Search

Simple Summary: The evaluation of therapeutic approaches over a decade at a tertiary cancer center in Germany was undertaken due to the frequent and critical discussions surrounding the selection of chemotherapy regimens and the incorporation of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) in the management of limited disease small cell lung cancer (LD-SCLC). We found significant differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) between patients treated with carboplatin and etoposide (CP) and those treated with cisplatin and etoposide (EP), with EP showing better outcomes. Concomitant chemotherapy was also associated with improved PFS and OS. Notably, PCI was found to significantly improve OS and showed a trend towards improved PFS. Female patients had better OS, and the type of chemotherapy and PCI remained independent predictors of survival. This research provides valuable insights into treatment patterns, outcomes, and survival predictors for LD-SCLC, emphasizing the importance of personalized treatment approaches and the potential benefits of PCI. However, the study's retrospective nature and sample-size limitations should be considered, highlighting the need for further prospective studies in this field. In this study, we investigated the outcomes and factors influencing treatment efficacy in 93 patients with limited disease small cell lung cancer (LD-SCLC), with a median age of 64 years. We focused on the impact of chemotherapy regimens, prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI), and patient-related variables. The median follow-up for OS was 17.3 months. We observed a statistically significant difference in PFS between LD-SCLC patients treated with cisplatin and etoposide (EP) and those treated with carboplatin and etoposide (CP) (PFS: EP 13.63 months vs. CP 6.54 months, p < 0.01). Patients treated with EP had better overall survival (OS) than CP-treated patients (OS: EP 26.9 months vs. CP 16.16 months, p < 0.01). Concomitant chemotherapy was associated with improved PFS (p = 0.003) and OS (p = 0.002). Patients receiving PCI showed superior OS (p = 0.05) and a trend towards improved PFS (p = 0.057). Female gender was associated with better OS (p = 0.025). Most patients had an ECOG performance status of 0 (71%). This real-world study underscores the importance of multidisciplinary LD-SCLC management, emphasizing the roles of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and PCI. These findings inform personalized treatment strategies and emphasize the need for prospective trials to validate these results and optimize LD-SCLC treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A high proportion of patients with relapsed classical Hodgkin's lymphoma achieve a response with the antibody-drug conjugate brentuximab vedotin, and the drug is well tolerated. We modified the escalated BEACOPP regimen (eBEACOPP; bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone) and implemented brentuximab vedotin with the aim to reduce toxic effects while maintaining the protocol's efficacy.Methods: We did an open-label, multicentre, randomised phase 2 study at 20 study sites in Germany. Adult patients (aged 18-60 years) with newly diagnosed, advanced, classical Hodgkin's lymphoma were randomly assigned (1:1) to treatment with six cycles of either BrECAPP (brentuximab vedotin 1·8 mg/kg on day 1, etoposide 200 mg/m2 on days 2-4, doxorubicin 35 mg/m2 on day 2, cyclophosphamide 1250 mg/m2 on day 2, procarbazine 100 mg/m2 on days 2-8, and prednisone 40 mg/m2 on days 2-15) or BrECADD (brentuximab vedotin 1·8 mg/kg on day 1, etoposide 150 mg/m2 on days 2-4, doxorubicin 40 mg/m2 on day 2, cyclophosphamide 1250 mg/m2 on day 2, dacarbazine 250 mg/m2 on days 3-4, and dexamethasone 40 mg on days 2-5). Randomisation was done centrally by stratified minimisation, with study site and sex as stratification factors. The co-primary endpoints were complete response to chemotherapy and complete remission at the end of treatment, which were assessed by intention to treat. Patients who were found not to meet inclusion criteria after randomisation or without restaging data after two cycles of study treatment were excluded from the primary endpoint analysis. All patients who started study treatment were assessable for safety. This report presents the final analysis at a median follow-up of 17 months (IQR 13·2-21·5). The preplanned 2-year follow-up analysis is yet to be reported. