Search

Poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are approved in the USA for the treatment of patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) mutated (BRCA+) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). BRCA reversion mutations are a known mechanism of acquired resistance to PARP inhibitors in multiple cancer types, although their impact and prevalence in mCRPC remain unknown.To examine the prevalence of BRCA reversion mutations in the plasma of patients with BRCA+ mCRPC after progression on rucaparib.Men with BRCA+ mCRPC enrolled in Trial of Rucaparib in Prostate Indications 2 (TRITON2) were treated with rucaparib after progressing on one to two lines of androgen receptor-directed and one taxane-based therapy. Cell-free DNA from the plasma of 100 patients, collected at the end of treatment after confirmed progression before May 5, 2020, was queried for BRCA reversion mutations using next-generation sequencing (NGS).The association of clinical efficacy and postprogression genomics was measured in 100 patients with BRCA+ mCRPC treated with rucaparib.No baseline BRCA reversion mutations were observed in 100 BRCA+ patients. NGS identified somatic BRCA reversion mutations in 39% (39/100) of patients after progression. Reversion rates were similar for BRCA2 and BRCA1, irrespective of germline or somatic status, but higher in samples with a high tumor DNA fraction. Most patients with reversions (74%, 29/39) had two or more reversion mutations occurring subclonally at lower allele frequencies than the original BRCA mutations. The incidence of BRCA reversion mutations increased with the duration of rucaparib treatment. The frequency of reversion mutations was higher in patients with an objective (58%) or a prostate-specific antigen (69%) response compared with those without either (39% and 29%, respectively).These findings suggest that BRCA reversion mutations are a significant mechanism of acquired resistance to rucaparib in patients with BRCA+ mCRPC, with evidence of subclonal convergence promoting systemic resistance.Men with BRCA mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer enrolled in TRITON2 were treated with rucaparib after progressing on one to two lines of androgen receptor-directed and one taxane-based therapy. Cell-free DNA from the plasma of 100 patients, collected after radiographic or prostate-specific antigen progression before May 5, 2020, was analyzed by next-generation sequencing and queried for BRCA reversion mutations.

Patients in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) must be successfully randomized to reduce or eliminate bias. Because pre-treatment symptoms have prognostic significance in cancer patients, qualitative and quantitative tools were developed to assess similarity of baseline pre-treatment symptoms across different treatment arms of RCTs as one measure of randomization success. Clinician-reported symptom data from two colorectal cancer RCTs, CO.20 and CO.17, were used to demonstrate the utility of a qualitative visualization tool and quantitative machine learning K-means tool, which grouped patients into clusters using baseline symptoms. Qualitatively, reflection bar graphs (RBGs) visualized potential imbalances in baseline symptoms (i) across treatment arms and (ii) by corresponding patient clusters identified within each treatment arm. RBGs found that the treatment arms for both RCTs had similar symptom profiles, while the lack of significant differences in the proportions of patients in each cluster across treatment arms further confirmed successful randomization. This paper details the creation of visualization, machine-learning, and statistical tools to compare baseline symptoms across RCT treatment arms, demonstrating that the CO.20 and CO.17 trials were successfully randomized by baseline symptoms and are comparable. These tools can therefore be implemented easily to ensure an extra layer of quality assurance of the randomization process for study assessment.

PURPOSE This randomized, open-label trial compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine with those of gemcitabine for resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01964430 ). METHODS We assigned 866 treatment-naive patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2) + gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2) or gemcitabine alone to one 30-40 infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of six 28-day cycles. The primary end point was independently assessed disease-free survival (DFS). Additional end points included investigator-assessed DFS, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS Two hundred eighty-seven of 432 patients and 310 of 434 patients completed nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine and gemcitabine treatment, respectively. At primary data cutoff (December 31, 2018; median follow-up, 38.5 [interquartile range [IQR], 33.8-43 months), the median independently assessed DFS was 19.4 ( nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 18.8 months (gemcitabine; hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.729 to 1.063; P = .18). The median investigator-assessed DFS was 16.6 (IQR, 8.4-47.0) and 13.7 (IQR, 8.3-44.1) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.694 to 0.965; P = .02). The median OS (427 events; 68% mature) was 40.5 (IQR, 20.7 to not reached) and 36.2 (IQR, 17.7-53.3) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.680 to 0.996; P = .045). At a 16-month follow-up (cutoff, April 3, 2020; median follow-up, 51.4 months [IQR, 47.0-57.0]), the median OS (511 events; 81% mature) was 41.8 ( nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 37.7 months (gemcitabine; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.687 to 0.973; P = .0232). At the 5-year follow-up (cutoff, April 9, 2021; median follow-up, 63.2 months [IQR, 60.1-68.7]), the median OS (555 events; 88% mature) was 41.8 versus 37.7 months, respectively (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.678 to 0.947; P = .0091). Eighty-six percent ( nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) and 68% (gemcitabine) of patients experienced grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events. Two patients per study arm died of treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSION The primary end point (independently assessed DFS) was not met despite favorable OS seen with nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine.

