Search

Introduction: A genetic variant explaining a part of the exposure of many kinase inhibitors (KIs) is the single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) CYP3A4*22, resulting in less CYP3A4 enzyme activity. The primary aim of this study was to investigate if the systemic exposure is non-inferior after a dose reduction of KIs metabolized by CYP3A4 in CYP3A4*22 carriers compared to patients without this SNP (i.e., wildtype patients) receiving the standard dose., Methods: In this multicenter, prospective, non-inferiority study, patients were screened for the presence of CYP3A4*22. Patients with the CYP3A4*22 SNP received a 20-33% dose reduction. At steady state, a pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was performed and compared to the PK results from wildtype patients treated with the registered dose using a two-stage individual patient data meta-analysis approach., Results: In total, 207 patients were included in the final analysis. The CYP3A4*22 SNP was found in 16% of the patients in the final analysis (n = 34). Most of the included patients received imatinib (37%) or pazopanib (22%) treatment. The overall geometric mean ratio (GMR) comparing the exposure of the CYP3A4*22 carriers to the exposure of the wildtype CYP3A4 patients was 0.89 (90% confidence interval: 0.77-1.03)., Conclusion: Non-inferiority could not be proven for dose reduction of KIs metabolized by CYP3A4 in CYP3A4*22 carriers compared to the registered dose in wildtype patients. Therefore, an up-front dose reduction based upon the CYP3A4*22 SNP for all KIs does not seem an eligible new way of personalized therapy., Trial Registration: International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal; number NL7514; registered 11/02/2019., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Polypharmacy is becoming increasingly prevalent in society. Patients with polypharmacy are at greater risk for drug-drug interactions, which can influence the efficacy of treatment. Especially, in oncology this is a concern since neoplasms are increasing prevalent with age, as well as polypharmacy is. Besides drug-drug interactions, also herb-drug and food-drug interactions could be present. Knowledge of these interactions is of great importance for safe and effective anti-cancer treatment, because the therapeutic window of most of these oncologic drugs are small. To study pharmacokinetic interaction effects, a cross-over pharmacokinetic study is a widely used, efficient and scientifically robust design. Yet, several aspects need to be considered when carrying out an interaction study. This includes the knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of a cross-over design. Furthermore, determination of the end point and research question of interest, calculation of the required sample size, analysis of the generated data with a robust statistical plan and consideration of the logtransformation for some pharmacokinetic parameters are important aspects to consider. Even though some guidelines exist regarding these key issues, no clear overview exists. In this article an overview of these aspects is provided and their effect is discussed., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. All co-authors have seen and agree with the contents of the manuscript and there is no financial interest to report., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Alectinib is the keystone treatment in advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). An exposure-response threshold of 435 ng/mL has recently been established, albeit 37% of patients do not reach this threshold. Alectinib is orally administered, and absorption is largely influenced by food. Hence, further investigation into this relationship is needed to optimize its bioavailability., Patients and Methods: In this randomized 3-period crossover clinical study in ALK+ NSCLC, alectinib exposure was compared among patients with different diets. Every 7 days, the first alectinib dose was taken with either a continental breakfast, 250-g of low-fat yogurt, or a self-chosen lunch, and the second dose was taken with a self-chosen dinner. Sampling for alectinib exposure (Ctrough) was performed at day 8, just prior to alectinib intake, and the relative difference in Ctrough was compared., Results: In 20 evaluable patients, the mean Ctrough was 14% (95% CI, -23% to -5%; P=.009) and 20% (95% CI, -25% to -14%; P<.001) lower when taken with low-fat yogurt compared with a continental breakfast and a self-chosen lunch, respectively. Administration with a self-chosen lunch did not change exposure compared with a continental breakfast (+7%; 95% CI, -2% to +17%; P=.243). In the low-fat yogurt period, 35% of patients did not reach the threshold versus 5% with the other meals (P<.01)., Conclusions: Patients and physicians should be warned for a detrimental food-drug interaction when alectinib is taken with low-fat yogurt, because it results in a clinically relevant lower alectinib exposure. Intake with a self-chosen lunch did not change drug exposure and could be a safe and patient-friendly alternative.

Background: Central nervous system (CNS) metastases are present in approximately 40% of patients with metastatic epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated ( EGFR m+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor osimertinib is a substrate of transporters ABCB1 and ABCG2 and metabolized by CYP3A4. We investigated relationships between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) ABCB1 3435C>T, ABCG2 421C>A and 34G>A, and CYP3A4∗22 and CNS treatment efficacy of osimertinib in EGFR m+ NSCLC patients., Methods: Patients who started treatment with osimertinib for EGFR m+ NSCLC between November 2014 and June 2021 were included in this retrospective observational multicentre cohort study. For patients with baseline CNS metastases, the primary endpoint was CNS progression-free survival (CNS-PFS; time from osimertinib start until CNS disease progression or death). For patients with no or unknown baseline CNS metastases, the primary endpoint was CNS disease-free survival (CNS-DFS; time from osimertinib start until occurrence of new CNS metastases). Relationships between SNPs and baseline characteristics with CNS-PFS and CNS-DFS were studied with competing-risks survival analysis. Secondary endpoints were relationships between SNPs and PFS, overall survival, severe toxicity, and osimertinib pharmacokinetics., Findings: From 572 included patients, 201 had baseline CNS metastases. No SNP was associated with CNS-PFS. Genotype ABCG2 34GA/AA and/or ABCB1 3435CC --present in 35% of patients-- was significantly associated with decreased CNS-DFS (hazard ratio 0.28; 95% CI 0.11-0.73; p = 0.009) in the multivariate analysis. This remained significant after applying a Bonferroni correction and internal validation through bootstrapping. ABCG2 421CA/AA was related to more severe toxicity (27.0% versus 16.5%; p = 0.010)., Interpretation: ABCG2 34G>A and ABCB1 3435C>T are predictors for developing new CNS metastases during osimertinib treatment, probably because of diminished drug levels in the CNS. ABCG2 421C>A was significantly related with the incidence of severe toxicity. Pre-emptive genotyping for these SNPs could individualize osimertinib therapy. Addition of ABCG2 inhibitors for patients without ABCG2 34G>A should be studied further, to prevent new CNS metastases during osimertinib treatment., Funding: No funding was received for this trial., Competing Interests: G.D.M.V. reports grants from Eli Lilly; outside the submitted work. A.C.D. reports grants from Boehringer-Ingelheim; outside the submitted work (paid to institution). R.H.J.M. reports an unrestricted grant from Boehringer-Ingelheim (paid to institution) and grants from Astellas, Bayer, Cristal Therapeutics, Novartis, Pamgene, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Servier; outside the submitted work (paid to institution). L.E.L.H. has no relationship to disclose in relation to this manuscript. Outside of the current manuscript: research funding Roche Genentech, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Takeda (all institution, Beigene under negotiation); advisory board: BMS, Eli Lilly, Roche Genentech, Pfizer, Takeda, MSD, Merck, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amgen, Janssen (all institution, Roche one time self); speaker: MSD, Lilly (institution); travel/conference reimbursement: Roche Genentech (self); mentorship program with key opinion leaders: funded by AstraZeneca; fees for educational webinars: Benecke, Medtalks, VJOncology (self), high5oncology (institution); interview sessions funded by Roche Genentech, Bayer, Lilly (institution); local PI of clinical trials: AstraZeneca, Novartis, BMS, MSD, Merck, GSK, Takeda, Blueprint Medicines, Roche Genentech, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Mirati, Abbvie, Gilead. A.J.v.d.W. reports grants and advisory board from AstraZeneca, grants and advisory board from Boehringer-Ingelheim, advisory board from Janssen, advisory board from Novartis, grants and advisory board from Pfizer, grants and advisory board from Roche, grants and advisory board from Takeda, all outside the submitted work; all payment to the UMCG. N.S. provided consultation or attended advisory boards for Boehringer Ingelheim, Cogent Biosciences, Ellipses Pharma, Luszana. N. Steeghs received research grants from Abbvie, Actuate Therapeutics, Amgen, Array, Ascendis Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cantargia, CellCentric, Cogent Biosciences, Cresecendo Biologics, Cytovation, Deciphera, Eli Lilly, Exelixis, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, InteRNA, Janssen, Kinnate Biopharma, Luszana, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merus, Molecular Partners, Navire Pharma, Novartis, Numab Therapeutics, Pfizer, Relay Pharmaceuticals, Revolution Medicin, Roche, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Taiho, Takeda. All outside the submitted work, all payment to the Netherlands Cancer Institute. E.F.S. has no relationship to disclose in relation to the manuscript. Outside the submitted work (all institutional): research grants from Astra Zeneca, MSD, BMS, Roche Genentech, advisory boards Astra Zeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, DSI, MSD, Takeda, Roche, Merck, Novartis, Amgen, Janssen. All other authors declare no competing interests., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

Aim of the Study: Occurrence of hand-foot syndrome (HFS) during capecitabine treatment often results in treatment interruptions (26 %) or treatment discontinuation (17 %), and can severely decrease quality of life. In this study, we investigated whether single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes involved in capecitabine metabolism - other than DPYD - are associated with an increased risk for capecitabine-induced HFS., Methods: Patients treated with capecitabine according to standard of care were enrolled after providing written informed consent for genotyping purposes. Prospectively collected blood samples were used to extract genomic DNA, which was subsequently genotyped for SNPs in CES1, CES2 and CDA. SNPs and clinical baseline factors that were univariably associated with HFS with P ≤ 0.10, were tested in a multivariable model using logistic regression., Results: Of the 446 patients eligible for analysis, 146 (32.7 %) developed HFS, of whom 77 patients (17.3 %) experienced HFS ≥ grade 2. In the multivariable model, CES1 1165-33 C>A (rs2244613, minor allele frequency 19 %) and CDA 266 + 242 A>G (rs10916825, minor allele frequency 35 %) variant allele carriers were at higher risk of HFS ≥ grade 2 (OR 1.888; 95 %CI 1.075-3.315; P = 0.027 and OR 1.865; 95 %CI 1.087-3.200; P = 0.024, respectively)., Conclusions: We showed that CES1 1165-33 C>A and CDA 266 + 242 A>G are significantly associated with HFS grade 2 and grade 3 in patients treated with capecitabine. Prospective studies should assess whether this increased risk can be mitigated in carriers of these SNPs, when pre-emptive genotyping is being followed by dose adjustment or by alternative treatment by a fluoropyrimidine that is not substrate to CES1, such as S1., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Melanoma brain metastasis (MBM) is associated with poor outcome, but targeted therapies (TTs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized treatment over the past decade. We assessed the impact of these treatments in a real-world setting., Methods: A single-center cohort study was performed at a large, tertiary referral center for melanoma (Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands). Overall survival (OS) was assessed before and after 2015, after which TTs and ICIs were increasingly prescribed., Results: There were 430 patients with MBM included; 152 pre-2015 and 278 post-2015. Median OS improved from 4.4 to 6.9 months (HR 0.67, p < 0.001) after 2015. TTs and ICIs prior to MBM diagnosis were associated with poorer median OS as compared to no prior systemic treatment (TTs: 2.0 vs. 10.9 and ICIs: 4.2 vs. 7.9 months, p < 0.001). ICIs directly after MBM diagnosis were associated with improved median OS as compared to no direct ICIs (21.5 vs. 4.2 months, p < 0.001). Stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT; HR 0.49, p = 0.013) and ICIs (HR 0.32, p < 0.001) were independently associated with improved OS., Conclusion: After 2015, OS significantly improved for patients with MBM, especially with SRT and ICIs. Demonstrating a large survival benefit, ICIs should be considered first after MBM diagnosis, if clinically feasible.

