Search

Purpose: Postdiagnosis exercise is associated with lower breast cancer (BC) mortality but its link with risk of recurrence is less clear. We investigated the impact and dose-response relationship of exercise and recurrence in patients with primary BC., Methods: Multicenter prospective cohort analysis among 10,359 patients with primary BC from 26 centers in France between 2012 and 2018 enrolled in the CANcer TOxicities study, with follow-up through October 2021. Exercise exposure was assessed using the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire-16, quantified in standardized metabolic equivalent of task-hours per week (MET-h/wk). We examined the dose/exposure response of pretreatment exercise on distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI) for all patients and stratified by clinical subtype and menopausal status using inverse probability treatment weighted multivariable Cox models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs)., Results: For the overall cohort, the relationship between exercise and DRFI was nonlinear: increasing exercise ≥ 5 MET-h/wk was associated with an inverse linear reduction in DRFI events up to approximately 25 MET-h/wk; increasing exercise over this threshold did not provide any additional DRFI benefit. Compared with <5 MET-h/wk, the adjusted HR for DRFI was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.61 to 1.00) for ≥ 5 MET-h/wk. Stratification by subtype revealed the hormone receptor-/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2- (HR-/HER2-; HR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.38 to 0.92]) and HR-/HER2+ (HR, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.14 to 0.96]) subtypes were preferentially responsive to exercise. The benefit of exercise was observed especially in the premenopausal population., Conclusion: Postdiagnosis/pretreatment exercise is associated with lower risk of DRFI events in a nonlinear fashion in primary BC; exercise has different impact on DRFI as a function of subtype and menopausal status.

Objectives: The perception of oncologists could impact the attractiveness of the specialty and dialogue between oncologists and other physicians. The aim of the study was to describe and understand the stereotypes and social representation (SR) associated with oncologists among medical students, residents and physicians in France., Methods: This nationwide web-based survey conducted in 2021 was based on hierarchical evocation methods. Qualitative analyses were based on the Reinert method with factorial analyses. Each respondent's SR was graded from 1 to 5 (from 1: very positive SR to 5: very negative SR)., Results: Oncologists suffer from a rather negative SR. The negative representation was mostly related to difficulties in practising and the proximity with death and end of life. Oncologists were also associated with more positive notions like interdisciplinarity or intellectual complexity. Attendance to an oncology course was associated with a better SR of oncology (p=0.036), whereas having someone in the family practising oncology had a negative impact (p=0.028)., Conclusions: SR of oncologists is rather contrasted. It was positively influenced by attendance to an oncology course, which could be an option to correct stereotypes and update on this rapidly evolving specialty., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Importance: Return to work after breast cancer (BC) treatment depends on several factors, including treatment-related adverse effects. While cancer-related cognitive impairment is frequently reported by patients with BC, to date, no longitudinal studies have assessed its association with return to work., Objective: To examine whether cognition, assessed using objective and subjective scores, was associated with return to work 2 years after BC diagnosis., Design, Setting, and Participants: In a case series of the French Cancer Toxicities (CANTO) cohort, a study of patients with stage I to III BC investigated cognition from April 2014 to December 2018 (2 years' follow-up). Participants included women aged 58 years or younger at BC diagnosis who were employed or looking for a job., Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcome was return to work assessed 2 years after BC diagnosis. Objective cognitive functioning (tests), cognitive symptoms, anxiety, depression, and fatigue were prospectively assessed at diagnosis (baseline), 1 year after treatment completion, and 2 years after diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to explain return to work status at year 2 according to each cognitive measure separately, adjusted for age, occupational class, stage at diagnosis, and chemotherapy., Results: The final sample included 178 women with BC (median age: 48.7 [range, 28-58] years), including 37 (20.8%) who did not return to work at year 2. Patients who returned to work had a higher (ie, professional) occupational class and were less likely to have had a mastectomy (24.1% vs 54.1%; P < .001). Return to work at year 2 was associated with lower overall cognitive impairment (1-point unit of increased odds ratio [1-pt OR], 0.32; 95% CI, 0.13-0.79; P = .01), higher working memory (1-pt OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.23-3.59; P = .008), higher processing speed (1-pt OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.20-3.36; P = .01) and higher attention performance (1-pt OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.04-2.64; P = .04), higher perceived cognitive abilities (1-pt OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.03-1.21; P = .007), and lower depression (1-pt OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.93; P = .001) at year 2 assessment. Return to work at year 2 was associated with several measures assessed at baseline and year 1: higher processing speed (1-pt OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.37-4.31; P = .003 and 1.95; 95% CI, 1.14-3.50; P = .02), higher executive performance (1-pt OR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.28-5.75; P = .01, and 2.88; 95% CI, 1.36-6.28; P = .006), and lower physical fatigue (10-pt OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69-0.95; P = .009 and 0.84; 95% CI, 0.71-0.98; P = .02)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this case series study of patients with BC, return to work 2 years after diagnosis was associated with higher cognitive speed performance before and after BC treatment. Cognitive difficulties should be assessed before return to work to propose suitable management.