The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colon cancer continues to be debated. The presence of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) after surgery predicts very poor recurrence-free survival, whereas its absence predicts a low risk of recurrence. The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for ctDNA-positive patients is not well understood.We conducted a trial to assess whether a ctDNA-guided approach could reduce the use of adjuvant chemotherapy without compromising recurrence risk. Patients with stage II colon cancer were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to have treatment decisions guided by either ctDNA results or standard clinicopathological features. For ctDNA-guided management, a ctDNA-positive result at 4 or 7 weeks after surgery prompted oxaliplatin-based or fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy. Patients who were ctDNA-negative were not treated. The primary efficacy end point was recurrence-free survival at 2 years. A key secondary end point was adjuvant chemotherapy use.Of the 455 patients who underwent randomization, 302 were assigned to ctDNA-guided management and 153 to standard management. The median follow-up was 37 months. A lower percentage of patients in the ctDNA-guided group than in the standard-management group received adjuvant chemotherapy (15% vs. 28%; relative risk, 1.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25 to 2.65). In the evaluation of 2-year recurrence-free survival, ctDNA-guided management was noninferior to standard management (93.5% and 92.4%, respectively; absolute difference, 1.1 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.1 to 6.2 [noninferiority margin, -8.5 percentage points]). Three-year recurrence-free survival was 86.4% among ctDNA-positive patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy and 92.5% among ctDNA-negative patients who did not.A ctDNA-guided approach to the treatment of stage II colon cancer reduced adjuvant chemotherapy use without compromising recurrence-free survival. (Supported by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and others; DYNAMIC Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12615000381583.).

Gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) are the most common gastrointestinal tract mesenchymal tumours. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have transformed the management of advanced GIST. Imatinib was the first TKI to gain approval as management for patients with advanced GIST, establishing a new standard of care. Since then, as a result of several trials including the GRID and INVICTUS studies, we now have five lines of approved targeted therapy, including imatinib, sunitinib, regorafenib, ripretinib and avapritinib for the treatment of unresectable, advanced GISTs. In this review, the Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group (AGITG) provide an overview of the key trials that have changed clinical practice, discuss the molecular drivers of GISTs, the importance of molecular testing and directing therapy according to molecular targets, as well as future strategies in the management of advanced GISTs.

Background Complementary medicines (CM) are frequently used by patients with cancer. Controversy exists over the effectiveness and risk that CM may add to conventional cancer therapy. The incidence of CM use among patients enrolled in phase III clinical trials is unknown. Methods Medication lists from 6 international phase III clinical trials were retrospectively reviewed to identify patients using CM. Patients had metastatic breast, colorectal, or lung cancers. Quality of life, adverse events, overall survival, and progression-free survival were compared between CM users and non-users. Baseline differences between groups were adjusted with propensity score matching groups. Results Seven hundred and six of 3446 patients (20.5%) used at least one CM. CM use was highest among patients with breast cancer (35.6%). CM users had more favorable baseline prognostic factors (ECOG 0-1, non-smoking status, younger age, and fewer metastases). CM use was associated with lower rates of adverse events (50% vs. 62%, P = .002) and quality of life was similar between both groups. After adjustment with propensity score matching, CM use was also associated with longer overall survival in patients with lung cancer (adjusted hazard ratio 0.80, 95%CI, 0.68-0.94, P =.0054). However, several key control variables like EGFR status were not available. Conclusion One in 5 patients in phase III clinical trials report using CM. CM was not associated with worse cancer-specific outcomes. However, CM users had more favorable baseline prognostic factors, and likely other confounders that may have contributed to improved outcomes observed in the lung cohort. Physicians should monitor for CM use and potential interactions with clinical trial drugs.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) is highly lethal. Combination chemotherapy regimens improve overall survival (OS). Historically, only one third of mPDAC patients in Victoria received chemotherapy (1) . AIM: To describe current Australian chemotherapy utilisation and outcomes in patients with mPDAC using the multi-site PURPLE (Pancreatic cancer: Understanding Routine Practice and Lifting End Results) registry. METHODS: PURPLE collects longitudinal data on consecutive patients with pancreatic cancer seen since January 2016. Data was collated for patients with mPDAC from six Victorian sites, and analysed descriptively. RESULTS: Three-hundred-and-sixty-three patients with mPDAC were identified. Median age was 70 years (20-94). First line chemotherapy was administered in 195 patients (54%). Prevalent regimens included gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel (71%), gemcitabine alone (10%) and FOLFIRINOX (6%). Sixty-two of 195 (32%) patients who received first line treatment have proceeded to second line chemotherapy. Chemotherapy treated patients were younger (69 versus 73 years, p

