•The CRISP registry collects representative, nationwide data on NSCLC in Germany.•CRISP mirrors the treatment and disease trajectory of patients with advanced NSCLC.•Biomarker testing rates increased ...over time, yet are still improvable.•17.7 % of the patients presented with a druggable alteration.•Median PFS was longer for patients with a druggable EGFR or ALK alteration.
An increasing number of treatment-determining biomarkers has been identified in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and molecular testing is recommended to enable optimal individualized treatment. However, data on implementation of these recommendations in the “real-world” setting are scarce. This study presents comprehensive details on the frequency, methodology and results of biomarker testing of advanced NSCLC in Germany.
This analysis included 3,717 patients with advanced NSCLC (2,921 non-squamous; 796 squamous), recruited into the CRISP registry at start of systemic therapy by 150 German sites between December 2015 and June 2019. Evaluated were the molecular biomarkers EGFR, ALK, ROS1, BRAF, KRAS, MET, TP53, RET, HER2, as well as expression of PD-L1.
In total, 90.5 % of the patients were tested for biomarkers. Testing rates were 92.2 % (non-squamous), 70.7 % (squamous) and increased from 83.2 % in 2015/16 to 94.2% in 2019. Overall testing rates for EGFR, ALK, ROS1, and BRAF were 72.5 %, 74.5 %, 66.1 %, and 53.0 %, respectively (non-squamous). Testing rates for PD-L1 expression were 64.5 % (non-squamous), and 58.5 % (squamous). The most common testing methods were immunohistochemistry (68.5 % non-squamous, 58.3 % squamous), and next-generation sequencing (38.7 % non-squamous, 14.4 % squamous). Reasons for not testing were insufficient tumor material or lack of guideline recommendations (squamous). No alteration was found in 37.8 % (non-squamous), and 57.9 % (squamous), respectively. Most common alterations in non-squamous tumors (all patients/all patients tested for the respective biomarker): KRAS (17.3 %/39.2 %), TP53 (14.1 %/51.4 %), and EGFR (11.0 %/15.1 %); in squamous tumors: TP53 (7.0 %/69.1 %), MET (1.5 %/11.1 %), and EGFR (1.1 %/4.4 %). Median PFS (non-squamous) was 8.7 months (95 % CI 7.4–10.4) with druggable EGFR mutation, and 8.0 months (95 % CI 3.9–9.2) with druggable ALK alterations.
Testing rates in Germany are high nationwide and acceptable in international comparison, but still leave out a significant portion of patients, who could potentially benefit. Thus, specific measures are needed to increase implementation.
Mantle cell lymphomas (MCLs) represent a clinically aggressive lymphoma subtype with a poor prognosis. To explore a potential progress in outcome a historical comparison was performed using data from ...the Kiel Lymphoma Study Group (KLSG; 1975 to 1986) and the German Low Grade Lymphoma Study Group (GLSG; 1996 to 2004).
All patients with the histologically confirmed diagnosis of advanced-stage nonblastoid MCL were eligible. To minimize the potential heterogeneity of different risk profiles frequency matching was pursued. In addition, we adjusted for potential confounding variables by multiple Cox regression.
A total of 520 patients were assessable, 150 from KLSG and 370 from GLSG studies. The median overall survival was 2.7 years for KLSG patients as compared with 4.8 years for GLSG patients (P < .0001). The 5-year survival rates were 22% in the KLSG group (95% CI, 13% to 31%) as compared with 47% for GLSG treated patients (95% CI, 38% to 55%). The hazard ratio adjusted for performance status, lactate dehydrogenase, and age was 0.44 for GLSG patients (95% CI, 0.32 to 0.59).
Median overall survival of patients with advanced nonblastoid MCL almost doubled during the past 30 years. Potential reasons for this apparent improvement in overall survival include the application of anthracycline-containing regimens and new approaches, such as antilymphoma antibodies or stem cell transplantation. Advances in general supportive care, new diagnostic tools, and general improvement of life span might have also reinforced this effect. However, our results are questioning the validity of historical comparisons which had been frequently applied in previous trials.