Background Anti-cancer vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (VEGFI) frequently induce a rise in blood pressure (BP). The most effective treatment of this BP rise is currently unknown, and risk factors and its association with survival remain inconclusive. Methods and Results Baseline characteristics and BP readings were retrospectively collected from oncology patients who received oral VEGFI treatment (sorafenib, sunitinib, pazopanib, regorafenib, lenvatinib, or cabozantinib). Risk factors for a clinically relevant BP rise (increase of ≥20 mm Hg in systolic BP or ≥10 mm Hg in diastolic BP) were investigated via logistic regression (relative), efficacy of antihypertensives via unpaired t-tests, and association of BP rise with survival via Cox regression analysis. In total, 162 (47%) of 343 included patients developed a clinically relevant BP rise ≥7 days after VEGFI treatment initiation. Both calcium channel blockers and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors effectively reduced systolic BP (-24.1 and -18.2 mm Hg, respectively) and diastolic BP (-12.0 and -11.0 mm Hg, respectively). Pazopanib therapy (odds ratio, 2.71 [95% CI, 1.35-5.42; P =0.005], compared with sorafenib) and estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min per 1.73 m 2 (OR, 1.75 [95% CI, 0.99-3.18, P =0.054]) were risk factors for a BP rise, whereas a baseline BP ≥140/90 mm Hg associated with a lower risk (OR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.25-0.62, P <0.001]). Only for renal cell carcinoma, BP rise was associated with a substantially improved median overall survival compared with no BP rise: 45.4 versus 20.3 months, respectively, P =0.003. Conclusions The type of VEGFI, baseline BP, and baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate determine the VEGFI-induced BP rise. Both calcium channel blockers and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors are effective antihypertensive treatments. Particularly in patients with renal cell carcinoma, a BP rise is associated with improved overall survival.

Background: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients with positive AR-V7 expression in their circulating tumour cells (CTCs) rarely derive benefit from abiraterone and enzalutamide., Design: We performed a prospective, multicenter, single arm phase II clinical trial (CABA-V7) in mCRPC patients previously treated with docetaxel and androgen deprivation therapy., Objective: In this trial, we investigated whether cabazitaxel treatment resulted in clinically meaningful PSA response rates in patients with positive CTC-based AR-V7 expression and collected liquid biopsies for genomic profiling., Results: Cabazitaxel was found to be modestly effective, with only 12% of these patients obtaining a PSA response. Genomic profiling revealed that CTC-based AR-V7 expression was not associated with other known mCRPC-associated alterations. CTC-based AR-V7 status and dichotomised CTC counts were observed as independent prognostic markers at baseline., Conclusions: AR-V7 positivity predicted poor overall survival (OS). However, cabazitaxel-treated AR-V7 positive patients and those lacking AR-V7 positivity, who received cabazitaxel as standard of care, appeared to have similar OS. Therefore, despite the low response rate, cabazitaxel may still be an effective treatment in this poor prognosis, AR-V7 positive patient population., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Ronald de Wit has acted in a consulting or advisory role for Sanofi, Merck, Astellas, Bayer, Orion; and has received research funding from Bayer, Sanofi, Travel support from Sanofi, Bayer. Stefan Sleijfer has acted in a consulting or advisory role for the Center for Personalized Cancer Treatment (chair), Dutch Science Agenda Personalized Medicine (chair) and Supervisory board of SkylineDx; and holds an interest in patent #10555926 (Use of cabazitaxel in the treatment of prostate cancer) held by Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam. Martijn P. Lolkema has acted in a consulting or advisory role for Sanofi, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Astellas, Incyte, Amgen, Janssen Cilag, Bayer, Servier and Pfizer. John. W. M. Martens has acted in a consulting or advisory role for Novartis. Paul Hamberg has acted in a consulting or advisory role for Astellas, MSD, Pfizer AstraZeneca, BMS, Ipsen. Bianca Mostert has acted in consulting or advisory role for Servier, BMS and Lilly; and has received research funding from Sanofi, BMS. Ron H.J. Mathijssen acted in a consulting or advisory role Servier; and has received research funding for Sanofi, Pamgene, Astellas, ISI, Bayer, Servier, Roche, Novartis, Cristal Therapeutics, and Pfizer. All remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) associated diabetes is a harmful adverse event (AE) in patients with cancer following anti-programmed (cell) death protein-1 (PD-1) treatment. There are no available biomarkers able to predict this AE. The primary aim of this study was to investigate C-peptide levels as potential predictor for the occurrence of ICI-related diabetes. The secondary aim was to describe the presence of islet autoantibodies and course of pancreatic enzymes in patients with and without ICI-related diabetes., Methods: From a total of 1318 patients with cancer who started anti-PD-1 treatment 8 cases and 16 controls were studied in this nested case-control study. C-peptide levels, islet autoantibodies, and pancreatic enzymes were measured in prospectively collected blood serum., Results: In cases versus controls, median C-peptide levels were comparable at baseline and before toxicity or at the corresponding time point in controls. No patient had C-peptide levels below reference range before toxicity onset. Two out of eight patients in the ICI-related diabetes group had positive islet autoantibodies, whereas one out of 16 patients in the control group had positive islet autoantibodies. Pancreatic enzymes were elevated before diabetes onset in one patient (13%) and in one control (6%) at the corresponding time point., Conclusions: In patients developing ICI-related diabetes, changes in C-peptide levels, islet autoantibody positivity, and pancreatic enzymes before ICI-related diabetes onset seem comparable to patients without ICI-related diabetes. (NTR: NL6828)., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement EAB, KdJ, TU, RvdW, MWJS, SAAvdB, EOH, SLWK, SB declares having no relevant conflict of interest. CHvdL declares having received consulting fees from Amgen, Pfizer, MSD, payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from MSD. LC declares having received support for attending meetings and/or travel from Ipsen. RAF declares having received consultancy fees from Recordati, support for attending meetings and/or travel from Ipsen. AAMvdV declares having received consulatency fees (paid to the institute) from BMS, MSD, Merck, Eisai, Ipsen, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi. AJ declares having received support for attending meetings and/or travel from Ipsen. JGJVA declares having received consulting fees from MSD, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amphera, Eli-Lilly, Takeda, Bayer, Roche, Astra Zeneca, BIOCAD, payment or honoraria for lectures, presentrations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from MSD, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amphera, Eli-Lilly, Takeda, Bayer, Roche, Astra Zeneca, BIOCAD, having patents planned, issued or pending regarding biomarkers for immunotherapy, allogenic tumor cell lysates. RHJM declares having received grants or contracts (paid to the institute) from Astellas, Bayer, Crital Therapeutics, Novartis, Pamgene, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Servier., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.. All rights reserved.)

Afatinib is an oral small-molecule kinase inhibitor (SMKI) approved for treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) driver mutation. Although oral administration is convenient, most SMKIs experience pH-dependent solubility. A drug-drug interaction between afatinib and proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) has, however, never been studied in humans. Hence, we performed a randomized, three-period cross-over study. Afatinib (30 mg or 40 mg) was administered without PPI (period A), concomitantly with esomeprazole (period B) and three hours after esomeprazole intake (period C). Primary objective was the area under the curve (AUC 0-24 h ) comparing period A to period B and period A to period C. Secondary objectives were other pharmacokinetic parameters and toxicity. Linear mixed effect modelling was performed for differences in AUC 0-24 h and C max between periods A and B and periods A and C. In 18 evaluable NSCLC patients, concomitant use of 40 mg esomeprazole decreased the steady-state afatinib AUC 0-24 h with 10.2% (95% CI -29.2 to +14.0%; p = 0.564) compared to afatinib administration without PPI. Esomeprazole intake three hours prior to afatinib did not significantly influence afatinib AUC 0-24 h (-0.6%; 95% CI -14.9 to +16.1%; p = 1.0). No differences in toxicity were observed. To conclude, esomeprazole did not change the exposure to afatinib in patients with NSCLC. Since there is no clinically relevant drug-drug interaction, esomeprazole can safely be co-administered with afatinib. This is important for clinical practice, because other EGFR-SMKIs (e.g. erlotinib and gefitinib) do experience clinically relevant drug-drug interactions with acid-suppressive agents., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement G.D. Marijn Veerman reports grants from Eli Lilly, outside the submitted work, Roelof W.F. van Leeuwen reports grants from Bayer, Astellas, Pfizer, BMS and Roche, outside the submitted work (paid to institution), Ron H.J. Mathijssen reports an unrestricted grant from Boehringer-Ingelheim (paid to institution). Furthermore, Ron H.J. Mathijssen reports grants from Servier, Sanofi, Bayer, Astellas, Pamgene, Cristal Therapeutics, Pfizer, and Novartis, outside the submitted work (paid to institution), Joachim G.J.V Aerts reports grants from Boehringer-Ingelheim, outside the submitted work (paid to institution), Anne-Marie C. Dingemans reports grants from Boehringer-Ingelheim, outside the submitted work (paid to institution), All other authors declare no to have competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.. All rights reserved.)