Supplementary Figure 1 and 2

Purpose:The PARP inhibitor rucaparib is approved in the United States for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and a deleterious germline and/or somatic BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) alteration. While sequencing of tumor tissue is considered the standard for identifying patients with BRCA alterations (BRCA+), plasma profiling may provide a minimally invasive option to select patients for rucaparib treatment. Here, we report clinical efficacy in patients with BRCA+ mCRPC identified through central plasma, central tissue, or local genomic testing and enrolled in TRITON2.Patients and Methods:Patients had progressed after next-generation androgen receptor–directed and taxane-based therapies for mCRPC and had BRCA alterations identified by central sequencing of plasma and/or tissue samples or local genomic testing. Concordance of plasma/tissue BRCA status and objective response rate and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rates were summarized.Results:TRITON2 enrolled 115 patients with BRCA+ identified by central plasma (n = 34), central tissue (n = 37), or local (n = 44) testing. Plasma/tissue concordance was determined in 38 patients with paired samples and was 47% in 19 patients with a somatic BRCA alteration. No statistically significant differences were observed between objective and PSA response rates to rucaparib across the 3 assay groups. Patients unable to provide tissue samples and tested solely by plasma assay responded at rates no different from patients identified as BRCA+ by tissue testing.Conclusions:Plasma, tissue, and local testing of mCRPC patients can be used to identify men with BRCA+ mCRPC who can benefit from treatment with the PARP inhibitor rucaparib.

Purpose: The PARP inhibitor rucaparib is approved in the United States for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and a deleterious germline and/or somatic BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) alteration. While sequencing of tumor tissue is considered the standard for identifying patients with BRCA alterations (BRCA+), plasma profiling may provide a minimally invasive option to select patients for rucaparib treatment. Here, we report clinical efficacy in patients with BRCA+ mCRPC identified through central plasma, central tissue, or local genomic testing and enrolled in TRITON2. Patients and Methods: Patients had progressed after next-generation androgen receptor–directed and taxane-based therapies for mCRPC and had BRCA alterations identified by central sequencing of plasma and/or tissue samples or local genomic testing. Concordance of plasma/tissue BRCA status and objective response rate and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rates were summarized. Results: TRITON2 enrolled 115 patients with BRCA+ identified by central plasma (n = 34), central tissue (n = 37), or local (n = 44) testing. Plasma/tissue concordance was determined in 38 patients with paired samples and was 47% in 19 patients with a somatic BRCA alteration. No statistically significant differences were observed between objective and PSA response rates to rucaparib across the 3 assay groups. Patients unable to provide tissue samples and tested solely by plasma assay responded at rates no different from patients identified as BRCA+ by tissue testing. Conclusions: Plasma, tissue, and local testing of mCRPC patients can be used to identify men with BRCA+ mCRPC who can benefit from treatment with the PARP inhibitor rucaparib.

