Search

The publisher regrets that the collaborators for this paper were not listed as such within the author details of the published paper. The collaborators were published in the Acknowledgements and are as follows: Alberto Farolfi, Silvia Ruscelli, Martina Valgiusti, Sara Pini, Marina Faedi, Department of Medical Oncology, IRST IRCCS, Meldola; Angela Ragazzini, Unit of Biostatistics and Clinical Trials, IRST IRCCS, Meldola; Cristina Pittureri and Elena Amaducci, Palliative Care and Hospice Unit, AUSL Romagna, Cesena; Irene Guglieri, Psychooncology Service, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV – IRCCS, Padua; Francesca Bergamo, Sara Lonardi, Department of Clinical and Experimental Oncology, Medical Oncology 1, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV – IRCCS, Padua; Camilla Di Nunzio, Medical Oncology Unit, Oncology–Hematology Department, Guglielmo da Saliceto Hospital, Piacenza; Monica Bosco, Palliative Care Unit, Oncology–Hematology Department, Guglielmo da Saliceto Hospital, Piacenza; Barbara Bocci, Medical Oncology Unit, San Paolo Hospital, Milan; Alfina Bramanti and Chiara Gandini, Oncology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia; Angela Buonadonna, Medical Oncology Unit, Aviano National Cancer Institute, Aviano; Alessandro Comandone, Medical Oncology Unit, Presidio Humanitas Gradenigo, Turin; Sonia Zoccali, Coordinamento Cure Palliative (supported by F.I.L.E., Leniterapia Italian Foundatio), Florence; Maria Simona Pino, Medical Oncology Unit, Oncology Department, S. Maria Annunziata Hospital, Florence; Davide Dalu, Palliative Care Unit, Oncology Department, L. Sacco Hospital, Milan; Pietro Sozzi, Oncology Unit, Ospedale degli Infermi, Ponderano; Alberto Gozza, Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, E.O. Galliera Hospitals, Genoa; Monica Giordano and Carla Longhi, Oncology Unit, Sant'Anna Hospital, Como; Cristina Autelitano, Palliative Care Unit, Arcispedale S. Maria Nuova – IRCCS, Reggio Emilia; Teresa Gamucci, Oncology Unit, SS Trinità Hospital Sora, ASL Frosinone, Frosinone; Cataldo Mastromauro, Oncology Unit, ULSS 12 Veneziana, Venice; Rodolfo Scognamiglio, Hospice Nazareth, Mestre; Daniela Degiovanni, Palliative Care Unit, Casale Monferrato, ASL Alessandria; Federica Negri, Medical Oncology Unit, Istituti Ospitalieri, Cremona; Augusto Caraceni, Palliative Care, Pain Therapy and Rehabilitation Department, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan; and Luigi Montanari, Palliative Care Unit Ravenna, AUSL Romagna, Italy. The publisher would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.

To investigate early changes in tumour perfusion parameters by dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (D-CEUS) and to identify any correlation with survival and tumour response in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) treated with bevacizumab (B). Thirty-seven patients randomized to either chemotherapy (C) plus B or C alone were considered for this study. D-CEUS was performed at baseline and after the first treatment cycle (day 15). Four D-CEUS perfusion parameters were considered: derived peak intensity (DPI), area under the curve (AUC), slope of wash-in (A) and time to peak intensity (TPI). In patients treated with C plus B, a ≥22.5 % reduction in DPI, ≥20 % increase in TPI and ≥10 % reduction in AUC were correlated with higher progression-free survival in the C+B arm (p = 0.048, 0.024 and 0.010, respectively) but not in the C arm. None of the evaluated parameter modifications had a correlation with tumour response or overall survival. D-CEUS could be useful for detecting and quantifying dynamic changes in tumour vascularity as early as 15 days after the start of B-based therapy. Although these changes may be predictive of progression-free survival, no correlation with response or overall survival was found. • D-CEUS showed early changes in liver metastasis perfusion in colorectal cancer. • A decrease in tumour perfusion was associated with longer progression-free survival. • The decrease in perfusion was not correlated with higher overall survival.

Novel predictive biomarkers are needed to improve patient selection and optimize the use of bevacizumab (B) in metastatic colorectal cancer. We analyzed the potential of five circulating biomarkers to predict B efficacy and monitor response. Peripheral blood samples collected at baseline, at the first clinical evaluation and at progression were available for 129 patients enrolled in the prospective multicentric ITACa trial and randomized to receive FOLFOX4/FOLFIRI (CT) with (64 patients) or without B (65 patients). VEGF-A, eNOS, EPHB4, COX2 and HIF-1α mRNA levels were measured by qRT-PCR. Baseline marker expression levels and their modulation during therapy were analyzed in relation to objective response, progression-free survival and overall survival (OS). VEGF and eNOS expression was significantly correlated in both groups (Spearman’s correlation coefficient = 0.80; P 30% reduction in eNOS and VEGF levels from baseline to the first clinical evaluation showed better OS than the others (median OS 31.6 months, 95% CI 21.3–49.5 months and median OS 14.4 months, 95% CI 9.0–22.7 months, respectively, HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.19–0.78, P = 0.008). A reduction in eNOS and VEGF expression from baseline to the first clinical evaluation may indicate a response to B.