Aim: With increasing use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) more patients will develop severe and potentially life-threatening immune-related adverse events (irAEs). So far, predictive models for the occurrence of grade ≥3 irAEs are lacking. Therefore, we analysed associations between patient and disease characteristics, and the occurrence of grade ≥3 irAEs., Methods: Patients with cancer who were treated with anti-PD-1 (+/-anti-CTLA-4) between July 2015 and February 2020, and who were prospectively included in the MULTOMAB-trial, were eligible for this cohort study. Time to and occurrence of grade ≥3 irAEs according to CTCAE v5.0 were retrospectively registered. The associations between patient and disease characteristics and irAE occurrence were analysed using the competing risk cox-regression model of Fine and Gray. Analyses were performed separately in patients treated with monotherapy (anti-PD-1) and combination therapy (anti-PD-1 + anti-CTLA-4). Subgroup analyses were performed in tumour types with the highest number of patients; melanoma and NSCLC., Results: Out of 641 patients, 106 patients (17%) experienced grade ≥3 irAEs. None of the analysed factors were associated with grade ≥3 irAE occurrence in the monotherapy (n = 550) or the combination therapy (n = 91) groups, nor in the subgroup analyses. Of interest, none of the patients with NSCLC with a WHO performance status of 0 (n = 34) experienced grade ≥3 irAEs. Most common NSCLC histology types were adenocarcinoma (n = 99/55%) and squamous cell carcinoma (n = 39/22%)., Concluding Statement: This study shows that patient and disease characteristics are not able to predict the occurrence of serious AEs in patients treated with ICIs., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: EAB, NSV, KdJ, DPH, DEMV, EOH, MWJS, SB, SLWK declares having no relevant conflict of interest. RD has received research support from MSD and Bayer, personal fees from Bluebird Bio, Genticel, other support from Pan Cancer T outside the submitted work (all paid to the Erasmus MC Cancer Institute), as well as European patent application no's. 21152822.9 and 21184727.2. AAMvdV declares having received consultancy fees (paid to the institute) from BMS, MSD, Merck, Eisai, Ipsen, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi. JGJVA declares having received consulting fees from MSD, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amphera, Eli-Lilly, Takeda, Bayer, Roche, Astra Zeneca, BIOCAD, payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from MSD, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amphera, Eli-Lilly, Takeda, Bayer, Roche, Astra Zeneca, BIOCAD, having patents planned, issued or pending regarding biomarkers for immunotherapy, allogenic tumour cell lysates. AJ declares having received support for attending meetings and/or travel from Ipsen. RHJM declares having received grants or contracts (paid to the institute) from Astellas, Bayer, Cristal Therapeutics, Novartis, Pamgene, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Servier., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Nintedanib is an oral small-molecule kinase inhibitor and first-line treatment for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Nintedanib is a substrate of the drug efflux transporter ABCB1. Green tea flavonoids --especially epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG)-- are potent ABCB1 modulators. We investigated if concomitant administration of green tea extract (GTE) could result in a clinically relevant herb-drug interaction. Patients were randomized between A-B and B-A, with A being nintedanib alone and B nintedanib with GTE. Both periods lasted 7 days, in which nintedanib was administered twice daily directly after a meal. In period B, patients additionally received capsules with GTE (500 mg BID, >60% EGCG). Pharmacokinetic sampling for 12 h was performed at day 7 of each period. Primary endpoint was change in geometric mean for the area under the curve (AUC 0-12 h ). A linear mixed model was used to analyse AUCs and maximal concentration (C max ). In 26 included patients, the nintedanib AUC 0-12 h was 21% lower (95% CI -29% to -12%; P < 0.001) in period B (with GTE) compared to period A. C max did not differ significantly between periods; - 14% (95% CI -29% to +4%; P = 0.12). The detrimental effect was predominant in patients with the ABCB1 3435 C>T wild type variant. No differences in toxicities were observed. Exposure to nintedanib decreased with 21% when administered 60 min after GTC for only 7 days. This is a statistically significant interaction which could potentially impair treatment efficacy. Before patients and physicians should definitely be warned to avoid this combination, prospective clinical validation of an exposure-response relationship is necessary., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: In breast cancer patients treated with the anti-estrogen tamoxifen, low concentrations of the active metabolite endoxifen are associated with more disease recurrence. We hypothesized that we could increase endoxifen concentrations by induction of its formation and inhibition of its metabolism by co-administration of probenecid., Methods: We conducted a crossover study and measured endoxifen concentrations in patients on steady-state tamoxifen monotherapy and after 14 days of combination treatment with probenecid. Eleven evaluable patients were included., Results: Treatment with tamoxifen and probenecid resulted in a 26% increase of endoxifen area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC 0-24h ) compared to tamoxifen monotherapy (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8-46%; p  < 0.01), while the maximum observed endoxifen concentration increased with 24% (95% CI: 7-44%; p  < 0.01). The metabolic ratio of endoxifen to tamoxifen increased with 110% (95% CI: 82-143%; p  < 0.001) after the addition of probenecid., Conclusion: Probenecid resulted in a clinically relevant increase of endoxifen concentrations in breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant tamoxifen. This combination therapy could provide a solution for patients with a CYP2D6-poor metabolizer phenotype or endoxifen concentrations below the threshold despite earlier tamoxifen dose., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s), 2022.)

When standard treatment options are not available anymore, patients with advanced cancer may participate in early phase clinical trials. Improving this complex decision-making process may improve their quality of life. Therefore, this prospective multicenter study with questionnaires untangles several contributing factors to decisional conflict (which reflects the quality of decision-making) in patients with advanced cancer who recently decided upon early phase clinical trial participation (phase I or I/II). We hypothesized that health-related quality of life, health literacy, sense of hope, satisfaction with the consultation, timing of the decision, and the decision explain decisional conflict. Mean decisional conflict in 116 patients was 30.0 (SD = 16.9). Multivariate regression analysis showed that less decisional conflict was reported by patients with better global health status (β = −0.185, p = 0.018), higher satisfaction (β = −0.246, p = 0.002), and who made the decision before (β = −0.543, p < 0.001) or within a week after the consultation (β = −0.427, p < 0.001). These variables explained 37% of the variance in decisional conflict. Healthcare professionals should realize that patients with lower global health status and who need more time to decide may require additional support. Although altering such patient intrinsic characteristics is difficult, oncologists can impact the satisfaction with the consultation. Future research should verify whether effective patient-centered communication could prevent decisional conflict.

Retrospective data suggest that gastric acid reduction by proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) impairs the dissolution and subsequent absorption of capecitabine, and thus potentially reduces the capecitabine exposure. Therefore, we examined prospectively the effect of esomeprazole on the pharmacokinetics of capecitabine. In this randomized crossover study, patients with cancer were assigned to 2 sequence groups, each consisting of 3 phases: capecitabine with esomeprazole administration 3 hours before (phase A), capecitabine alone (phase B), and capecitabine concomitant with cola and esomeprazole co-administration 3 hours before (phase C). The primary end point was the relative difference (RD) in exposure to capecitabine assessed by the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero to infinity (AUC 0-inf ) and analyzed by a linear mixed effect model. Twenty-two evaluable patients were included in the analysis. After esomeprazole, there was a 18.9% increase in AUC 0-inf of capecitabine (95% confidence interval (CI) -10.0% to 57.0%, P = 0.36). In addition, capecitabine half-life was significantly longer after esomeprazole (median 0.63 hours vs. 0.46 hours, P = 0.005). Concomitant cola did not completely reverse the effects observed after esomeprazole (RD 3.3% (95% CI -16.3 to 27.4%, P = 1.00). Capecitabine exposure is not negatively influenced by esomeprazole cotreatment. Therefore, altered capecitabine pharmacokinetics do not explain the assumed worse clinical outcome of PPI-cotreated patients with cancer., (© 2021 The Authors. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics © 2021 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Aim of the Study: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic significantly impacted cancer care. In this study, clinical patient characteristics related to COVID-19 outcomes and advanced care planning, in terms of non-oncological treatment restrictions (e.g. do-not-resuscitate codes), were studied in patients with cancer and COVID-19., Methods: The Dutch Oncology COVID-19 Consortium registry was launched in March 2020 in 45 hospitals in the Netherlands, primarily to identify risk factors of a severe COVID-19 outcome in patients with cancer. Here, an updated analysis of the registry was performed, and treatment restrictions (e.g. do-not-intubate codes) were studied in relation to COVID-19 outcomes in patients with cancer. Oncological treatment restrictions were not taken into account., Results: Between 27th March 2020 and 4th February 2021, 1360 patients with cancer and COVID-19 were registered. Follow-up data of 830 patients could be validated for this analysis. Overall, 230 of 830 (27.7%) patients died of COVID-19, and 60% of the remaining 600 patients with resolved COVID-19 were admitted to the hospital. Patients with haematological malignancies or lung cancer had a higher risk of a fatal outcome than other solid tumours. No correlation between anticancer therapies and the risk of a fatal COVID-19 outcome was found. In terms of end-of-life communication, 50% of all patients had restrictions regarding life-prolonging treatment (e.g. do-not-intubate codes). Most identified patients with treatment restrictions had risk factors associated with fatal COVID-19 outcome., Conclusion: There was no evidence of a negative impact of anticancer therapies on COVID-19 outcomes. Timely end-of-life communication as part of advanced care planning could save patients from prolonged suffering and decrease burden in intensive care units. Early discussion of treatment restrictions should therefore be part of routine oncological care, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: P.H. reports consulting fees from Astellas, MSD, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, BMS, Ipsen, all outside the submitted work; D.D. reports personal speakers fees from MSD, Roche, AstraZeneca, BMS, Novartis, Pfizer, all outside the submitted work; EGEdV reports an advisory role at Daiichi Sankyo, NSABP and Sanofi (all outside the submitted work and paid to UMCG), and research funding from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Chugai Pharma, Crescendo, CytomX Therapeutics, G1 Therapeutics, Genentech, Nordic Nanovector, Radius Health, Regeneron, Roche, Servier and Synthon (all outside the submitted work and paid to UMCG); L.H. reports others from boehringer ingelheim, others from BMS, others from Roche Genentech, others from BMS, grants from Roche Genentech, grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, others from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Quadia, grants from Astra Zeneca, others from Eli Lilly, others from Roche Genentech, others from Pfizer, others from MSD, others from Takeda, non-financial support from AstraZeneca, non-financial support from Novartis, non-financial support from BMS, non-financial support from MSD/Merck, non-financial support from GSK, non-financial support from Takeda, non-financial support from Blueprint Medicines, non-financial support from Roche Genentech, others from Amgen, all outside the submitted work; H.W. reports personal fees and non-financial support from Astellas, personal fees from roche, non-financial support from Ipsen, all outside the submitted work; JH has received financial compensation for advisory roles from Achilles Tx, BMS, BioNTech, Eisai, Immunocore, Instil Bio, Ipsen, MSD, Merk Serono, Molecular Partners, Neogene Tx, PokeAcel, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, T-knife, Third Rock Ventures, all outside the submitted work. JH received research grants from Amgen, Asher Bio, BMS, BioNTech, MSD and Novartis, all outside the submitted work. JH owns stock options from Neogene Therapeutics, outside the submitted work; A.D. reports personal fees from Roche, Eli Lily, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, BMS, Novartis, Takeda, Pharmamar, non-financial support from Abbvie, grants from BMS, grants from Amgen, all outside the submitted work; A.V. reports advisory board of BMS, MSD, Merck, Pfizer, Ipsen, Eisai, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Novartis, Sanofi, all paid to Erasmus MC and outside the submitted work; J.G. reports advisory board of Pierre Fabre, BMS, MSD, and Servier, all outside the submitted work; T.H. reports grants from Roche, Astra Zeneca, BMS, advisory board from MSD and BMS, congress support from Takeda, all outside the submitted work; K.S. reports grants and personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, Roche, Pierre Fabre, and Abbvie, all outside the submitted work; all remaining authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Data from previous work suggests that there is no correlation between systemic (plasma) paclitaxel exposure and efficacy in patients treated for esophageal cancer. In this trial, we investigated ATP-binding cassette efflux transporter expression and intratumoral pharmacokinetics of paclitaxel to identify changes which could be a first sign of chemoresistance. Methods: Patients with esophageal cancer treated with paclitaxel and carboplatin (± concomitant radiotherapy) were included. During the first and last cycle of weekly paclitaxel, blood samples and biopsies of esophageal mucosa and tumor tissue were taken. Changes in paclitaxel exposure and expression of ABCB1 (P-glycoprotein) over time were studied in both tumor tissue and normal appearing esophageal mucosa. Results: ABCB1 was significantly higher expressed in tumor tissue compared to esophageal tissue, during both the first and last cycle of paclitaxel (cycle 1: p < 0.01; cycle 5/6: p = 0.01). Interestingly, ABCB1 expression was significantly higher in adenocarcinoma than in squamous cell carcinoma ( p < 0.01). During the first cycle, a trend towards a higher intratumoral paclitaxel concentration was observed compared to the esophageal mucosa concentration (RD:43%; 95%CI: -3% to 111% p = 0.07). Intratumoral and plasma paclitaxel concentrations were significantly correlated during the first cycle (AUC 0-48 h : r = 0.72; p < 0.01). Conclusion: Higher ABCB1 expression in tumor tissue, and differences between histological tumor types might partly explain why tumors respond differently to systemic treatment. Resistance by altered intratumoral paclitaxel concentrations could not be demonstrated because the majority of the biopsies taken at the last cycle of paclitaxel did contain a low amount of tumor cells or no tumor., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 van Eerden, van Doorn, de Man, Heersche, Doukas, van den Bosch, Oomen-de Hoop, de Bruijn, Bins, Ibrahim, Nikkessen, Friberg, Koolen, Spaander and Mathijssen.)

