and 49 (8.8%) were non-randomized multiple-arm studies. The Methodological Score was equal to 0 (lowest level), 1, 2, 3 (highest level) respectively for 22 (3.9%), 119 (21.4%), 270 (48.5%) and 146 (26.2%) articles. The primary end point is almost systematically reported (90.5%), while sample size calculation is missing in 66% of the articles. 3 variables were independently associated with reporting of a high standard: presence of statistical design (p-value <0.001), multicenter trial (p-value = 0.012), per-protocol analysis (p-value <0.001)., Limitations: Screening was mainly performed by a sole author. The Key Methodological Score was based on only 3 items, making grey zones difficult to translate., Conclusions & Implications of Key Findings: This literature review highlights the existence of gaps concerning the quality of reporting. It therefore raised the question of the suitability of the methodology as well as the quality of these trials, reporting being incomplete in the corresponding articles.

Radiochemotherapy is undergoing a complete expansion. Currently, possibilities of treatment combination are skyrocketting, with different anticancer and targeted molecules, different radiotherapy techniques, and dose escalation with each therapy. The development of a modern phase I radiochemotherapy trial becomes more and more complex and should be fully investigated. In the literature, there are no exhaustive reviews describing the necessity of their characteristics. The present article explores historical and current phase I clinical trials involving a combination of radiation therapy and anticancer therapies. Selected trials were identified by searching in PubMed databases. A total of 228 studies were identified in the last three decades, and a portrait of their characteristics is presented. As expected, most frequently studied malignancies were head and neck cancers, followed by non-small cell lung cancer and brain cancer. Toxicity is reported in more than 90% of the studies. Most studies were published since 2010, at the area of targeted therapies, but mainly concerned classical chemotherapies (cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil). The present review highlights some limits. Indeed, methodology seems not optimised and could be based on more accurate methods of dose-escalation. The present portrait of phase I radiochemotherapy trials suggests that radiochemotherapy notion must be reinvented and trials should be adapted to its complexity. Step by step method does not sound like an option anymore. Let us build the future of radiochemotherapy on past evidences., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The elderly population in Western countries is growing and constitutes a public health issue. Concomitantly, age-related diseases such as cancer increase. There are few data on the efficacy, tolerability and toxicity of specific anticancer therapy in the very elderly patients; therefore, their management is not standardized., Methods: In this bi-institutional study, we reviewed medical records of patients who received or continued specific anticancer therapy beyond the age of 90 years. Geriatric assessment was not reported for our patients. Twelve patients were enrolled. Their general health condition was good, and half of them were living in elderly institutions. Ten patients had a solid tumor and 2 were treated for hematological malignancies. Most were diagnosed with a locally advanced or metastatic disease, and the goal of treatment was curative for only 1 patient. Six patients received chemotherapy as first-line treatment, 4 patients received targeted therapy and 2 received concomitant chemoradiation. Four patients received a second-line treatment., Results: Despite a significant reduction in treatment posology in half of the patients, 8 acute grade 3/4 toxicities were reported and 2 patients died of treatment-related septic shock. Median duration of first-line treatment was 3.2 months, and progression-free survival ranged from 18 to 311 days. Overall survival ranged from 18 days to 11 years., Conclusion: Aging is a heterogeneous process, and management of elderly patients is a multidisciplinary approach. Geriatric assessment helps to identify older patients with a higher risk of morbidity/mortality and allows to assess the risks and benefits of specific anticancer therapy. The choice of treatment should be based primarily on the expected symptomatic benefit, and treatment should not compromise the quality of life., (© 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

The ageing of French population imposes to radiotherapists the challenge to treat older patients and to adjust their treatment. Unthinkable 30 years ago, radiation therapy concerns nowadays patients aged more than 90 years old. Oncogeriatric scales have been improved those last years without necessarily making sure that the right treatment is given to the right patient: if oncogeriatric scales use influences the final therapeutic decision, it does not define new target volumes, new doses, or new fractionation protocols. Except for some organs, there is not, for the moment, any consensus concerning geriatric population adapted treatments. This makes any therapeutic decision difficult. The present review has for objective to realise a report of the studies about favorable and unfavorable effects of radiation therapy amongst aged (>70 years old) or very aged (>90years old) population., (Copyright © 2015 Société Française du Cancer. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Rare cancers represent about a quarter of all cancers diagnosed in Europe, and their incidence is increasing. Meanwhile, scientific advances provide techniques, which become more and more sophisticated in the domain of radiotherapy. Treatment options for radiotherapy rare cancers are increasing, but are not yet evaluated. The question of the appropriateness of treatment by modern radiotherapy techniques in rare cancers remains. There are a lot of cases reported in the literature for treating rare cancers by modern technology. These techniques are often used when anatomical and dosimetric constraints do not achieve optimal treatment by surgery or standard radiotherapy. In contrast, standard radiotherapy techniques also provide good results in terms of overall survival and tolerance. They are also less expensive and less complex in terms of dosimetry. The establishment of specialized centers in rare cancers seems essential to evaluate the appropriateness of the use of modern techniques in these cases. Currently, data from the literature does not provide an answer to this question., (Copyright © 2014 Société Française du Cancer. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

The number of nonagenarian people in the world is steadily growing. This phenomenon will increase in future years: in 2050, world population prospects estimate 71.16 million people aged 90 years or older. The two main causes of death among people aged 85 years or more in Europe in 2003 were cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases and cancers. However, the elderly are often excluded from clinical trials; they are underrepresented in clinical registries and especially nonagenarians. Care (medical, surgical, oncology) of these very elderly is currently insufficiently based on scientific recommendations. For the physician, the choice to treat or not to treat very elderly patients (for fear of side effects) is difficult. Oncology is particularly affected by this problem. Here we review these different fields of internal medicine management of nonagenarian patients with a special focus on oncology and on comprehensive geriatric assessment as a base for all care decision taking.

Background: There are only scarce data on the management of patients aged 90years or older with cancer, and more particularly on the place of radiation therapy (RT). We report the first large study on patients (pts) aged 90years or older receiving RT., Methods and Materials: Records from RT departments from five institutions were reviewed to identify pts 90years of age and older who underwent RT for various malignant tumours treated between 2003 and 2012. Tumours' characteristics were examined, as well as treatment specificities and treatment intent., Results: 308 pts receiving 318 RT courses were identified, mean age was 93.2years (standard deviation 2.8). Treatment was given with curative and palliative intent in 44% and 56%, respectively. Factors associated with a curative treatment were performance status (PS), place of life, previous surgery and tumour stage. Median total prescribed dose was 36Gy (4-76Gy). Hypofractionation and split course were used in 88% and 7.3%, respectively. Most toxicities were mild to moderate. RT could not be completed in 23 pts (7.5%). No long-term toxicity was reported. Median overall survival was 22.9months (95CI: 15.5-42.7months). Cancer was the cause of death in 8.7% and 46% of pts treated with curative and palliative intent, respectively., Conclusion: This study shows that RT is feasible for patients aged 90years or more. PS, place of life and tumour stage were factors of the therapeutic decision. There is no reason to withdraw pts with good general health condition from potentially curative RT, provided that careful attention is paid to factors of toxicity and to geriatric vulnerabilities., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)