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01569204.Findings: Between Oct 26, 2012, and May 15, 2014, 104 patients were enrolled to the study (52 were assigned to each study arm). Two patients dropped out before the start of study treatment because of acute infection (n=1) and withdrawal of consent (n=1) and one patient was excluded because of intermediate-stage disease (all were assigned BrECAPP). 42 (86%, 95% CI 73-94) of 49 patients assigned BrECAPP achieved a complete response after chemotherapy and 46 (94%, 95% CI 83-99) had complete remission as their final treatment outcome. In the BrECADD group, 46 (88%, 95% CI 77-96) of 52 patients achieved both a complete response after chemotherapy and complete remission as their final treatment outcome. 58 serious adverse events were reported, 32 events in 21 of 50 patients who received BrECAPP and 26 events in 18 of 52 patients who received BrECADD. The most common grade 3-4 toxic effects were haematological adverse events (91 [89%] of 102 patients). Grade 3-4 organ toxic effects were reported in seven (17%) of 42 patients assigned BrECAPP and two (4%) of 46 allocated BrECADD. 16 (32%) of 50 patients assigned BrECAPP and 18 (35%) of 52 allocated BrECADD had grade 1-2 peripheral neuropathy, and one (2%) patient assigned BrECAPP developed grade 3 peripheral neuropathy; all but one case (allocated BrECAPP) resolved. No deaths were reported during the follow-up period.Interpretation: Both eBEACOPP variants met the co-primary efficacy endpoints. Particularly, the BrECADD regimen was associated with a more favourable toxicity profile and was, therefore, selected to challenge standard eBEACOPP for the treatment of advanced classical Hodgkin's lymphoma in the phase 3 HD21 study by the German Hodgkin Study Group (NCT02661503), which aims to further reduce treatment-related morbidity.Funding: Takeda Pharmaceuticals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Poorly differentiated head and neck neuroendocrine neoplasms are very rare. Surgical resection alone is insufficient to control the disease because of the high incidence of metastases. However, due to the lack of randomised clinical trials, treatment recommendations for this cancer vary considerably and are based on a limited number of small retrospective studies. We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients treated at our institution between 2003 and 2011. We assessed the stage of disease, type of therapy, toxicity, treatment response, time to progression and overall survival for all cases. Ten patients received combined modality treatment with chemotherapy in addition to surgery or radiation or both. According to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (RECIST) criteria, six of nine evaluable patients achieved complete remission and three patients had a partial remission. The mean duration of response was 358 days, with a range from 141 to 1080 days. The overall 1-year survival rate was 88%; however, only approximately 50% of patients were alive after 2 years. Multimodality treatment concepts induce high initial remission rates in poorly differentiated neuroendocrine head and neck carcinomas. However, the time to relapse is usually short, and therefore long-term prognosis of this rare head and neck tumour remains poor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system is commonly used to classify hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. However, other staging classification schemes have been proposed. We aimed to compare the prognostic accuracy of the Hong Kong Liver Cancer Staging (HKLC), the Model to Estimate Survival for HCC (MESH), and the BCLC staging systems using a Western cohort of HCC patients., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 918 patients diagnosed with HCC treated at the University Medical Center of Mainz between 2005 and 2014. We compared the predictive power of survival time of the BCLC, HKLC, and MESH. Predictive ability was tested using the integrated Brier score (IBS) and Harrell's C index., Results: Kaplan-Meier analyses showed significant differences in survival between stages defined by the BCLC, HKLC, and MESH. The HKLC classification demonstrated a more robust classification concordance and lower prediction error compared to the BCLC and MESH. In addition, we found that the BCLC offers superior predictive ability to the MESH in the first four years, whereas the MESH is superior for long-term predictions., Conclusion: Our analyses confirm the prognostic value of three different HCC scoring systems. When compared, the HKLC provides superior prognostication ability.