Importance: Death rattle, defined as noisy breathing caused by the presence of mucus in the respiratory tract, is relatively common among dying patients. Although clinical guidelines recommend anticholinergic drugs to reduce the death rattle after nonpharmacological measures fail, evidence regarding their efficacy is lacking. Given that anticholinergics only decrease mucus production, it is unknown whether prophylactic application may be more appropriate., Objective: To determine whether administration of prophylactic scopolamine butylbromide reduces the death rattle., Design, Setting, and Participants: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was performed in 6 hospices in the Netherlands. Patients with a life expectancy of 3 or more days who were admitted to the participating hospices were asked to give advance informed consent from April 10, 2017, through December 31, 2019. When the dying phase was recognized, patients fulfilling the eligibility criteria were randomized. Of the 229 patients who provided advance informed consent, 162 were ultimately randomized. The date of final follow-up was January 31, 2020., Interventions: Administration of subcutaneous scopolamine butylbromide, 20 mg four times a day (n = 79), or placebo (n = 78)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the occurrence of a grade 2 or higher death rattle as defined by Back (range, 0-3; 0, no rattle; 3, rattle audible standing in the door opening) measured at 2 consecutive time points with a 4-hour interval. Secondary outcomes included the time between recognizing the dying phase and the onset of a death rattle and anticholinergic adverse events., Results: Among 162 patients who were randomized, 157 patients (97%; median age, 76 years [IQR, 66-84 years]; 56% women) were included in the primary analyses. A death rattle occurred in 10 patients (13%) in the scopolamine group compared with 21 patients (27%) in the placebo group (difference, 14%; 95% CI, 2%-27%, P = .02). Regarding secondary outcomes, an analysis of the time to death rattle yielded a subdistribution hazard ratio (HR) of 0.44 (95% CI, 0.20-0.92; P = .03; cumulative incidence at 48 hours: 8% in the scopolamine group vs 17% in the placebo group). In the scopolamine vs placebo groups, restlessness occurred in 22 of 79 patients (28%) vs 18 of 78 (23%), dry mouth in 8 of 79 (10%) vs 12 of 78 (15%), and urinary retention in 6 of 26 (23%) vs 3 of 18 (17%), respectively., Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients near the end of life, prophylactic subcutaneous scopolamine butylbromide, compared with placebo, significantly reduced the occurrence of the death rattle., Trial Registration: trialregister.nl Identifier: NTR6264.

Context: Early integration of oncology and palliative care has been recommended to improve patient outcomes at the end of life. A standardized Palliative Care Pathway, consisting of a structured electronic medical checklist, may support such integration., Objectives: We studied the effect of implementation of a Palliative Care Pathway on patients' place of death and advance care planning., Methods: We conducted a prospective pre- and postimplementation study of adult patients with cancer from a single hospital who died between February 2014 and February 2015 (pre-implementation period) or between November 2015 and November 2016 (post-implementation period)., Results: We included 424 patients in the pre- and 426 in the post-implementation period. The pathway was started for 236 patients (55%) in the post-implementation period, on average 33 days (IQR 12-73 days) before death. 74% and 77% of the patients died outside hospital in the pre- and post-implementation period, respectively (P = 0.360). When the PCP was initiated, 83% died outside hospital. Bad-news conversations (75% and 62%, P < 0.001) and preferred place of death (47% and 32%, P < 0.001) were more often documented in the pre-implementation period, whereas a DNR-code was more often documented during the post-implementation period (79% and 89%, P < 0.001)., Conclusions: Implementation of a Palliative Care Pathway had no overall positive effect on place of death and several aspects of advance care planning. Start of a Palliative Care Pathway in the last months of life may be too late to improve end-of-life care. Future research should focus on strategies enabling earlier start of palliative care interventions., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Chemotherapy-induced alopecia (CIA), a side effect with high impact, can be prevented by cooling the scalp during the administration of some cytotoxic drugs. However, the effects of this prolonged scalp cooling on the pharmacokinetics of chemotherapy have never been investigated. In this study, we compared the pharmacokinetics of the widely used chemotherapeutic agent paclitaxel (weekly dose of 80-100 mg/m 2 ) in female patients with solid tumors using concomitant scalp cooling ( n = 14) or not ( n = 24). Blood samples were collected in all patients for pharmacokinetic analyses up to 6 h after one course of paclitaxel administration. The primary endpoint was the clearance (L/h) of paclitaxel. Paclitaxel clearance-expressed as relative difference in geometric means-was 6.8% (90% CI: -16.7% to 4.4%) lower when paclitaxel was administered with concomitant scalp cooling versus paclitaxel infusions without scalp cooling. Within the subgroup of patients using scalp cooling, paclitaxel clearance was not statistically significantly different between patients with CIA (alopecia grade 1 or 2) and those without CIA. Hence, scalp cooling did not negatively influence the clearance of paclitaxel treatment.

Docetaxel entrapped nanoparticle CPC634 is associated with dose-related skin toxicity that resembles conventional docetaxel (Cd)-related skin toxicity. This study compared the cutaneous pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of docetaxel and CPC634. In this randomised cross-over study, patients with solid tumours received one cycle of CPC634 and Cd (both at 75 mg/m 2 ). Skin biopsies were taken at baseline and at day 8 of both cycles. Released and total docetaxel (released docetaxel plus entrapped docetaxel) concentrations and histopathological changes in the skin biopsies were evaluated. Twenty patients underwent paired skin biopsies for pharmacokinetic analysis and 10 patients had biopsies available for histopathological assessment. The total skin docetaxel concentration was 369% (95%CI: 229% to 569%, p < 0.001) higher after CPC634 administration compared to Cd while the released docetaxel concentrations were not statistically different (95%CI: -9% to 63%, p = 0.169). The CPC634 released docetaxel concentration in the skin was positively correlated with plasma concentrations (Pearson's correlation 0.48, p = 0.03). Histopathological examination revealed increased apoptosis, mitotic cells with nuclear atypia, and micronucleation with an enhanced Ki-67 index for both compounds. In conclusion, both CPC634 and Cd treatment result in docetaxel exposure in the skin causing cutaneous anti-mitotic effects such as micronucleation, which could induce an inflammatory reaction leading to skin toxicity.

