Santiago Aparo

Who Benefits From Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for Gastric Cancer? A Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE Large randomized trials have demonstrated significant survival benefits with the use of adjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation therapy for gastric cancer. The importance of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) remains unclear. We performed an up-to-date meta-analysis of randomized trials testing the use of RT for resectable gastric cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized trials testing adjuvant (including neoadjuvant) RT for resectable gastric cancer. Hazard ratios describing the impact of adjuvant RT on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were extracted directly from the original studies or calculated from survival curves. Pooled estimates were obtained using the inverse variance method. Subgroup analyses were performed to determine whether the efficacy of RT varies with chemotherapy use, RT timing, geographic region, type of nodal dissection performed, or lymph node status. RESULTS Thirteen studies met all inclusion criteria and were used for this analysis. Adjuvant RT was associated with a significant improvement in both OS (HR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.70-0.86, P<.001) and DFS (HR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.63-0.80, P<.001). In the 5 studies that tested adjuvant chemoradiation therapy against adjuvant chemotherapy, similar effects were seen for OS (HR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.67-1.03, P=.087) and DFS (HR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.91-0.65, P=.002). Available data did not reveal any subgroup of patients that does not benefit from adjuvant RT. CONCLUSION In randomized trials for resectable gastric cancer, adjuvant RT provides an approximately 20% improvement in both DFS and OS. Available data do not reveal a subgroup of patients that does not benefit from adjuvant RT. Further study is required to optimize the implementation of adjuvant RT for gastric cancer with regard to patient selection and integration with systemic therapy.

Randomized Phase 2 Trial of the Oncolytic Virus Pelareorep (Reolysin) in Upfront Treatment of Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Pelareorep causes oncolysis in tumor cells with activated Ras. We hypothesized that pelareorep would have efficacy and immunomodulatory activity in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (MPA) when combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel. A randomized phase 2 study (NCT01280058) was conducted in treatment-naive patients with MPA randomized to two treatment arms: paclitaxel/carboplatin + pelareorep (Arm A, n = 36 evaluable patients) versus paclitaxel/carboplatin (Arm B, n = 37 evaluable patients). There was no difference in progression-free survival (PFS) between the arms (Arm A PFS = 4.9 months, Arm B PFS = 5.2 months, P = 0.6), and Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene (KRAS) status did not impact outcome. Quality-adjusted Time without Symptoms or Toxicity analysis revealed that the majority of PFS time was without toxicity or progression (4.3 months). Patient immunophenotype appeared important, as soluble immune biomarkers were associated with treatment outcome (fractalkine, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, regulated on activation, normal T cell expressed and secreted (RANTES), and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)). Increased circulating T and natural killer (NK)-cell subsets were also significantly associated with treatment outcome. Addition of pelareorep was associated with higher levels of 14 proinflammatory plasma cytokines/chemokines and cells with an immunosuppressive phenotype (Tregs, cytotoxic T lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA4)(+) T cells). Overall, pelareorep was safe but does not improve PFS when administered with carboplatin/paclitaxel, regardless of KRAS mutational status. Immunologic studies suggest that chemotherapy backbone improves immune reconstitution and that targeting remaining immunosuppressive mediators may improve oncolytic virotherapy.

Evolvement of the treatment paradigm for metastatic colon cancer. From chemotherapy to targeted therapy

Colorectal Cancer is the second most common cancer in incidence and mortality in the United States. In spite of current screening strategies 1 out of 5 patients still presents with metastatic disease. During the last 10-15 years there has been significant increase in the availability of chemotherapy options for this disease. The recent introduction of molecular markers to the treatment algorithm allows oncologists to tailor treatments for each particular patient. In the following article we give an overview of the landmark publications that led to our current standards and we give our view on particular situations in which the available evidence is not so helpful in making therapeutic decisions.

Survival analysis of Hispanics in a cohort of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) appears to have worse prognosis among Hispanics and other ethnic minorities in the United States. We investigated the overall survival (OS) of Hispanics with HCC and compared it with non‐Hispanic (NH) whites and NH blacks.

