Current risk models in solitary fibrous tumour (SFT) were developed using cohorts with short follow-up and cannot reliably identify low-risk patients. We recently developed a novel risk model ...(G-score) to account for both early and late recurrences. Here, we aimed to validate the G-score in a large international cohort with long-term follow-up.
Data were collected from nine sarcoma referral centres worldwide. Recurrence-free interval (RFi) was the primary endpoint.
The cohort comprised 318 patients with localised extrameningeal SFTs. Disease recurrence occurred in 96 patients (33%). The estimated 5-year RFi rate was 72%, and the 10-year RFi rate was 52%. G-score precisely predicted recurrence risk with estimated 10-year RFi rate of 84% in low risk, 54% in intermediate risk and 36% in high risk (p < 0.001; C-index 0.691). The mDemicco (p < 0.001; C-index 0.749) and Salas
(p < 0.001; C-index 0.674) models also predicted RFi but identified low-risk patients less accurate with 10-year RFi rates of 72% and 70%, respectively.
G-score is a highly significant predictor of early and late recurrence in SFT and is superior to other models to predict patients at low risk of relapse. A less intensive follow-up schedule could be considered for patients at low recurrence risk according to G-score.
Abstract
Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy improves outcomes of pts with early breast cancer, but CINV have been regarded as two of the most disturbing side effects, affecting their quality of life ...(QoL). In this study, the primary objective was to compare the efficacy of olanzapine in addition to the standard aprepitant-based antiemetic regimen for CINV in pts receiving the 1st cycle of adjuvant AC chemotherapy (adriamycin 60mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 600mg/m2). The secondary objective was to compare the tolerability and efficacy of such regimen in the 4 cycles of AC.
Methods: This is a prospective single center, randomized study. Eligible pts had early stage breast cancer of Chinese ethnicity; they were chemotherapy- naive and treated with adjuvant AC chemotherapy. Antiemetic regimen for all studied population included aprepitant, ondansetron and dexamethasone; patients were randomly allocated to Olanzapine (with olanzapine) or Standard (without olanzapine) arms. Individual patient filled in self-reported diary and visual analogue scale for nausea from which information on nausea, vomiting and use of rescue medication were collected; outcomes were compared during acute phase (0-24 hrs), delay (24-120 hrs) and overall time-frame (0-120 hrs) from initiation of AC. QoL was assessed by Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE).
Results: 120 pts were randomized. For CINV in Cycle 1 AC, outcomes of Olanzapine vs Standard arms were: complete response (acute phase 70.0 vs 51.7%, p=0.0397; delay phase 75.0 vs 45.0%, p=0.0008; overall time-frame 65.0 vs 38.3%, p=0.0035), complete protection (acute phase 70.0 vs 50.0%, p=0.0253; delay phase 71.7 vs 40.0%, p=0.0005; overall 61.7 vs 36.7%, p=0.0062), total control (acute phase 65.0 vs 41.7%, p=0.0104; delay phase 60.0 vs 31.7%, p=0.0018; overall 51.7 vs 26.7%, p=0.0050), ‘no vomiting’ (acute phase 73.3 vs 51.7%, p=0.0142; delay phase 76.7 vs 48.3%, p=0.0013; overall 68.3 vs 40.0%, p=0.0018), ‘no significant nausea’ (acute phase 95.0 vs 75.0%, p=0.0017; delay phase 91.7 vs 65.0%, p=0.0004; overall 91.7 vs 63.3%, p=0.0002),‘no nausea’ (acute phase 76.7 vs 53.3%, p=0.0074; delay phase 65.0 vs 35.0%, p=0.0010; overall 58.3 vs 33.3%, p=0.0060), and need of rescue medication (acute phase 3.3 vs 11.7%, p=0.0654; delay phase 6.7 vs 21.7%, p=0.0133; overall 8.3 vs 23.3%, p=0.0244). Assessment of FLIE on Day 6 after Cycle 1 AC between the Olanzapine vs Standard arms revealed better QOL mean scores for nausea domain (p<0.0001), vomiting domain (p=0.0682) and total scores (p<0.0001). During assessment of multiple cycles, Olanzapine arm was associated with significantly higher rates of complete response in cycle 3 (delay phase and overall time-frame) and cycle 4 (delay phase) as well as total control in cycle 4 (delay phase). Both treatments were generally well tolerated; apart from nausea and vomiting, there was no significant difference in adverse events between the two arms.
Conclusions: In this prospective study of Chinese women with breast cancer, the addition of olanzapine to standard antiemetic regimen increases the control of CINV and improves the QoL of pts during AC chemotherapy.
Funding: Madam Diana Hon Fun Kong Donation for Cancer Research.
Citation Format: Winnie Yeo, Thomas KH Lau, Vicky TC Chan, Li Leung, Dong Lai, Elizabeth Pang, Maggie Cheung, Ashley Wong, Winnie MT Soo, Vanessa TY Yeung, Teresa Tse, Eva WM Yeung, Daisy CM Lam, Kenneth CW Wong, David R Johnson, Kim PK Ng, Herbert Loong, Joyce TY Ng, Florence Mok, Mimi KM Lee, Darren MC Poon, Yvonne SH Yau, Macy Tong, Joyce JS Suen, Frankie KF Mo. Randomized study to determine the efficacy of Olanzapine for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in Chinese breast cancer patients (PTS) abstract. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-12-09.
BACKGROUNDUp to 15% of young adults with glioblastoma have the activating oncogenic BRAF V600E mutation, an actionable target of the MAPK signal transduction pathway governing tumor cell ...proliferation. Small molecule inhibitors of BRAF and MEK, a downstream protein immediately following BRAF, have been shown to confer a survival advantage for patients with BRAF V600E mutant advanced melanoma. We describe our experience using this combined target therapy for two patients with BRAFV600E mutant glioblastoma (GBM) as primary treatment due to extenuating clinical circumstances that prohibited the prescription of standard treatment.CASE PRESENTATIONThe two patients were both 22 years old on presentation. After the initial tumor resection, they both developed rapid deterioration in performance status within a few weeks due to leptomeningeal metastases. In view of the critical condition, BRAF and MEK inhibitors were prescribed as first line treatment. The two patients both achieved dramatic clinical response, which was parallel to the impressive radiological regression of the disease. Unfortunately, the duration of disease control was short as drug resistance developed rapidly. The two patients died 7 and 7.5 month after initial diagnosis of GBM.CONCLUSIONSPrimary treatment with inhibitors of BRAF and MEK can lead to tumor regression for patients with BRAF V600E mutant glioblastoma. We therefore recommend that all young GBM patients should undergo BRAFV600E mutation testing, especially for those with unusual aggressive clinical course.
PDF