Preclinical data suggests that protein and calorie restriction (PCR) might improve treatment tolerability without impairing antitumor efficacy. Therefore, we have studied the influence of PCR on irinotecan pharmacokinetics and toxicity. In this crossover trial, patients with liver metastases of solid tumors were included and randomized to treatment with irinotecan preceded by 5 days of PCR (~ 30% caloric and ~ 70% protein restriction) during the first cycle and a second cycle preceded by a normal diet or vice versa. Pharmacokinetic blood sampling and biopsies of both healthy liver and liver metastases were performed. The primary end point was the relative difference in geometric means for the active metabolite SN-38 concentration in healthy liver analyzed by a linear mixed model. No significant differences were seen in irinotecan (+ 16.8%, P = 0.22) and SN-38 (+ 9.8%, P = 0.48) concentrations between PCR and normal diet in healthy liver, as well as in liver metastases (irinotecan: -38.8%, P = 0.05 and SN-38: -13.8%, P = 0.50). PCR increased irinotecan plasma area under the curve from zero to 24 hours (AUC 0-24h ) with 7.1% (P = 0.04) compared with normal diet, whereas the SN-38 plasma AUC 0-24h increased with 50.3% (P < 0.001). Grade ≥ 3 toxicity was not increased during PCR vs. normal diet (P = 0.69). No difference was seen in neutropenia grade ≥ 3 (47% vs. 32% P = 0.38), diarrhea grade ≥ 3 (5% vs. 21% P = 0.25), and febrile neutropenia (5% vs. 16% P = 0.50) during PCR vs. normal diet. In conclusion, plasma SN-38 exposure increased dramatically after PCR, whereas toxicity did not change. PCR did not alter the irinotecan and SN-38 exposure in healthy liver and liver metastases. PCR might therefore potentially improve the therapeutic window in patients treated with irinotecan., (© 2020 The Authors Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics © 2020 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Background: Ranitidine, a histamine 2 blocker, is the standard of care to prevent hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) caused by paclitaxel infusion. However, the added value of ranitidine in this premedication regimen is controversial. Therefore, we compared the incidence of HSRs during paclitaxel treatment between a standard regimen including ranitidine and a regimen without ranitidine., Methods: This prospective, pre-post interventional, non-inferiority study compared the standard premedication regimen (N = 183) with dexamethasone, clemastine and ranitidine with a premedication regimen without ranitidine (N = 183). The primary outcome was the incidence of HSR grade ≥3. Non-inferiority was determined by checking whether the upper bound of the two-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) for the difference in HSR rates excluded the +6% non-inferiority margin., Results: In both the pre-intervention (with ranitidine) and post-intervention (without ranitidine) group 183 patients were included. The incidence of HSR grade ≥3 was 4.4% (N = 8) in the pre-intervention group and 1.6% (N = 3) in the post-intervention group: difference -2.7% (90% CI: -6.2 to 0.1)., Conclusions: As the upper boundary of the 90% CI does not exceed the predefined non-inferiority margin of +6%, it can be concluded that a premedication regimen without ranitidine is non-inferior to a premedication regimen with ranitidine., Clinical Trial Registration: www.trialregister.nl ; NL8173.

A substantial number of melanoma patients do not benefit from therapy with anti-PD-1. Therefore, we investigated the predictive value of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes related to the PD-1 axis in patients with metastatic melanoma. From 119 consecutive melanoma patients who were treated with pembrolizumab or nivolumab monotherapy, blood samples were genotyped for 11 SNPs in nine genes. Associations between SNPs and OS were tested using Cox regression analysis and internally validated by bootstrapping. For SNPs with a statistical significance, an expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) analysis was performed. In a subset of patients, immunophenotyping was performed. Patients with a SNP in PDCD1 (804C > T; rs2227981) had a significantly poorer OS with a 3-year OS rate of 51.8%, as compared to 71% in wild type patients (hazard ratio [HR] 2.37; 95% CI: 1.11-5.04; p = 0.026). eQTL analysis showed that this SNP was associated with decreased gene expression. In addition, PDCD1 804C > T carriers had a reduced fraction of peripheral PD-1 + CD4 + T cells. No other associations between SNPs and OS were found. PDCD1 804C > T is associated with poorer OS after anti-PD-1 monotherapy in patients with metastatic melanoma. This SNP may affect clinical benefit from ICIs by decreasing transcription initiation and expression of PD-1 in T cells.

Small molecule kinase inhibitors (SMKIs) are widely used in oncology. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) for SMKIs could reduce underexposure or overexposure. However, logistical issues such as timing of blood withdrawals hamper its implementation into clinical practice. Extrapolating a random concentration to a trough concentration using the elimination half-life could be a simple and easy way to overcome this problem. In our study plasma concentrations observed during 24 h blood sampling were used for extrapolation to trough levels. The objective was to demonstrate that extrapolation of randomly taken blood samples will lead to equivalent estimated trough samples compared to measured C min values. In total 2241 blood samples were analyzed. The estimated C trough levels of afatinib and sunitinib fulfilled the equivalence criteria if the samples were drawn after T max . The calculated C trough levels of erlotinib, imatinib and sorafenib met the equivalence criteria if they were taken, respectively, 12 h, 3 h and 10 h after drug intake. For regorafenib extrapolation was not feasible. In conclusion, extrapolation of randomly taken drug concentrations to a trough concentration using the mean elimination half-life is feasible for multiple SMKIs. Therefore, this simple method could positively contribute to the implementation of TDM in oncology.

Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in the blood of cancer patients are of high clinical relevance. Since detection and isolation of CTCs often rely on cell dimensions, knowledge of their size is key. We analyzed the median CTC size in a large cohort of breast (BC), prostate (PC), colorectal (CRC), and bladder (BLC) cancer patients. Images of patient-derived CTCs acquired on cartridges of the FDA-cleared CellSearch ® method were retrospectively collected and automatically re-analyzed using the accept software package. The median CTC diameter (μm) was computed per tumor type. The size differences between the different tumor types and references (tumor cell lines and leukocytes) were nonparametrically tested. A total of 1962 CellSearch ® cartridges containing 71 612 CTCs were included. In BC, the median computed diameter (CD) of patient-derived CTCs was 12.4 μm vs 18.4 μm for cultured cell line cells. For PC, CDs were 10.3 μm for CTCs vs 20.7 μm for cultured cell line cells. CDs for CTCs of CRC and BLC were 7.5 μm and 8.6 μm, respectively. Finally, leukocytes were 9.4 μm. CTC size differed statistically significantly between the four tumor types and between CTCs and the reference data. CTC size differences between tumor types are striking and CTCs are smaller than cell line tumor cells, whose size is often used as reference when developing CTC analysis methods. Based on our data, we suggest that the size of CTCs matters and should be kept in mind when designing and optimizing size-based isolation methods., (© 2020 The Authors. Published by FEBS Press and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Erlotinib's gastrointestinal solubility and absorption are decreased by proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Since erlotinib is a lipophilic drug, we hypothesized that concomitant intake with the fatty beverage milk may be a feasible way to increase erlotinib uptake. We performed a two-period, randomized, crossover study to investigate the influence of cow's milk with 3.9% fat on the exposure of erlotinib with and without the PPI esomeprazole in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The effect of esomeprazole was studied in an additional intrapatient comparison., Method: Pharmacokinetic sampling was performed on days 7 and 14 during 24 consecutive hours. During the 7 days prior to pharmacokinetic sampling, erlotinib was taken daily with 250 mL of either water or milk. In the PPI arm, esomeprazole (40 mg once daily 3 h prior to erlotinib) was taken for 3 days., Results: Erlotinib area under the curve from time zero to 24 h (AUC 24 ) did not significantly change when administered with milk, compared with water, in both non-PPI users (n = 14; - 3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 12 to 8%; p = 0.57) and patients who used esomeprazole (n = 15; 0%; 95% CI - 15 to 17%; p = 0.95). Esomeprazole decreased erlotinib AUC 24 by 47% (n = 9; 95% CI - 57 to - 34%; p < 0.001) and C max by 56% (95% CI - 64 to - 46%; p < 0.001). No differences in toxicities were observed between milk and water., Conclusion: Milk with 3.9% fat has no effect on the exposure to erlotinib in NSCLC patients, independent of PPI use. The combination with milk is safe and well tolerated. Concomitant esomeprazole treatment strongly decreased both erlotinib AUC 24 and C max and should be avoided if possible.

Aim of the Study: Patients with cancer might have an increased risk for severe outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To identify risk factors associated with a worse outcome of COVID-19, a nationwide registry was developed for patients with cancer and COVID-19., Methods: This observational cohort study has been designed as a quality of care registry and is executed by the Dutch Oncology COVID-19 Consortium (DOCC), a nationwide collaboration of oncology physicians in the Netherlands. A questionnaire has been developed to collect pseudonymised patient data on patients' characteristics, cancer diagnosis and treatment. All patients with COVID-19 and a cancer diagnosis or treatment in the past 5 years are eligible., Results: Between March 27th and May 4th, 442 patients were registered. For this first analysis, 351 patients were included of whom 114 patients died. In multivariable analyses, age ≥65 years (p < 0.001), male gender (p = 0.035), prior or other malignancy (p = 0.045) and active diagnosis of haematological malignancy (p = 0.046) or lung cancer (p = 0.003) were independent risk factors for a fatal outcome of COVID-19. In a subgroup analysis of patients with active malignancy, the risk for a fatal outcome was mainly determined by tumour type (haematological malignancy or lung cancer) and age (≥65 years)., Conclusion: The findings in this registry indicate that patients with a haematological malignancy or lung cancer have an increased risk of a worse outcome of COVID-19. During the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, these vulnerable patients should avoid exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, whereas treatment adjustments and prioritising vaccination, when available, should also be considered., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement D.D. reports personal fees from speakers fee MSD, personal fees from speakers fee Roche, personal fees from speakers fee AstraZeneca, personal fees from speakers fee BMS, personal fees from speakers fee Novartis, personal fees from speakers fee Pfizer, outside the submitted work; H.W. reports honoraria from Astellas and Roche and travel expenses from Ipsen, outside the submitted work; K.S. reports personal fees and advisory role for Novartis, personal fees from Roche, personal fees and advisory role for MSD, advisory role BMS, advisory role Pierre Fabre, advisory role Abbvie, outside the submitted work; L.H. reports other from Boehringer Ingelheim, other from BMS, other from Roche Genentech, other from BMS, grants from Roche Genentech, grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, other from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Quadia, grants from Astra Zeneca, other from Eli Lilly, other from Roche Genentech, other from Pfizer, other from MSD, other from Takeda, non-financial support from AstraZeneca, non-financial support from Novartis, non-financial support from BMS, non-financial support from MSD/Merck, non-financial support from GSK, non-financial support from Takeda, non-financial support from Blueprint Medicines, non-financial support from Roche Genentech, other from Amgen, outside the submitted work; A.D. reports personal fees from Roche, personal fees from Eli Lily, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from BMS, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Takeda, personal fees from Pharmamar, non-financial support from Abbvie, grants from BMS, grants from Amgen, outside the submitted work; A.V. reports advisory board of BMS, MSD, Merck, Pfizer, Ipsen, Eisai, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Novartis, Sanofi, outside the submitted work. All remaining authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Many cancer patients use additional herbs or supplements in combination with their anti-cancer therapy. Green tea-active ingredient epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG)-is one of the most commonly used dietary supplements among breast cancer patients. EGCG may alter the metabolism of tamoxifen. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the influence of green tea supplements on the pharmacokinetics of endoxifen; the most relevant active metabolite of tamoxifen., Methods: In this single-center, randomized cross-over trial, effects of green tea capsules on endoxifen levels were evaluated. Patients treated with tamoxifen for at least 3 months were eligible for this study. After inclusion, patients were consecutively treated with tamoxifen monotherapy for 28 days and in combination with green tea supplements (1 g twice daily; containing 300 mg EGCG) for 14 days (or vice versa). Blood samples were collected on the last day of monotherapy or combination therapy. Area under the curve (AUC 0-24h ), maximum concentration (C max ) and minimum concentration (C trough ) were obtained from individual plasma concentration-time curves., Results: No difference was found in geometric mean endoxifen AUC 0-24h in the period with green tea versus tamoxifen monotherapy (- 0.4%; 95% CI - 8.6 to 8.5%; p = 0.92). Furthermore, no differences in C max (- 2.8%; - 10.6 to 5.6%; p = 0.47) nor C trough (1.2%; - 7.3 to 10.5%; p = 0.77) were found. Moreover, no severe toxicity was reported during the whole study period., Conclusions: This study demonstrated the absence of a pharmacokinetic interaction between green tea supplements and tamoxifen. Therefore, the use of green tea by patients with tamoxifen does not have to be discouraged.