Background Prior studies have reported for several cancer types that treatment in the private sector is associated with improved survival outcomes. Data for patients with locally advanced unresectable and metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) have not previously been reported. Methods Analysis of patients from January 2016 to June 2020 registered to a multicentre prospective cancer database. Baseline demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics were compared. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare overall survival (OS). Multivariate Cox and logistic regression analyses were used to determine predictors of mortality and first-line chemotherapy treatment, respectively. Results Of 822 patients, 22.5% received private care. Private patients were older (median 71.5 vs. 68.9 years, p ≤ .05), had better performance status (ECOG 0 to 1: 82.2 vs. 73.5%, p = .05) and more likely to reside in an area with high socioeconomic advantage (67.0 vs. 19.6%, p ≤ .01). Private patients were more likely to receive first-line chemotherapy (69.7 vs. 54.2%, p ≤ .01) with logistic regression demonstrating private care (OR: 1.87, 95% CI: 1.20 to 2.97) as an independent predictor of receiving chemotherapy. Private patients had prolonged survival (median OS: 9.2 vs. 6.9 months, HR 1.2, p = .05). Receiving first-line chemotherapy was an independent predictor of mortality, but private care was not. Conclusions Care in the private system is associated with improved OS, with higher uptake of first-line chemotherapy appearing to be the main contributor. Given the discrepancy, further studies are needed to determine what factors are driving this difference.

Analyzing longitudinal cancer quality-of-life (QoL) measurements and their impact on clinical outcomes may improve our understanding of patient trajectories during systemic therapy. We applied an unsupervised growth mixture modeling (GMM) approach to identify unobserved subpopulations ("patient clusters") in the CO.20 clinical trial longitudinal QoL data. Classes were then evaluated for differences in clinico-epidemiologic characteristics and overall survival (OS).In CO.20, 750 chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients were randomized to receive Brivanib+Cetuximab (n = 376, experimental arm) versus Cetuximab+Placebo (n = 374, standard arm) for 16 weeks. EORTC-QLQ-C30 QoL summary scores were calculated for each patient at seven time points, and GMM was applied to identify patient clusters (termed "classes"). Log-rank/Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression analyses were conducted to analyze the survival performance between classes. Cox analyses were used to explore the relationship between baseline QoL, individual slope, and the quadratic terms from the GMM output with OS.In univariable analysis, the linear mixed effect model (LMM) identified sex and ECOG Performance Status as strongly associated with the longitudinal QoL score (p 0.01). The patients within each treatment arm were clustered into three distinct QoL-based classes by GMM, respectively. The three classes identified in the experimental (log-rank p-value = 0.00058) and in the control arms (p 0.0001) each showed significantly different survival performance. The GMM's baseline, slope, and quadratic terms were each significantly associated with OS (p 0.001).GMM can be used to analyze longitudinal QoL data in cancer studies, by identifying unobserved subpopulations (patient clusters). As demonstrated by CO.20 data, these classes can have important implications, including clinical prognostication.

Treatment with cetuximab provides a survival benefit for patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Practice-defining cetuximab studies utilised weekly (q1w) administration. More convenient second weekly (q2w) administration is supported by pharmacokinetic data and a recent meta-analysis, but large head-to-head studies have not been conducted. Therapeutic Goods Association (TGA) prescribing information states cetuximab be administered q1w for all indications.To assess the real-world use of q1w versus q2w cetuximab schedule and any difference in outcomes.We analysed data from a prospective mCRC database at seven Melbourne hospitals from January 2010 to August 2019. Characteristics and outcomes for cetuximab-treated patients were examined, comparing q1w versus q2w schedules. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were the primary endpoints.Of 214 eligible patients, 103 (48%) received q1w and 111 (52%) received q2w cetuximab. Q2w cetuximab has been used in70% of patients from 2015. Q2w was more commonly used in public patients (70% vs 13% in private, P 0.001), in left-sided primary tumours (83% vs 68%, P = 0.025) and in combination with chemotherapy (73% q2w vs 40% q1w, P 0.001). Q2w treatment was less common in BRAFV600E mutated tumours (4% vs 13%, P = 0.001). PFS was similar across all lines of therapy, including when analyses were limited to a left-sided primary and there was no difference in OS in multivariate analysis.This real-world analysis shows q2w cetuximab has become the dominant method of administration, despite TGA guidance. Our outcome data adds to other data supporting the use of q2w cetuximab as the standard option. Consideration could be given to modifying current TGA advice.