Background: Breast cancer (BC) is the second most common cancer that metastasizes to the brain. Particularly up to half of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (mBC) may develop brain metastases over the course of the disease. Nevertheless, little is known about the prevalence and the outcome of brain and leptomeningeal metastases (BLMM) in HER2-low BC. We compared the cumulative incidence of BLMM and associated outcomes among patients with HER2-low, HER2-negative (HER2-) and HER2+ mBC., Patients and Methods: This cohort study was conducted from the Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics (ESME) mBC database and included patients treated for mBC between 2012 and 2020 across 18 French comprehensive cancer centers and with known HER2 and hormone receptor (HR) status. The cumulative incidence of BLMM after metastatic diagnosis was estimated using a competing risk methodology with death defined as a competing event., Results: 19 585 patients were included with 6118 (31.2%), 9943 (50.8%) and 3524 (18.0%) being HER2-low, HER2- and HER2+ mBC, respectively. After a median follow-up of 48.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 47.7-49.3 months], BLMM were reported in 4727 patients: 1192 (25.2%) were diagnosed with BLMM at first metastatic diagnosis and 3535 (74.8%) after metastatic diagnosis. Multivariable analysis adjusted for age, histological grade, metastases-free interval and HR status showed that the risk of BLMM at metastatic diagnosis was similar in patients with HER2- compared to HER2-low mBC [odds ratio (OR) (95% CI) 1.00 (0.86-1.17)] and higher in those with HER2+ compared to HER2-low [OR (95% CI) 2.23 (1.87-2.66)]. Similar results were found after metastatic diagnosis; the risk of BLMM was similar in HER2- compared to HER2-low [subdistribution hazard ratio (sHR) (95% CI) 1.07 (0.98-1.16)] and higher in the HER2+ group [sHR (95% CI) 1.56 (1.41-1.73)]., Conclusions: The prevalence and evolution of BLMM in HER2-low mBC are similar to those in patients with HER2- tumors. In contrast to patients with HER2+ mBC, the prognosis of BLMM remains dismal in this population., Competing Interests: Disclosure WJ declares grants: AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: AstraZeneca, Eisai, BMS, Lilly France, Daiichi Sankyo, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Seagen; support for attending meetings and/or travel: AstraZeneca, Novartis, Chugai Pharma, Pfizer, Eisai, Pierre Fabre, Glaxo Smithkline, Roche, Lilly France, Sanofi Aventis; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board : AstraZeneca, Eisai, BMS, Lilly France, Daiichi Sankyo, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Seagen, Gilead. MA declares payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker’s bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: Gilead, Daiichi Sankyo, Pfizer, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Novartis; support for attending meetings and/or travel: Gilead, Pfizer, Novartis; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board: AstraZeneca, Novartis, Pfizer. FLD declares consulting fees: Novartis, Gilead; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: Amgen, Daiichi, Lilly, Novartis, Seagen, AZ; support for attending meetings and/or travel: Novartis, Pfizer, Seagen; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board: Daiichi, Lilly, Seagen, Pfizer, Novartis, Roche, Exact Sciences; receipt of equipment, materials, drugs, medical writing, gifts or other services : Lilly. TF declares payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker’s bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: Roche, Jansen, Lilly. BP received fees as advisor/consultant from Pierre Fabre (self), Daiichi Sankyo (self), Merck Sharp & Dohme (institution), Seattle Genetics (institution), Eli Lilly (institution) and Novartis (institution); funding to institution for research support from Daiichi Sankyo and AstraZeneca; and travel expenses from AstraZeneca, Pfizer and Gilead. JSF declares consulting fees: Pfizer, Lilly, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, GSK, Gilead, Daiichi Sankyo, Seagen, Exact Science, MSD; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: Lilly, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Gilead, Daiichi Sankyo, Seagen, MSD; support for attending meetings and/or travel: Pfizer, Lilly, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, GSK, Gilead, Daiichi Sankyo, Seagen, MSD. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Multidisciplinary team meetings are a current international practice in cancer care, but to date, few data exist on the specificity of its practice in hematology.In this manuscript, we present the result of the first national study, realized with quantitative and qualitative methods in France, which brings new insights in order to improve the collegial decision-making process.To improve the effectiveness of MDTMs, the needs to focus on complex cases, to enhance patient centeredness and teamwork are relevant aspects, and a specific focus on hematological particularities is warranted to truly improve process.Background Understanding the Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) process in different medical specialties facilitates the identification of core factors supporting effective MDTM work. Our mixed-methods study explores the participants' perceptions of hematology MDTMs.Design Online questionnaires collected data concerning the decision-making process, benefits and inconveniences of MDTMs for both patients and professionals. Semi-directive phone interviews were conducted and analyzed, thereby supplying qualitative data.Results A total of 205 professionals responded to the questionnaire and 22 participated in the qualitative interviews. The data indicate the unique characteristics of hematology, including a specific definition of collegiality, the frequent solicitation of expert advice and the anticipation of treatment even prior to the occurrence of MDTMs. Additional information concerning patients' wishes and psychosocial conditions are also needed. Participants emphasize the subjective aspects and the impact of the climate of MDTMs on medical decisions.Conclusion Although MDTMs are recognized to be a valuable tool, organizational and relational issues may interfere with their efficiency.To improve the effectiveness of MDTMs, the needs to focus on complex cases, to enhance patient centeredness and teamwork are relevant aspects. A specific focus on hematological particularities might be warranted to truly improve the collegial decision-making process in the context of hematology., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Cetuximab plus platinum-based therapy (PBT) followed by cetuximab maintenance until progression (EXTREME) is a guideline-recommended first-line treatment option in recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN). DIRECT (Dose Intensity RElative to CeTuximab) was the first phase 4 observational study evaluating EXTREME administration in the real-world setting., Aims: The primary aim of this study was to assess the relative dose intensity of cetuximab in patients with R/M SCCHN treated with first-line cetuximab according to the EXTREME regimen., Methods and Results: Patients were ≥18 years old and eligible to receive cetuximab/PBT. Primary endpoint was cetuximab relative dose intensity (RDI). Of prospectively enrolled patients (n = 157), 119 received ≥1 cycle of EXTREME. Practices differing from the EXTREME trial were 5-fluorouracil omission (14%), maintenance cetuximab given every other week (54%), prior cetuximab, disease-free interval <6 months. 64% of patients reached cetuximab RDI ≥80%; mean cetuximab RDI was 88%. 46% of patients received maintenance cetuximab (mean RDI, 91%). Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 4.5 and 9.4 months. No new/unexpected safety findings were observed., Conclusions: The DIRECT study showed that first-line cetuximab plus PBT was a feasible, beneficial first-line treatment regimen in patients with R/M SCCHN in the real-world setting., (© 2021 The Authors. Cancer Reports published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Objectives: To establish national reference levels (RLs) in interventional procedures under CT guidance as required by the 2013/59/Euratom European Directive., Methods: Seventeen categories of interventional procedures in thoracic, abdominopelvic, and osteoarticular specialties (percutaneous infiltration, vertebroplasty, biopsy, drainage, tumor destruction) were analyzed. Total dose length product (DLP), number of helical acquisitions (NH), and total DLP for helical, sequential, or fluoroscopic acquisitions were recorded for 10 to 20 patients per procedure at each center. RLs were calculated as the 3rd quartiles of the distributions and target values for optimization process (TVOs) as the median. RLs and TVOs were compared with previously published studies., Results: Results on 5001 procedures from 49 centers confirmed the great variability in patient dose for the same category of procedures. RLs were proposed for the DLPs and NHs in the seventeen categories. RLs in terms of DLP and NH were 375 mGy.cm and 2 NH for spinal or peri-spinal infiltration, 1630 mGy.cm and 3 NH for vertebroplasty, 845 mGy.cm and 4 NH for biopsy, 1950 mGy.cm and 8 NH for destruction of tumors, and 1090 mGy.cm and 5 NH for drainage. DLP and NH increased with the complexity of procedures., Conclusions: This study was the first nationwide multicentric survey to propose RLs for interventional procedures under CT guidance. Heterogeneity of practice in centers were found with different levels of patient doses for the same procedure. The proposed RLs will allow imaging departments to benchmark their practice with others and optimize their protocols., Key Points: • National reference levels are proposed for 17 categories of interventional procedures under CT guidance. • Reference levels are useful for benchmarking practices and optimizing protocols. • Reference levels are proposed for dose length product and the number of helical acquisitions.