Although epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are the preferred treatment for patients with EGFR -mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), not all patients benefit. We therefore explored the impact of the presence of mutations found in cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and TKI plasma concentrations during treatment on progression-free survival (PFS). In the prospective START-TKI study blood samples from 41 patients with EGFR -mutated NSCLC treated with EGFR-TKIs were available. Next generation sequencing (NGS) on cfDNA was performed, and plasma TKI concentrations were measured. Patients without complete plasma conversion of EGFR mutation at week 6 had a significantly shorter PFS (5.5 vs. 17.0 months, p = 0.002) and OS (14.0 vs. 25.5 months, p = 0.003) compared to patients with plasma conversion. In thirteen (second line) osimertinib-treated patients with a (plasma or tissue) concomitant TP53 mutation at baseline, PFS was significantly shorter compared to six wild-type cases; 8.8 vs. 18.8 months, p = 0.017. Erlotinib C mean decrease of ≥10% in the second tertile of treatment was also associated with a significantly shorter PFS; 8.9 vs. 23.6 months, p = 0.037. We obtained evidence that absence of plasma loss of the primary EGFR mutation, isolated plasma p.T790M loss after six weeks, baseline concomitant TP53 mutations, and erlotinib C mean decrease during treatment are probably related to worse outcome.

Prior studies have demonstrated an organic anion transporter 6 (OAT6)-mediated accumulation of sorafenib in keratinocytes. The OAT6 inhibitor probenecid decreases sorafenib uptake in skin and might, therefore, decrease sorafenib-induced cutaneous adverse events. Here, the influence of probenecid on sorafenib pharmacokinetics and toxicity was investigated. Pharmacokinetic sampling was performed in 16 patients on steady-state sorafenib treatment at days 1 and 15 of the study. Patients received sorafenib (200-800 mg daily) in combination with probenecid (500 mg two times daily (b.i.d.)) on days 2-15. This study was designed to determine bioequivalence with geometric mean Area under the curve from zero to twelve hours (AUC 0-12 h ) as primary endpoint. During concomitant probenecid, sorafenib plasma AUC 0-12 h decreased by 27% (90% CI: -38% to -14%; P < 0.01). Furthermore, peak and trough levels of sorafenib, as well as sorafenib concentrations in skin, decreased to a similar extent in the presence of probenecid. The metabolic ratio of sorafenib-glucuronide to parent drug increased (+29%) in the presence of probenecid. A decrease in systemic sorafenib concentrations during probenecid administration seems to have influenced cutaneous concentrations. Since sorafenib-glucuronide concentrations increased compared with sorafenib and sorafenib- N -oxide, probenecid may have interrupted enterohepatic circulation of sorafenib by inhibition of the organic anion transporting polypeptides 1B1 (OATP1B1). Sorafenib treatment with probenecid is, therefore, not bioequivalent to sorafenib monotherapy. A clear effect of probenecid on sorafenib toxicity could not be identified in this study.

Purpose: CPC634 is a novel nanoparticle entrapping docetaxel, developed to enhance the intratumoral chemotherapy exposure. This randomized cross-over study compared the intratumoral and plasma pharmacokinetics of CPC634 with conventional docetaxel., Patients and Methods: Adult patients with solid tumors were randomized to receive CPC634 (75 mg/m 2 ) in cycle 1, and conventional docetaxel (75 mg/m 2 ) in cycle 2 or vice versa . The study was powered to identify a 25% increase of intratumoral total docetaxel exposure after CPC634 infusion compared with conventional docetaxel. Four patients were allocated per tumor sampling time point, that is, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours, 7 and 14 days after infusion during both cycles. Total docetaxel and released docetaxel from the nanoparticle were determined in tumor tissue derived from a metastatic lesion and in plasma. Pharmacokinetic data were analyzed using linear mixed modeling., Results: In total, 24 evaluable patients were included. In the tumor, CPC634 exhibited a 461% higher total docetaxel ( P < 0.001) and a comparable released docetaxel concentration ( P = 0.43). Plasma AUC inf was 27% higher ( P = 0.001) and C max was 91% lower ( P < 0.001) for CPC634 released docetaxel. The median observed neutrophil count nadir after conventional docetaxel treatment was lower (0.50 × 10 9 /L) compared with CPC634 (4.30 × 10 9 /L; P < 0.001)., Conclusions: Here, we demonstrated that CPC634 enhanced the intratumoral total docetaxel exposure compared with conventional docetaxel. The lower incidence of neutropenia during CPC634 treatment is presumably related to lower plasma C max of released docetaxel. The unique pharmacokinetic profile of CPC634 nanoparticles has the potential to improve docetaxel treatment. A phase II efficacy trial of CPC634 is currently ongoing., (©2020 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Thyroid dysfunction is among the most common adverse effects during anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) immunotherapy, and alongside correlations with elevated anti-thyroid antibodies (ATAb), studies have found correlations with survival. However, the exact relations remain to be clarified. We, therefore, aimed at clarifying the relationship between thyroid dysfunction, ATAbs, and survival in anti-PD-1 treated cancer patients. Methods: We included 168 patients with nonsmall-cell lung carcinoma, renal cell carcinoma, and metastatic melanoma treated with nivolumab or pembrolizumab. Thyrotropin and free T4 (fT4) levels were measured before each anti-PD-1 infusion. ATAb levels (anti-thyroid peroxidase [TPO] and anti-thyroglobulin [Tg]) were measured at baseline and after two months of treatment. Although the vast majority of patients had detectable levels of ATABs, only a few patients had positive ATAbs when using conventional cut-offs. To study the consequences of detectable ATABs, the cut-off levels were a priori set at the median concentrations at baseline in the study population. Tumor progression was classified according to RECIST v1.1. Results: Patients who acquired overt thyroid dysfunction during treatment had significantly higher overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.18 confidence interval [CI: 0.04-0.76]; p  = 0.020) and progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 0.39 [0.15-0.998]; p  = 0.050) than patients without thyroid dysfunction with 1-year OS rates of 94% vs. 59% and 1-year PFS rates of 64% vs. 34%. During treatment, patients with ATAb levels above the median had a higher OS (HR = 0.39 [0.21-0.72]; p  = 0.003) and PFS (HR = 0.52 [0.33-0.81]; p  = 0.004) than patients with ATAb levels below the median, with 1-year OS rates of 83% vs. 49% and PFS rates of 54% vs. 20%, respectively. When analyzing ATAb levels over time, patients with a persistent ATAb level above the median had a higher OS (HR = 0.41 [0.19-0.89], p  = 0.025) and PFS (HR = 0.54 [0.31-0.95], p  = 0.032) compared with patients with a persistent ATAb level below the median. Patients whose ATAb levels increased above the median during treatment had an improved OS (HR = 0.27 [0.06-1.22], p  = 0.088) and PFS (HR = 0.24 [0.07-0.77], p  = 0.017) compared with patients whose ATAb levels decreased below the median. Conclusions: Acquired overt thyroid toxicity and above median ATAb levels during anti-PD-1 treatment are associated with improved PFS and OS. In addition, our results suggest that ATAb levels at baseline are of clinical relevance for PFS and OS.

Background : Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) results in high local control (LC) rates in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). For central lung tumors, risk-adapted fractionation schedules are used and underdosage to the Planned Target Volume (PTV) is often accepted to respect the dose constraints of the organs at risk in order to avoid high rates of toxicity. The purpose of this study was to analyze the effect of PTV underdosage and other possible prognostic factors on local- and disease control after SBRT in patients with central lung tumors. Material and Methods : Patients with centrally located NSCLC treated with SBRT were included. The doses were converted into biologically equivalent dose using α/β-value of 10 Gy (BED 10 ). Underdosage to the PTV was defined as the (percentage of) PTV receiving less than 100 Gy BED 10 ; (%)PTV < 100 BED 10 . Potential prognostic factors for LC and Disease Free Survival (DFS) were evaluated using Cox regression analysis. Results : Two hundred and twenty patients received ≤12 fractions of SBRT. LC-rates were 88% at 2 years and 81% at 3 years. Twenty-seven patients developed a local recurrence. Both the PTV < 100 BED 10 and %PTV < 100 BED 10 were not prognostic for LC. Tumor size and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV 1 ) were independently prognostic for LC. Disease progression was reported in 75 patients with DFS-rates of 66% at 2 years and 56% at 3 years. Disease recurrence was independent significantly associated with larger tumor diameter, lower lobe tumor location and decreased FEV 1 . Grade 4-5 toxicity was reported in 10 patients (8 with ultra-central tumors) and was fatal in at least 3 patients. Conclusion : Decrease in tumor coverage was not correlated with the local recurrence probability. The LC and DFS were promising after SBRT of centrally located NSCLC with tumor size, FEV 1 and tumor location (for DFS only) as prognostic factors.