The European Green Deal is a plan to decarbonise the EU economy by 2050, revolutionise the EU’s energy system, profoundly transform the economy and inspire efforts to combat climate change. But the plan will also have profound geopolitical repercussions. The Green Deal will affect geopolitics through its impact on the EU energy balance and global markets; on oil and gas-producing countries in the EU neighbourhood; on European energy security; and on global trade patterns, notably via the carbon border adjustment mechanism. At least some of these changes are likely to impact partner countries adversely. The EU needs to wake up to the consequences abroad of its domestic decisions. It should prepare to help manage the geopolitical aspects of the European Green Deal. Relationships with important neighbourhood countries such as Russia and Algeria, and with global players including the United States, China and Saudi Arabia, are central to this effort, which can be structured around seven actions: 1) Help neighbouring oil and gas-exporting countries manage the repercussions of the European Green Deal. The EU should engage with these countries to foster their economic diversification, including into renewable energy and green hydrogen that could in the future be exported to Europe; 2) Improve the security of critical raw materials supply and limit dependence, first and foremost on China. Essential measures include greater supply diversification, increased recycling volumes and substitution of critical materials; 3) Work with the US and other partners to establish a ‘climate club’ whose members will apply similar carbon border adjustment measures. All countries, including China, would be welcome to join if they commit to abide by the club's objectives and rules; 4) Become a global standard-setter for the energy transition, particularly in hydrogen and green bonds. Requiring compliance with strict environmental regulations as a condition to access the EU market will be strong encouragement to go green for all countries; 5) Internationalise the European Green Deal by mobilising the EU budget, the EU Recovery and Resilience Fund, and EU development policy; 6) Promote global coalitions for climate change mitigation, for example through a global coalition for the permafrost, which would fund measures to contain the permafrost thaw; 7) Promote a global platform on the new economics of climate action to share lessons learned and best practices.

B-Raf proto-oncogene (BRAF)-V600E mutations (BRAFmt) in colorectal cancer (CRC) predominantly occur in right-side (RS) primaries. In metastatic CRC (mCRC), there is substantial overlap between the reported features of BRAFmt and of an RS primary. To explore the significance of BRAFmt in a left-side (LS) primary, we analysed data from a multi-site mCRC registry. Tumours distal to the splenic flexure were considered LS. Of 3380 patients enrolled from June 2009 to June 2020, 214 (13%) of 1657 with known status were BRAFmt: 127 (24%) of 524 RS and 87 (8%) of 1133 LS. LS versus RS BRAFmt were younger (mean 59.5 vs. 65.1 years; p = 0.01), whereas sex (48 vs. 59% female; p = 0.13), mismatch repair-deficiency (dMMR) (16 vs. 21%; p = 0.47), and overall survival (OS) (median 15.1 vs. 17.7 months; p = 0.98) were similar. LS BRAFmt versus LS BRAF wildtype (wt) were of similar age (59.5 vs. 61.3 years; p = 0.28) with more females (48 vs. 37%; p = 0.04), more dMMR (16 vs. 1%; p < 0.0001), and inferior OS (median 15.1 vs. 36.6 months; p < 0.0001). Initial treatment with chemotherapy plus an epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor produced median progression-free survival (PFS) of 4.3 versus 12.3 months (p = 0.20) for LS BRAFmt (n = 9) versus LS BRAFwt (n = 104). Initial chemotherapy and bevacizumab produced a median PFS of 7.6 versus 11.6 months (p = 0.02) for LS BRAFmt (n = 36) versus LS BRAFwt (n = 438), respectively. LS BRAFmt cancers share many features with RS BRAFmt cancers, including poor survival outcomes. Mature data on the activity of BRAF-targeted therapies in the first-line setting are eagerly awaited.