A single nucleotide polymorphism in the MGMT gene is a novel prognostic biomarker in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Background: Discovery of novel biomarkers of prognosis and drug response remains an elusive, yet critical goal. Thus, accurate and rapid screening of an array of pertinent mutations/SNPs is an essential step in cancer management. Methods: Using a high-throughput multiplex PCR microarray technique, we simultaneously screened the mutational status/SNP of 32 hotspots in multiple genes for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) from 126 formalin fixed paraffin embedded samples from 78 patients. The efficacy of the technology was validated by cross-comparison with conventional Sanger sequencing and Original Research Article

Alemtuzumab induced ST-segment elevation and acute myocardial dysfunction

Cardiac toxicity as a side effect of chemotherapeutic agents has been well reported in the literature. Cardiac toxicity secondary to alemtuzumab has been reported, presenting as congestive heart failure and arrhythmias. Here we report a case of acute myocardial dysfunction after administration of a test dose of alemtuzumab. Our patient was a 66-year-old man with a history of small lymphocytic lymphoma/chronic lymphocytic lymphoma who received a test dose of alemtuzumab. Twenty minutes post administration, the patient developed nausea, vomiting, rigors, and tachycardia. Electrocardiography (ECG) showed acute ST-segment elevations in contiguous leads V2-V6, I, and AVL with no associated chest pain. Bedside echocardiogram showed akinesis of the anterior septum, apex, distal anterior wall, and decreased left ventricular ejection fraction. Cardiac catheterization showed non-critical occlusive disease and no intervention was undertaken. Post-catheterization ECG revealed resolution of ST segment elevations, TWI in V4-V6, and prolongation of corrected QT. Repeat echocardiogram 10 days after the event demonstrated no improvement in wall motion or ejection fraction. We discuss the possible mechanisms causing ST-elevations and acute myocardial dysfunction after treatment with alemtuzumab. <Learning objective: Alemtuzumab can cause acute myocardial dysfunction after administration of a test dose. Considering that this is a serious adverse effect, detailed cardiac evaluation and a high level of caution are recommended before administration of alemtuzumab. While no clear etiology could be identified for this side effect, excessive and acute cytokine release triggered by alemtuzumab administration is a possible explanation. This could be potentially attenuated by using anti-interleukin-6 or tumor necrosis factor inhibitors.>.

Clinical outcome and prognostic markers for patients with gynecologic malignancies in phase 1 clinical trials: A single institution experience from 1999 to 2010

OBJECTIVES There is a scarcity of outcome data regarding phase 1 trials for patients with gynecologic malignancy. The objective of this study was to assess toxicity, clinical benefit and prognosticators in gynecologic oncology patients participating in phase 1 trials. METHODS All phase 1 oncology trials conducted at Albert Einstein Cancer Center from 1999 to 2010 were reviewed and extracted for relevant demographic and clinical data concerning patients with gynecologic malignancy. Cox-proportional and logistic regression modeling were used for multivariate analysis. RESULTS 120 distinct patients with gynecologic malignancy participated in 41 trials, constituting 30.6% of all phase 1 patients enrolled in the same time period. The median age is 59 years. Out of the 184 patients enrolled, 160 individual responses were evaluable. Seventeen DLT events (9.2%) occurred, including 1 (0.5%) treatment-related mortality. There were 27.2%≥ grade 3 hematologic and 24.4% non-hematologic toxicity. Eighty patients had stable disease (SD, 50%), including 21.9% with SD ≥ 4 months, 11 (6.3%) with partial response (PR), and 3 (1.9%) achieving complete response (CR). The clinical benefit rate (CBR=SD+CR+PR) was 58.1%. Albumin (Alb)≤ 3.5 g/dL and abnormal ANC were independent negative prognosticators of survival. We also found a continuous correlation between changes in Albumin (p=0.02) and LDH (p=0.02) and odds of achieving CBR≥4month. CONCLUSIONS Our clinical outcome and safety data suggested that phase 1 trials may be a reasonable option for patients with advanced and recurrent gynecologic cancer. The potential prognosticators identified should be further validated in larger trials.