Background: A minority of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) benefit from treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Ineffective effector function of activated T and NK cells may lead to reduced tumor cell death, even when these activated effector cells are released from their immune checkpoint brake. Hence, in this study we aimed to assess the association of baseline serum granzyme B, as well as germline variation of the GZMB gene, with clinical outcome to programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) blockade., Methods: A total of 347 patients with stage IV NSCLC who started nivolumab treatment between June 2013 and June 2017 were prospectively included. Baseline serum and whole blood was available, allowing for protein quantification and targeted DNA sequencing. Clinical outcome was based on best overall response (BOR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, V.1.1, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS)., Results: Patients with low serum levels of granzyme B had worse PFS (HR: 1.96; 95% CI: 1.12 to 3.43; p=0.018) and worse OS (HR: 2.08; 95% CI: 1.12 to 3.87; p=0.021) than patients with high baseline serum levels. To validate the findings, germline variation of GZMB rs8192917 was assessed. Patients with homozygous and heterozygous variants of GZMB rs8192917 had worse BOR (OR: 1.60; 95% CI: 1.01 to 2.52; p=0.044) and worse PFS (HR: 1.38; 95% CI:1.02 to 1.87; p=0.036) than wild types., Conclusions: A low baseline serum level of granzyme B and germline variation of GZMB was associated with worse clinical outcome in NSCLC, emphasizing the relevance and additional value of monitoring germline genetic variations which mirror cytotoxic functions of T cells in ICI therapy., Trail Registration Number: Dutch Trial Registry (NL6828)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: CHvdL reports non-financial support from BMS, MSD, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim and AstraZeneca outside the submitted work. AAMvdV reports support from BMS, MSD, Sanofi, Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Ipsen, Eisai and Bayer outside the submitted work. JA reports personal fees from MSD, BMS, Amphera, Eli-Lilly, Takeda, Bayer, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca outside the submitted work, and has a patent allogenic tumor cell lysate licensed to Amphera, a patent combination immunotherapy in cancer and a patent biomarker for immunotherapy pending. RHJM reports grants and non-financial support from Astellas, Bayer and Boehringer Ingelheim, grants from Cristal Therapeutics and Pamgene, grants and personal fees from Novartis, Servier, grants and non-financial support from Pfizer, grants from Roche, Sanofi, outside the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: The study aimed to evaluate overall survival and local control, and to identify factors independently associated with overall survival (OS) and local control (LC)., Materials and Methods: This retrospective study examined 118 patients with primary colorectal cancer, in whom 202 inoperable pulmonary oligometastases were treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy between 2005 and 2015. Primary endpoint was to evaluate OS and identify prognostic factors associated with OS. Secondary aim was to evaluate LC and identify prognostic factors associated with LC., Results: Median follow-up was 31 months (range 3-88 months). Median OS was 39.2 months (95% CI 34.8-43.6 months). Two-, three-, and five-year OS was 69%, 55% and 36%, respectively. LC at 2-, 3-, and 5-year was 83%, 81% and 77% respectively. Factors independently associated with OS in the multivariable analysis included BED 10  ≥ 100 Gy (HR 0.52), male gender (HR 0.52), age < 70 years (HR 0.52) and presence of single metastasis (HR 0.37). BED 10  < 100 Gy (HR 3.67) and pre-SBRT chemotherapy (HR 2.66) were independently associated with poor LC in a multivariable analysis., Conclusions: SBRT was associated with 2- year OS of 69% and 2-year LC of 83%. SBRT dose ≥ 100 Gy BED 10 was independently associated with both better overall survival and local control., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Cabazitaxel, used in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), is associated with adverse events which may require dose reductions or discontinuation of treatment. We investigated the potential association of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes encoding drug transporters and drug-metabolizing enzymes with cabazitaxel toxicity, overall survival (OS) and pharmacokinetics (PK)., Methods: A total of 128 cabazitaxel-treated mCRPC patients, of whom prospectively collected data on toxicity and OS were available and 24 mCRPC patients with available cabazitaxel PK measurements, were genotyped using genomic DNA obtained from EDTA blood. The SLCO1B1 (388A > G; *1B; rs2306283 and 521 T > C; *5; rs4149056 and haplotype SLCO1B1*15), SLCO1B3 (334 T > G; rs4149117), CYP3A4 (*22; rs35599367), CYP3A5 (*3; rs776746), ABCB1 (3435C > T; rs1045642), and TUBB1 (57 + 87A > C; rs463312) SNPs were tested for their association with clinical and PK parameters by univariate/multivariate logistic regression, log-rank test, or Kruskal-Wallis test., Results: The SLCO1B1*15 haplotype was significantly associated with a lower incidence of leukopenia and neutropenia (p = 0.020 and p = 0.028, respectively). Patients harboring a homozygous variant for SLCO1B1*1B experienced higher rate ≥ grade 3 (p = 0.042). None of the SNPs were associated with pharmacokinetics or OS., Conclusions: In this study, SLCO1B1 (SLCO1B1*15 and SLCO1B1*1B) was associated with cabazitaxel-induced adverse events in mCRPC patients. As the associations were opposite to previous studies in other drugs and contradicted an underlying pharmacokinetic rationale, these findings are likely to be false-positive and would ideally be validated with even larger (pharmacokinetic) cohorts.

Purpose: In the multicenter, phase 3, HYpofractionated irradiation for PROstate cancer trial, hypofractionated (HF) radiation therapy was compared with conventionally fractionated (CF) radiation therapy. In previous reports, we could not demonstrate the postulated superiority of hypofractionation in terms of relapse-free survival at 5 years. The frequent use of long-term androgen deprivation therapy might have had substantial effects on relapse-free survival. In the current analysis, we provide updated 7-year relapse-free survival outcomes., Methods and Materials: We enrolled patients with intermediate- to high-risk T1b-T4NX-N0MX-M0 localized prostate cancer. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either HF (64.6 Gy in 19 fractions) or CF (78.0 Gy in 39 fractions) radiation therapy. Based on an estimated α/β ratio for prostate cancer of 1.5 Gy, the EQD2 was 90.4 Gy for HF versus 78.0 Gy for CF radiation therapy. The primary endpoint of the present analysis is relapse-free survival at 7 years., Results: A total of 820 patients were enrolled, of whom 804 were assessable for the current evaluation (407 HF versus 397 CF). Median follow-up was 89 months (interquartile range, 83-99). Concomitant androgen deprivation therapy was prescribed for 537 (67%) of 804 patients for a median duration of 32 months (interquartile range, 10-44). Treatment failure at 7 years was reported in 220 (27.4%) of 804 patients, 107 (26.3%) in HF versus 113 (28.5%) in CF radiation therapy. Seven-year relapse-free survival was 71.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 66.4-76.4) for HF versus 67.6% (95% CI, 62.0-72.5) for CF (P = .52). Overall survival was 80.8% (95% CI, 76.5-84.4) in HF versus 77.6% (95% CI, 73.0-81.5) in CF radiation therapy (P = .17)., Conclusions: The current results of 7-year relapse-free survival confirmed our previous findings that the hypothesized dose escalation in the HF arm did not translate to superior tumor control compared with the CF arm., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The treatment of central lung tumors with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is challenged by the risk of excessive esophageal toxicity. To improve clinical decision making, we aimed to derive normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models in a patient cohort with central lung tumors treated with SBRT and to evaluate the currently used esophagus dose constraints., Methods and Materials: Patients with a central lung tumor who received SBRT (8 fractions of 7.5 Gy or 12 fractions of 5 Gy) were included. Doses were recalculated to an equivalent dose of 2 Gy with an α/β-ratio of 10 Gy for acute and 3 Gy for late toxicity (the cut-off was 3 months). The esophagus was manually delineated. NTCP modeling based on logistic regression was used to relate dose-volume histogram parameters (D max , D 1cc , D 2cc , D 5cc ) to acute and late toxicity. Parameters with a P < .05 were included in the model. Based on the NTCP models, we determined the probability of toxicity for the currently used dose constraints: D 1cc ≤40 Gy for 8 fractions and D 1cc ≤48 Gy for 12 fractions., Results: For this study, 188 patients with 203 tumors were eligible. Esophagus toxicity occurred in 33 patients (18%). Late high-grade toxicity consisted of 2 possible treatment-related deaths (grade 5) and 2 patients with grade 3 toxicity. Acute toxicity consisted of only grade 1 (n = 19) and grade 2 toxicity (n = 10). All investigated dose-volume histogram parameters were significantly correlated to acute and late toxicity. The probability of late high-grade toxicity is 1.1% for 8 fractions and 1.4% for 12 fractions when applying the current dose constraints., Conclusions: High-grade esophageal toxicity occurred in 2.1% of the patients, including 2 possible treatment-related deaths. The currently used dose constraints correspond to a low risk of high-grade toxicity., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Antidepressants like the serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRIs) are often used concomitantly with tamoxifen (e.g. for treatment of depression). This may lead to an additional prolongation of the QTc-interval, with an increased risk of cardiac side effects. Therefore we investigated whether there is a drug-drug interaction between tamoxifen and SRIs resulting in a prolonged QTc-interval., Methods: Electrocardiograms (ECGs) of 100 patients were collected at steady state tamoxifen treatment, with or without concomitant SRI co-medication. QTc-interval was manually measured and calculated using the Fridericia formula. Primary outcome was difference in QTc-interval between tamoxifen monotherapy and tamoxifen concomitantly with an SRI., Results: The mean QTc-interval was 12.4 ms longer when tamoxifen was given concomitantly with an SRI (95% CI:1.8-23.1 ms; P = 0.023). Prolongation of the QTc-interval was particularly pronounced for paroxetine (17.2 ms; 95%CI:1.4-33.0 ms; P = 0.04), escitalopram (12.5 ms; 95%CI:4.4-20.6 ms; P < 0.01) and citalopram (20.7 ms; 95%CI:0.7-40.7 ms; P = 0.047), where other agents like venlafaxine did not seem to prolong the QTc-interval. None of the patients had a QTc-interval of >500 ms., Conclusions: Concomitant use of tamoxifen and SRIs resulted in a significantly higher mean QTc-interval, which was especially the case for paroxetine, escitalopram and citalopram. When concomitant administration with an SRI is warranted venlafaxine is preferred.