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic has severely affected clinical practice in oncology, leading to organizational, ethical, and medical issues. In particular, it has raised challenges in the context of competing care priorities between COVID-19 and cancer treatment. Residents on the front line face difficulties related to increasing care needs and urgent reorganization of health care systems while managing psychological stress and uncertainty. We aimed to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on oncology residents., Methods and Materials: We conducted a national survey (39 questions) in France among oncology and radiation therapy residents to determine the psychological impact and professional difficulties (eg, reassignment, training/research time, supervision, teleworking, management of patients) associated with the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic., Results: Overall, 222 residents (medical oncologists, 61%; radiation therapists, 39%) participated in our survey, representing approximately one third of all residents and fellows in France. One third of respondents had been reassigned to a COVID-19 ward. Training and research activity decreased for 89% and 41% of respondents, respectively. Two thirds (70%) of respondents declared that they had faced ethical issues, 35% felt worried about their own health, and 23% experienced psychological distress. According to the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, 32% were anxious and 17% depressed. Consumption of tobacco, psychostimulants, and alcohol increased in 31%, 24%, and 29% of respondents, respectively., Conclusion: French oncology residents were highly affected by the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of professional activity and psychological impact. This national survey can be used as a basis for improved management, medical reorganization, and training of residents during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: Cancer patients have been reported to be at higher risk of COVID-19 complications and deaths. We report the characteristics and outcome of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 during breast cancer treatment at Institut Curie hospitals (ICH, Paris area, France)., Methods: An IRB-approved prospective registry was set up at ICH on March 13, 2020, for all breast cancer patients with COVID-19 symptoms or radiologic signs. Registered data included patient history, tumor characteristics and treatments, COVID-19 symptoms, radiological features, and outcome. Data extraction was done on April 25, 2020. COVID-19 patients were defined as those with either a positive RNA test or typical, newly appeared lung CT scan abnormalities., Results: Among 15,600 patients actively treated for early or metastatic breast cancer during the last 4 months at ICH, 76 patients with suspected COVID-19 infection were included in the registry and followed. Fifty-nine of these patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 based on viral RNA testing (N = 41) or typical radiologic signs: 37/59 (63%) COVID-19 patients were treated for metastatic breast cancer, and 13/59 (22%) of them were taking corticosteroids daily. Common clinical features mostly consisted of fever and/or cough, while ground-glass opacities were the most common radiologic sign at diagnosis. We found no association between prior radiation therapy fields or extent of radiation therapy sequelae and extent of COVID-19 lung lesions. Twenty-eight of these 59 patients (47%) were hospitalized, and 6 (10%) were transferred to an intensive care unit. At the time of analysis, 45/59 (76%) patients were recovering or had been cured, 10/59 (17%) were still followed, and 4/59 (7%) had died from COVID-19. All 4 patients who died had significant non-cancer comorbidities. In univariate analysis, hypertension and age (> 70) were the two factors associated with a higher risk of intensive care unit admission and/or death., Conclusions: This prospective registry analysis suggests that the COVID-19 mortality rate in breast cancer patients depends more on comorbidities than prior radiation therapy or current anti-cancer treatment. Special attention must be paid to comorbidities when estimating the risk of severe COVID-19 in breast cancer patients.