Use of neoadjuvant (NA) chemotherapy is recommended when pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is borderline resectable METHOD: A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with localized PDAC between January 2016 and March 2019 within the Australasian Pancreatic Cancer Registry (PURPLE, Pancreatic cancer: Understanding Routine Practice and Lifting End results) was performed. Clinicopathological characteristics, treatment, and outcome were analyzed. Overall survival (OS) comparison was performed using log-rank model and Kaplan-Meier analysis.The PURPLE database included 754 cases with localised PDAC, including 148 (20%) cases with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC). Of the 148 BRPC patients, 44 (30%) underwent immediate surgery, 80 (54%) received NA chemotherapy, and 24 (16%) were inoperable. The median age of NA therapy patients was 63 years and FOLFIRINOX (53%) was more often used as NA therapy than gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (31%). Patients who received FOLFIRINOX were younger than those who received gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (60 years vs. 67 years, p = .01). Surgery was performed in 54% (43 of 80) of BRPC patients receiving NA chemotherapy, with 53% (16 of 30) achieving R0 resections. BRPC patients undergoing surgery had a median OS of 30 months, and 38% (9 of 24) achieved R0 resection. NA chemotherapy patients had a median OS of 20 months, improving to 24 months versus 10 months for patients receiving FOLFIRINOX compared to gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (Hazard Ratio (HR) .3, p .0001).NA chemotherapy use in BRPC is increasing in Australia. One half of patients receiving NA chemotherapy proceed to curative resection, with 53% achieving R0 resections. Patients receiving Infusional 5-flurouracil, Irinotecan and Oxaliplatin (FOLIRINOX) had increased survival than gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel. Treatment strategies are being explored in the MASTERPLAN and DYNAMIC-Pancreas trials.

BACKGROUND: Evidence supporting dose modifications to reduce serious treatment-related adverse events of antineoplastic therapy is limited and frequently based on clinical trial protocols, which are not always generalisable to community patients. eviQ is an online resource with treatment protocols and recommendations for dose modification formulated by expert opinion and evidence-based review. Original recommended haematological thresholds to delay treatment were: neutrophil count

We investigate differences in spousal reports of intimate partner violence (IPV) against women and men using a sample of 800 couples in rural Kenya. We find that up to one-third of couples disagree but that disagreement varies by violence type and victim's gender. We study the role of gender attitudes in explaining this heterogeneity. We find that couples with more gender-unequal attitudes are more likely to agree on violence against women and less likely to agree on violence against men. This suggests that gender norms govern reporting by the victim. Thus, discrepancies may result even if perpetrators report accurately.

Trifluridine/tipiracil is available on the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme for the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) previously treated with, or not considered candidates for, fluoropyrimidine-, oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based chemotherapies, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor agents. This article reviews trifluridine/tipiracil clinical data and presents practical information on its use in the management of refractory mCRC in Australia. Whereas the primary mechanism of action of fluoropyrimidines such as fluorouracil (5-FU) and capecitabine is enzyme inhibition of nucleotide synthesis, trifluridine/tipiracil primarily acts by incorporation into DNA, resulting in DNA dysfunction. Trifluridine/tipiracil has activity in patients with 5-FU-resistant tumors and can be considered in patients with prior intolerance or toxicity to 5-FU. In the pivotal phase III RECOURSE trial evaluating trifluridine/tipiracil in chemotherapy-refractory mCRC, efficacy benefits were observed across all a priori prognostic subgroups including those defined by age (≥65 and ≥75 years), geographical origin, primary tumor site or KRAS status. Trifluridine/tipiracil therapy benefits appropriately selected patients who have an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1, with no more than mild hepatic impairment or mild-to-moderate renal impairment, and who are capable of adhering to oral therapy safely. Appropriate dosing, monitoring for adverse events and effective management of side effects are essential.

Introduction Pancreatic cancer remains a challenging malignancy due to the high proportion of patients diagnosed at advanced stages and the limited treatment options. This article discusses recent evidence in the management of both localised and advanced pancreatic cancer and offers an expert opinion on current best practice. Areas covered For patients with localised disease, the evidence for adjuvant chemotherapy is discussed as well as emerging neoadjuvant approaches for resectable, borderline resectable and locally advanced disease. Advances in metastatic disease are discussed including cytotoxic chemotherapy, targeted therapies and the role of genomic testing to identify patients with molecular alterations. Reviewed literature included; journal publications, abstracts presented at major international oncology meetings and ongoing clinical trials databases. Expert opinion Pancreatic cancer is a devastating diagnosis and despite recent advances has a very poor prognosis. Only a minority of patients, 20%, are diagnosed with potentially curable disease. The shifting paradigm towards neoadjuvant therapy may improve resectability and survival rates however robust evidence is required. Thus far, there has only been limited progress in advanced stage disease. Genomic testing may potentially identify more treatment targets although limited to small subgroups.