Purpose: To compare the results of plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) and next-generation sequencing (NGS) on detection of epidermal growth factor receptor ( EGFR ) primary activating mutations and p.T790M with results of tissue analysis in patients with EGFR mutated non-small-cell lung cancer., Methods: All patients with EGFR mutated non-small cell lung cancer for which a pathology and a plasma specimen were available upon progression between November 2016 and July 2018 were selected. Concordance, Cohen's κ, and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated., Results: Plasma cfDNA and pathology specimens of 36 patients were analyzed. Agreement between ddPCR and NGS was 86% (κ = 0.63) for the primary activating mutation and 94% (κ = 0.89) for the p.T790M detection. Allele ratios were comparable, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.992 and 0.997, respectively. Discrepancies of some degree were found in 15 patients (41.7%). In six patients (16.7%), no mutations were detected in cfDNA. In three patients (8.3%), p.T790M was detected in plasma but not in the pathology specimen, whereas in three other patients (8.3%), p.T790M was demonstrated in the pathology specimen but not in plasma. Concordance of cfDNA and pathology for the primary activating mutation was 69% for ddPCR and 83% for NGS. For the detection of p.T790M, this was 75% (κ = 0.49) for ddPCR as well as for NGS., Conclusion: Mutual agreement is high between NGS and ddPCR in cfDNA on the level of a specific mutation, with comparable ratio results. Plasma testing of EGFR primary activating mutations and p.T790M shows high concordance with pathology results, for NGS as well as for ddPCR, depending on the extent of the panel used. In NGS, more genetic aberrations can be investigated at once.

Background: Patients with advanced cancer for whom standard systemic treatment is no longer available may be offered participation in early phase clinical trials. In the decision making process, both medical-technical information and patient values and preferences are important. Since patients report decisional conflict after deciding on participation in these trials, improving the decision making process is essential. We aim to develop and evaluate an Online Value Clarification Tool (OnVaCT) to assist patients in clarifying their values around this end-of-life decision. This improved sharing of values is hypothesized to support medical oncologists in tailoring their information to individual patients' needs and, consequently, to support patients in taking decisions in line with their values and reduce decisional conflict., Methods: In the first part, patients' values and preferences and medical oncologists' views hereupon will be explored in interviews and focus groups to build a first prototype OnVaCT using digital communication (serious gaming). Next, we will test feasibility during think aloud sessions, to deliver a ready-to-implement OnVaCT. In the second part, the OnVaCT, with accompanied training module, will be evaluated in a pre-test (12-18 months before implementation) post-test (12-18 months after implementation) study in three major Dutch cancer centres. We will include 276 patients (> 18 years) with advanced cancer for whom standard systemic therapy is no longer available, and who are referred for participation in early phase clinical trials. The first consultation will be recorded to analyse patient-physician communication regarding the discussion of patients' values and the decision making process. Three weeks afterwards, decisional conflict will be measured., Discussion: This project aims to support the discussion of patient values when considering participation in early phase clinical trials. By including patients before their first appointment with the medical oncologist and recording that consultation, we are able to link decisional conflict to the decision making process, e.g. the communication during consultation. The study faces challenges such as timely including patients within the short period between referral and first consultation. Furthermore, with new treatments being developed rapidly, molecular stratification may affect the patient populations included in the pre-test and post-test periods., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Registry number: NTR7551 (prospective; July 17, 2018).

Background: Addition of deep hyperthermia results in improved local control (LC) and overall survival (OS) compared to radiotherapy alone in patients with cervical carcinoma. Previously, we showed that the thermal dose of hyperthermia significantly correlates with LC and disease specific survival (DSS). Over the last decade, new radiation techniques were introduced resulting in improved LC., Aim: To validate the effect of thermal dose in a more recent cohort of patients treated with modern radiotherapy techniques, including image guided brachytherapy (IGBT)., Methods: We analyzed primary cervical carcinoma patients treated with a combination of radiotherapy and deep hyperthermia between 2005 and 2016 at our institute. Data on patient, tumor and treatment were collected including the thermal dose parameters TRISE and CEM43T90. Follow-up data on LC, disease free survival, DSS, OS as well as late toxicity data were collected. Data were analyzed using the Cox proportional hazard and Kaplan-Meier analyses., Results: 227 patients were included. In multivariate analysis, histology, FIGO stage, lymphadenopathy, TRISE, CEM43T90 and IGBT had a significant effect on LC. In the patients treated with IGBT, the thermal dose parameter TRISE remained to have a significant effect on LC in univariate analysis., Conclusions: The positive association between thermal dose and clinical outcome is replicated in an independent, recent cohort of cervical carcinoma patients. Importantly, in patients receiving IGBT, the effect of thermal dose on clinical outcome is still observed., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: High-grade glioma cells consume mainly glucose and cannot compensate for glucose restriction. Apoptosis may potentially occur under carbohydrate restriction by a ketogenic diet (KD). We explored the feasibility and safety of KD during standard treatment of chemoradiation in patients with glioblastoma multiforme., Methods: A full liquid KD induced ketosis within 2 weeks before start of chemoradiation. After 6 weeks, the KD was modified with solid foods and medium-chain-triglyceride emulsions and used for an additional 6 weeks while maintaining ketosis. During the total study period (14 weeks), feasibility, safety, coping (both patient and partner), quality of life (QoL), neurological functioning and impairment were measured. Overall survival was analyzed with actuarial estimates., Results: Eleven patients started the study protocol, nine reached ketosis and six (67%) completed the study. Severe adverse effects did not occur. The majority of coping scores ranged from 3 to 6 on a 10-point scale at all timepoints; QoL, neurological functioning, and impairment did not essentially change over time; overall survival ranged between 9.8 and 19.0 months., Conclusion: KD was feasible and safe as an adjuvant to standard chemoradiation treatment of glioblastoma multiforme. A supportive partner and intensive counseling were essential for coping. Future research should identify possible beneficial effects on overall survival., Clinical Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Registry: NTR5167 (registration date 29-01-2015), http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/index.asp., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Many patients have advanced esophageal cancer at diagnosis. However, the most optimal treatment has not been identified. Therefore, we evaluated a weekly regimen of carboplatin (area under the curve (AUC)) of 4 and paclitaxel at 100 mg/m 2 as an induction or palliative treatment. All patients with advanced (gastro)esophageal cancer treated with this regimen between 2002-2018 were included. Exclusion criteria were previous radiotherapy or treatment elsewhere. Data on toxicity, response, and survival were collected. Analyses were performed in two groups: induction (iCT) or palliative chemotherapy (pCT). Median progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method. A total of 291 patients was included (iCT: 122; pCT: 169). Most patients had T3 carcinoma (iCT: 54%; pCT: 66%) and stage IV disease (iCT: 42%; pCT: 91%). A toxicity grade ≥3 occurred mainly as hematological toxicity (iCT: 71%; pCT: 73%) and gastrointestinal toxicity (iCT: 3%; pCT: 5%). Response rates were 48% (iCT) and 44% (pCT). Esophagectomy or definitive chemoradiotherapy followed in 42% of iCT, resulting in a PFS of 22.1 months (interquartile range (IQR): 12.4-114.2) and OS of 26.8 months (IQR: 15.4-91.7). For pCT, PFS was 8.2 months (IQR: 5.1-14.5) and OS 10.9 months (IQR: 6.5-18.3). This retrospective cohort study demonstrated that weekly carboplatin (AUC4) and paclitaxel (100 mg/m 2 ) is a well-tolerated and effective induction or palliative treatment regimen for patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Future research should directly compare this treatment regimen with other first-line treatment options to determine its true value for clinical practice., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Regorafenib exposure could potentially be influenced by an interaction with acid-reducing drugs. In this crossover trial, patients were randomized into two sequence groups consisting of three phases: regorafenib intake alone, regorafenib with concomitant esomeprazole, and regorafenib with esomeprazole 3 hours prior. The primary end point was the relative difference (RD) in geometric means for regorafenib 0-24-hour area under the concentration-time curve (AUC 0-24h ) and was analyzed by a linear mixed model in 14 patients. AUC 0-24h for regorafenib alone was 55.9 μg·hour/mL (coefficient of variance (CV): 40%), and for regorafenib with concomitant esomeprazole or with esomeprazole 3 hours prior AUC 0-24h was 53.7 μg·hour/mL (CV: 34%) and 53.6 μg·hour/mL (CV: 43%), respectively. No significant differences were identified when regorafenib alone was compared with regorafenib with concomitant esomeprazole (RD: -3.9%; 95% confidence interval (CI): -20.5 to 16.1%; P = 1.0) or regorafenib with esomeprazole 3 hours prior (RD: -4.1%; 95% CI: -22.8 to 19.2%; P = 1.0). These findings indicate that regorafenib and esomeprazole can be safely combined in clinical practice., (© 2018 The Authors Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Aims: Docetaxel has been approved for the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer in combination with prednisone. Since prednisone is known to induce the cytochrome P450 iso-enzyme CYP3A4, which is the main metabolizing enzyme of docetaxel in the liver, a potential drug-drug interaction may occur. In this prospective randomized pharmacokinetic cross-over study we investigated docetaxel exposure with concomitant prednisone, compared to docetaxel monotherapy in men with metastatic prostate cancer., Methods: Patients scheduled to receive at least 6 cycles of docetaxel (75 mg/m 2 ) and who gave written informed consent were randomized to receive either the 1 st 3 cycles, or the last 3 consecutive cycles with prednisone (twice daily 5 mg). Pharmacokinetic blood sampling was performed during cycle 3 and cycle 6. Primary endpoint was difference in docetaxel exposure, calculated as area under the curve (AUC 0-inf ) and analysed by means of a linear mixed model. Given the cross-over design the study was powered on 18 patients to answer the primary, pharmacokinetic, endpoint., Results: Eighteen evaluable patients were included in the trial. Docetaxel concentration with concomitant prednisone (AUC 0-inf 2784 ng*h/mL, 95% confidence interval 2436-3183 ng*h/mL) was similar to the concentration of docetaxel monotherapy (AUC 0-inf 2647 ng*h/mL, 95% confidence interval 2377-2949 ng*h/mL). Exploratory analysis showed no toxicity differences between docetaxel monotherapy and docetaxel cycles with prednisone., Conclusion: No significant difference in docetaxel concentrations was observed. In addition, we found similar toxicity profiles in absence and presence of prednisone. Therefore, from a pharmacokinetic point of view, docetaxel may be administrated with or without prednisone., (© 2019 The British Pharmacological Society.)