Purpose: Adverse effects of breast cancer treatment can negatively affect survivors' work ability. Previous reports lacked detailed clinical data or health-related patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and did not prospectively assess the combined impact of treatment and related sequelae on employment., Methods: We used a French prospective clinical cohort of patients with stage I-III breast cancer including 1,874 women who were working and ≥ 5 years younger than legal retirement age (≤ 57 years) at breast cancer diagnosis. Our outcome was nonreturn to work (non-RTW) 2 years after diagnosis. Independent variables included treatment characteristics as well as toxicities (Common Toxicity Criteria Adverse Events [CTCAE] v4) and PROs (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] Quality of life Questionnaires, Breast cancer module [QLQ-BR23] and Fatigue module [QLQ-FA12], Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) collected 1 year after diagnosis. Logistic regression models assessed correlates of non-RTW, adjusting for age, stage, comorbidities, and socioeconomic covariates., Results: Two years after diagnosis, 21% of patients had not returned to work. Odds of non-RTW were significantly increased among patients treated with combinations of chemotherapy and trastuzumab (odds ratio [OR] v chemotherapy-hormonotherapy: for chemotherapy-trastuzumab, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.18 to 3.44; for chemotherapy-trastuzumab-hormonotherapy, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.10 to 2.41). Other significant associations with non-RTW included grade ≥ 3 CTCAE toxicities (OR v no, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.15 to 2.18), arm morbidity (OR v no, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.19 to 2.13), anxiety (OR v no, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.02 to 2.11), and depression (OR v no, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.34 to 3.91)., Conclusion: Receipt of systemic therapy combinations including trastuzumab was associated with increased odds of non-RTW. Likelihood of unemployment was also higher among patients who reported severe physical and psychological symptoms. This comprehensive study identifies potentially vulnerable patients and warrants supportive interventional strategies to facilitate their RTW.