The ITACa trial was designed to define the role of cetuximab (Cet) and bevacizumab (Bev) in combination with standard chemotherapy (CT, FOLFIRI or FOLFOX4) as first- and second-line treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer. All patients with WT KRAS tumors who had been enrolled in the first-line trial were randomized onto two independent second-line trials: CT or CT + Cet (study 2A) and CT + Bev or CT + Bev + Cet (study 2B). Patients with mutated KRAS were not eligible for randomization and were treated with CT alone (study 2A) or CT + Bev (study 2B). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). 48 and 56 KRAS WT patients were randomized while 31 and 40 KRAS mutated patients were treated without randomization. Study 2A: median PFS was 3.4 (95%CI 2.3–4.6) and 6.2 (95%CI 4.3–7.8) months for the CT and CT + Cet arms, respectively, with a hazard ratio (HR) = 0.64 (95%CI 0.35–1.16, p = 0.144). Study 2B: median PFS was 7.7 (95%CI 4.1–10.1) and 4.9 (95%CI 3.2–7.0) months for CT + Bev and CT + Cet + Bev arms, respectively, with a HR = 1.31 (95%CI 0.76–2.26, p = 0.330). Notwithstanding limitations due to the small sample size, among patients with WT KRAS the addition of Cet to second-line CT increased PFS, whereas the addition of Cet to CT + Bev was associated with worse PFS.

Background Early palliative care (EPC) in oncology has been shown to have a positive impact on clinical outcome, quality-of-care outcomes, and costs. However, the optimal way for activating EPC has yet to be defined. Methods This prospective, multicentre, randomised study was conducted on 207 outpatients with metastatic or locally advanced inoperable pancreatic cancer. Patients were randomised to receive ‘standard cancer care plus on-demand EPC’ (n=100) or ‘standard cancer care plus systematic EPC’ (n=107). Primary outcome was change in quality of life (QoL) evaluated through the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy – Hepatobiliary questionnaire between baseline (T0) and after 12 weeks (T1), in particular the integration of physical, functional, and Hepatic Cancer Subscale (HCS) combined in the Trial Outcome Index (TOI). Patient mood, survival, relatives' satisfaction with care, and indicators of aggressiveness of care were also evaluated. Findings The mean changes in TOI score and HCS score between T0 and T1 were −4.47 and −0.63, with a difference between groups of 3.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.10–7.57) (p=0.041), and −2.23 and 0.28 (difference between groups of 2.51, 95% CI 0.40–4.61, p=0.013), in favour of interventional group. QoL scores at T1 of TOI scale and HCS were 84.4 versus 78.1 (p=0.022) and 52.0 versus 48.2 (p=0.008), respectively, for interventional and standard arm. Until February 2016, 143 (76.9%) of the 186 evaluable patients had died. There was no difference in overall survival between treatment arms. Interpretations Systematic EPC in advanced pancreatic cancer patients significantly improved QoL with respect to on-demand EPC.

We present the first documented case of hemangioblastoma located in the left colon. A 75-year-old woman undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer experienced rectal bleeding. Colonoscopy revealed a roundish mass covered with normal mucosa in the sigmoid colon. Endoscopic ultrasound showed an isoechoic lesion originating from the third layer of the intestinal wall; underlying layers were normal. Endoscopic ultrasound features were not suggestive of either cancer or malignant stromal tumor. Left hemicolectomy was subsequently performed due to repeated episodes of lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Grossly, a circumscribed submucosal yellowish nodule (13 mm) was observed, which was not attached to any peripheral nerve. Histologically, the lesion was composed of large, atypical cells traversed by a network of blood vessels. Immunohistochemically, the cells showed positivity for inhibin and NSE and weak positivity for S-100. A diagnosis of hemangioblastoma was made. This case highlights that hemangioblastoma of the gastrointestinal tract can also occur. © The Author(s) 2013.

Background KRAS mutations negatively affect outcome after treatment with cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. As only 20% of KRAS wild type (WT) patients respond to cetuximab it is possible that other mutations, constitutively activating the EGFR pathway, are present in the non-responding KRAS WT patients. We retrospectively analyzed objective tumor response rate, (ORR) progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with respect to the mutational status of KRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA and PTEN expression in mCRC patients treated with a cetuximab-based regimen. Methods 67 mCRC patients were enrolled onto the study. DNA was extracted from paraffin-embedded sections derived from primary or metastatic lesions. Exon 2 of KRAS and exon 15 of BRAF were analyzed by direct sequencing, PIK3CA was evaluated by pyrosequencing and PTEN expression by immunohistochemistry. Results BRAF and PIK3CA mutations were independently associated with worse PFS (p = 0.006 and p = 0.028, respectively) and OS (p = 0.008 and p = 0.029, respectively). No differences in clinical outcome were found between patients who were positive or negative for PTEN expression. Conversely, patients negative for KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA mutations were characterized by significantly better ORR, PFS and OS than patients with at least one of these mutations. Conclusions BRAF and PIK3CA mutations would seem to be independent predictors of anti-EGFR therapy effectiveness and could be taken into consideration during treatment decision making.

Anti-EGFR therapy appears to be a potential treatment option for squamous cell anal carcinoma (SCAC). KRAS mutation is a rare event in SCAC, indicating the absence of the principal mechanism of resistance to this type of therapy. However, no information is available from the literature regarding the status of BRAF or PIK3CA in this cancer type. We analysed KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA status in SCAC patients in relation to the clinical-pathological characteristics of patients and to the presence of the human papilloma virus (HPV). One hundred and three patients were treated with the Nigro scheme for anal cancer from March 2001 to August 2012. Fifty patients were considered for the study as there was insufficient paraffinembedded tumour tissue to perform molecular analysis the remaining 53. DNA was extracted from paraffin-embedded sections. KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA gene status and HPV genotype were evaluated by pyrosequencing. KRAS and BRAF genes were wild-type in all cases. Conversely, PIK3CA gene was found to be mutated in 11 (22%) cases. In particular, 8 mutations occurred in exon 9 and 3 in exon 20 of the PIK3CA gene. These findings suggest that SCAC could potentially respond to an anti-EGFR drug. PIK3CA mutation may be involved in the process of carcinogenesis in some cases of SCAC. © 2014 Casadei Gardini et al.