Search

Cutaneous T-cell lymohomas ( CTCLs) are rare, but potentially devastating malignancies, with Mycosis fungoides and Sézary Syndrome being the most common. In our previous study, we identified and described regions of geographic clustering of CTCL cases in Texas by analyzing ~1990 patients using two distinct cancer registries. In the current work, we describe in detail demographic patterns for this malignancy in our study population and apply logistic regression models to analyze the incidence of CTCL by sex, race, age, and clinical stage at the time of diagnosis. Furthermore, using Fisher's exact test, we analyze changes in incidence over time in the identified Houston communities with unusually high CTCL incidence. While CTCL primarily affects Caucasian individuals >55 years old, we confirm that it presents at a younger age and with more advanced disease stages in African-American and Hispanic individuals. Also, we demonstrate a significant increase in CTCL incidence over time in the identified communities. Spring, Katy, and Houston Memorial areas had high baseline rates. Furthermore, a statistically significant disease surge was observed in these areas after ~2005. This report supplements our initial study documenting the existence of geographic clustering of CTCL cases in Texas and in greater detail describes demographic trends for our patient population. The observed surge in CTCL incidence in the three identified communities further argues that this malignancy may be triggered by one or more external etiologic agents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Cutaneous T-cell lymphomas (CTCLs) (mycosis fungoides and its leukemic variant, Sezary syndrome) are rare malignancies. Reports of the occurrence of mycosis fungoides in married couples and families raise the possibility of an environmental trigger for this cancer. Although it has been suggested that CTCL arises from inappropriate T-cell stimulation, to the authors' knowledge no preventable trigger has been identified to date. METHODS Using region, zip code, age, sex, and ethnicity, the authors analyzed the demographic data of 1047 patients from Texas who were seen in a CTCL clinic at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center during 2000 through 2012 (the MDACC database) and 1990 patients who were recorded in the population-based Texas Cancer Registry between 1996 and 2010. Subsequently, data from both databases were cross-analyzed and compared. RESULTS The current study findings, based on the MDACC database, documented geographic clustering of patients in 3 communities within the Houston metropolitan area, in which CTCL incidence rates were 5 to 20 times higher than the expected population rate. Analysis of the Texas Cancer Registry database defined the CTCL population rate for the state to be 5.8 cases per million individuals per year (95% confidence interval, 5.5-6.0 per million individuals per year), thus confirming the observations from the MDACC database and further highlighting additional areas of geographic clustering and regions spared from CTCL in Texas. CONCLUSIONS The current study documented geographic clustering of CTCL cases in Texas and argued for the existence of yet unknown external causes/triggers for this rare malignancy. Cancer 2015;121:1993-2003. © 2015 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dual BRAF and MEK inhibition produces a response in a large number of patients with stage IV BRAF-mutant melanoma. The existing standard of care for patients with clinical stage III melanoma is upfront surgery and consideration for adjuvant therapy, which is insufficient to cure most patients. Neoadjuvant targeted therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors (such as dabrafenib and trametinib) might provide clinical benefit in this high-risk p opulation.Methods: We undertook this single-centre, open-label, randomised phase 2 trial at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, TX, USA). Eligible participants were adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically or cytologically confirmed surgically resectable clinical stage III or oligometastatic stage IV BRAFV600E or BRAFV600K (ie, Val600Glu or Val600Lys)-mutated melanoma. Eligible patients had to have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, a life expectancy of more than 3 years, and no previous exposure to BRAF or MEK inhibitors. Exclusion criteria included metastases to bone, brain, or other sites where complete surgical excision was in doubt. We randomly assigned patients (1:2) to either upfront surgery and consideration for adjuvant therapy (standard of care group) or neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib (8 weeks of neoadjuvant oral dabrafenib 150 mg twice per day and oral trametinib 2 mg per day followed by surgery, then up to 44 weeks of adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib starting 1 week after surgery for a total of 52 weeks of treatment). Randomisation was not masked and was implemented by the clinical trial conduct website maintained by the trial centre. Patients were stratified by disease stage. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed event-free survival (ie, patients who were alive without disease progression) at 12 months in the intent-to-treat population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02231775.Findings: Between Oct 23, 2014, and April 13, 2016, we randomly assigned seven patients to standard of care, and 14 to neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib. The trial was stopped early after a prespecified interim safety analysis that occurred after a quarter of the participants had been accrued revealed significantly longer event-free survival with neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib than with standard of care. After a median follow-up of 18·6 months (IQR 14·6-23·1), significantly more patients receiving neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib were alive without disease progression than those receiving standard of care (ten [71%] of 14 patients vs none of seven in the standard of care group; median event-free survival was 19·7 months [16·2-not estimable] vs 2·9 months [95% CI 1·7-not estimable]; hazard ratio 0·016, 95% CI 0·00012-0·14, p<0·0001). Neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib were well tolerated with no occurrence of grade 4 adverse events or treatment-related deaths. The most common adverse events in the neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib group were expected grade 1-2 toxicities including chills (12 patients [92%]), headache (12 [92%]), and pyrexia (ten [77%]). The most common grade 3 adverse event was diarrhoea (two patients [15%]).Interpretation: Neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib significantly improved event-free survival versus standard of care in patients with high-risk, surgically resectable, clinical stage III-IV melanoma. Although the trial finished early, limiting generalisability of the results, the findings provide proof-of-concept and support the rationale for further investigation of neoadjuvant approaches in this disease. This trial is currently continuing accrual as a single-arm study of neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib.Funding: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our recent work regarding Merkel cell carcinoma sentinel lymph node (SLN) metastasis found that "solid" pattern microscopic metastasis conferred worse prognosis than the "nonsolid" ones. The goals of the present study were to (1) compare the prognostic significance/outcomes of 2 diagnostic groups-patients with a nonsolid pattern of SLN metastasis and those with diagnostically negative SLN biopsies (SLNB), and (2) evaluate the durability of SLN metastasis after extensive sectioning. Five-level, step-wise sectioning at 250-μm intervals was performed in all SLN blocks with an immunohistochemical stain for CK20 on all levels. The presence and pattern of metastases were recorded and analyzed as were corresponding patient and tumor parameters. Median follow-up durations for all patients (n=38), positive SLNB (n=16) and negative SLNB (n=22) groups were 56.3, 50.4, and 66.8 months, respectively. Overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) did not differ between the 2 diagnostic groups (OS P=0.65, DSS P=0.37) but did differ by immune status (immunocompetent vs. immunosuppressed, OS P=0.03, DSS P=0.005) and primary tumor category (OS P<0.0001, DSS P=0.001). On deeper sectioning, all 16 diagnostically positive SLNB continued to show nonsolid microscopic metastasis, and 32% (7/22) diagnostically negative SLNB revealed nonsolid metastasis. DSS was worse for sinusoidal-pattern metastasis versus all others (P=0.02). Five of 38 patients (13%) died of disease; the only immunocompetent patient had sinusoidal-pattern metastasis discovered in a diagnostically negative SLNB. Our data suggest that outcome for nonsolid metastasis is similar to that of negative SLNB with the exception of the sinusoidal pattern, which was associated with worse outcome. Larger studies are warranted to quantify and compare microscopic metastatic tumor burden by pattern and confirm whether the sinusoidal pattern confers an intermediate prognostic risk between solid and other nonsolid microscopic metastases.