Purpose: The Time to First Metastatic Recurrence (TFMR) could be considered as an indirect reflection of the tumour growth kinetics which plays an important role in cancer. Molecular subtypes such as expression of estrogen receptor are known predictive factors of TFMR. The CinéBreast study aimed to identify predictive factors of the time to TFMR., Methods: The French Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics (ESME) Metastatic Breast Cancer (MBC) Database (NCT03275311) was used, which contains data from a cohort of metastatic breast cancer patients from 2008 to 2016 using retrospective data collection. It is a national multi-centre database. The impact of TFMR on overall survival (OS) since first metastasis was also evaluated., Results: Among 16 702 patients recorded in the ESME MBC database, 10 595 had an initially localised breast cancer with hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 status available, with a metastatic recurrence. Median follow up was 56 months. Median TFMR was 59 months (<24: 20%, 24-60: 31%, 60-120: 25%, >120: 24%). HER2+ and TNBC were respectively 4 times and 12 times (p < 0.0001) more likely to have a recurrence within 2 years when compared to the luminal subgroup. Short TFMR and HR-/HER2-subtype significantly correlated with a poor OS in multivariate analysis. Some patients with MBC (20% in HER2+, 10% in ER+/HER2-and <5% in the ER-/HER2-) were long-term survivors in all 3 subgroups., Conclusions: In this large-scale real-life data study, patients with a TNBC metastatic recurrence had a shorter TFMR. Short TFMR significantly correlated with worse overall survival., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest TB reports grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Roche, grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Novartis, grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work. MC reports personal fees from Roche, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Astra Zeneca, personal fees from Menarini, outside the submitted work. WJ reports personal fees and non-financial support from Roche, outside the submitted work. AG reports grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Roche, during the conduct of the study. TP reports non-financial support and other support from Roche, outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Primary central nervous system lymphomas (PCNSLs) are mainly diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCLs) of the non-germinal center B-cell (non-GCB) subtype. This study aimed to determine the efficacy of rituximab plus lenalidomide (R2) in DLBCL-PCNSL., Patients and Methods: Patients with refractory/relapsed (R/R) DLBCL-PCNSL or primary vitreoretinal lymphoma (PVRL) were included in this prospective phase II study. The induction treatment consisted of eight 28-day cycles of R2 (rituximab 375/m2 i.v. D1; lenalidomide 20 mg/day, D1-21 for cycle 1; and 25 mg/day, D1-21 for the subsequent cycles); in responding patients, the induction treatment was followed by a maintenance phase comprising 12 28-day cycles of lenalidomide alone (10 mg/day, D1-21). The primary end point was the overall response rate (ORR) at the end of induction (P0 = 10%; P1 = 30%)., Results: Fifty patients were included. Forty-five patients (PCNSL, N = 34; PVRL, N = 11) were assessable for response. The ORR at the end of induction was 35.6% (95% CI 21.9-51.2) in assessable patients and 32.0% (95% CI 21.9-51.2) in the intent-to-treat analysis, including 13 complete responses (CR)/unconfirmed CR (uCR; 29%) and 3 partial responses (PR; 7%). The best responses were 18 CR/uCR (40%) and 12 PR (27%) during the induction phase. The maintenance phase was started and completed by 18 and 5 patients, respectively. With a median follow-up of 19.2 months (range 1.5-31), the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 7.8 months (95% CI 3.9-11.3) and 17.7 months (95% CI 12.9 to not reached), respectively. No unexpected toxicity was observed. The peripheral baseline CD4/CD8 ratio impacted PFS [median PFS = 9.5 months (95% CI, 8.1-14.8] for CD4/CD8 ≥ 1.6; median PFS = 2.8 months, [95% CI, 1.1-7.8) for CD4/CD8 < 1.6, P = 0.03)., Conclusions: The R2 regimen showed significant activity in R/R PCNSL and PVRL patients. These results support assessments of the efficacy of R2 combined with methotrexate-based chemotherapy as a first-line treatment of PCNSL., Clinical Trials Number: NCT01956695., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: To validate a model predicting the risk of threatened preterm delivery and to establish the optimal threshold for this risk scoring system., Materials and Methods: Two cohorts were studied: one of singleton pregnancies without preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM) and no cervical cerclage (cohort 1) and one of twin pregnancies without PPROM and no cervical cerclage (cohort 2). Patients were included from January 1st 2013 until December 31st 2013 by the Regional Perinatal Network of Ile de France with patients transferred because of threatened preterm delivery at 22 to 32 weeks of gestation. The individual probability of delivery within 48 hours of admission was calculated using the nomogram for every patient. Discrimination and calibration of the nomogram as well as the optimal threshold were determined using R studio., Results: The nomogram accurately predicted obstetric outcome. Discrimination and calibration were excellent, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.88 (95% CI 0.86-0.90) for cohort 1 and 0.73 (95% CI 0.66-0.80) for cohort 2. The optimal threshold would be 15% for cohort 1 and 10% for cohort 2. Using these thresholds, the performance characteristics of the nomogram were: sensitivity 80% (cohort 1) and 69% (cohort 2), negative predictive value 94.8% (cohort 1) and 91.3% (cohort 2). Use of the nomogram would avoid 253 unnecessary transfers in cohort 1., Conclusions: The nomogram was efficient and clinically relevant in our high risk population. A threshold set at 15% would help minimize the risk of preterm deliveries in singleton pregnancies and should reduce unnecessary, costly and stressful in utero transfer., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Molecularly targeted agents have been reported to have anti-tumour activity for patients whose tumours harbour the matching molecular alteration. These results have led to increased off-label use of molecularly targeted agents on the basis of identified molecular alterations. We assessed the efficacy of several molecularly targeted agents marketed in France, which were chosen on the basis of tumour molecular profiling but used outside their indications, in patients with advanced cancer for whom standard-of-care therapy had failed., Methods: The open-label, randomised, controlled phase 2 SHIVA trial was done at eight French academic centres. We included adult patients with any kind of metastatic solid tumour refractory to standard of care, provided they had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, disease that was accessible for a biopsy or resection of a metastatic site, and at least one measurable lesion. The molecular profile of each patient's tumour was established with a mandatory biopsy of a metastatic tumour and large-scale genomic testing. We only included patients for whom a molecular alteration was identified within one of three molecular pathways (hormone receptor, PI3K/AKT/mTOR, RAF/MEK), which could be matched to one of ten regimens including 11 available molecularly targeted agents (erlotinib, lapatinib plus trastuzumab, sorafenib, imatinib, dasatinib, vemurafenib, everolimus, abiraterone, letrozole, tamoxifen). We randomly assigned these patients (1:1) to receive a matched molecularly targeted agent (experimental group) or treatment at physician's choice (control group) by central block randomisation (blocks of size six). Randomisation was done centrally with a web-based response system and was stratified according to the Royal Marsden Hospital prognostic score (0 or 1 vs 2 or 3) and the altered molecular pathway. Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation. Treatments in both groups were given in accordance with the approved product information and standard practice protocols at each institution and were continued until evidence of disease progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, which was not assessed by independent central review. We assessed safety in any patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01771458., Findings: Between Oct 4, 2012, and July 11, 2014, we screened 741 patients with any tumour type. 293 (40%) patients had at least one molecular alteration matching one of the 10 available regimens. At the time of data cutoff, Jan 20, 2015, 195 (26%) patients had been randomly assigned, with 99 in the experimental group and 96 in the control group. All patients in the experimental group started treatment, as did 92 in the control group. Two patients in the control group received a molecularly targeted agent: both were included in their assigned group for efficacy analyses, the patient who received an agent that was allowed in the experimental group was included in the experimental group for the purposes of safety analyses, while the other patient, who received a molecularly targeted agent and chemotherapy, was kept in the control group for safety analyses. Median follow-up was 11·3 months (IQR 5·8-11·6) in the experimental group and 11·3 months (8·1-11·6) in the control group at the time of the primary analysis of progression-free survival. Median progression-free survival was 2·3 months (95% CI 1·7-3·8) in the experimental group versus 2·0 months (1·8-2·1) in the control group (hazard ratio 0·88, 95% CI 0·65-1·19, p=0·41). In the safety population, 43 (43%) of 100 patients treated with a molecularly targeted agent and 32 (35%) of 91 patients treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy had grade 3-4 adverse events (p=0·30)., Interpretation: The use of molecularly targeted agents outside their indications does not improve progression-free survival compared with treatment at physician's choice in heavily pretreated patients with cancer. Off-label use of molecularly targeted agents should be discouraged, but enrolment in clinical trials should be encouraged to assess predictive biomarkers of efficacy., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)