MET is a potential therapeutic target in lung cancer and both MET tyrosine kinase inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies have entered clinical trials. MET signaling can be activated by various ...mechanisms, including gene amplification. In this study, we aimed to investigate MET amplification status in adeno- and squamous cell carcinomas of the lung. We propose clearly defined amplification scores and provide epidemiologic data on MET amplification in lung cancer.
We evaluated the prevalence of increased MET gene copy numbers in 693 treatment-naïve cancers by FISH, defined clear cutoff criteria, and correlated FISH results to MET IHC.
Two thirds (67%) of lung cancers do not have gains in MET gene copy numbers, whereas 3% show a clear-cut high-level amplification (MET/centromer7 ratio ≥2.0 or average gene copy number per nucleus ≥6.0 or ≥10% of tumor cells containing ≥15 MET copies). The remaining cases can be subdivided into intermediate- (6%) and low-level gains (24%). Importantly, MET amplifications occur at equal frequencies in squamous and adenocarcinomas without or with EGFR or KRAS mutations.
MET amplification is not a mutually exclusive genetic event in therapy-naïve non-small cell lung cancer. Our data suggest that it might be useful to determine MET amplification (i) before EGFR inhibitor treatment to identify possible primary resistance to anti-EGFR treatment, and (ii) to select cases that harbor KRAS mutations additionally to MET amplification and, thus, may not benefit from MET inhibition. Furthermore, our study provides comprehensive epidemiologic data for upcoming trials with various MET inhibitors.
Summary Background Cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone (CHOP) is used to treat patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Interval decrease from 3 weeks of treatment (CHOP-21) to 2 ...weeks (CHOP-14), and addition of rituximab to CHOP-21 (R-CHOP-21) has been shown to improve outcome in elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). This randomised trial assessed whether six or eight cycles of R-CHOP-14 can improve outcome of these patients compared with six or eight cycles of CHOP-14. Methods 1222 elderly patients (aged 61–80 years) were randomly assigned to six or eight cycles of CHOP-14 with or without rituximab. Radiotherapy was planned to sites of initial bulky disease with or without extranodal involvement. The primary endpoint was event-free survival; secondary endpoints were response, progression during treatment, progression-free survival, overall survival, and frequency of toxic effects. Analyses were done by intention to treat. The trial is registered on National Cancer Institute website, number NCT00052936 and as EU-20243. Findings 3-year event-free survival was 47·2% after six cycles of CHOP-14 (95% CI 41·2–53·3), 53·0% (47·0–59·1) after eight cycles of CHOP-14, 66·5% (60·9–72·0) after six cycles of R-CHOP-14, and 63·1% (57·4–68·8) after eight cycles of R-CHOP-14. Compared with six cycles of CHOP-14, the improvement in 3-year event-free survival was 5·8% (−2·8–14·4) for eight cycles of CHOP-14, 19·3% (11·1–27·5) for six cycles of R-CHOP-14, and 15·9% (7·6–24·2) for eight cycles of R-CHOP-14. 3-year overall survival was 67·7% (62·0–73·5) for six cycles of CHOP-14, 66·0% (60·1–71·9) for eight cycles of CHOP-14, 78·1% (73·2–83·0) for six cycles of R-CHOP-14, and 72·5% (67·1–77·9) for eight cycles of R-CHOP-14. Compared with treatment with six cycles of CHOP-14, overall survival improved by −1·7% (−10·0–6·6) after eight cycles of CHOP-14, 10·4% (2·8–18·0) after six cycles of R-CHOP-14, and 4·8% (−3·1–12·7) after eight cycles of R-CHOP-14. In a multivariate analysis that used six cycles of CHOP-14 without rituximab as the reference, and adjusting for known prognostic factors, all three intensified regimens improved 3-year event-free survival (eight cycles of CHOP-14: RR relative risk 0·76 0·60–0·95, p=0·0172; six cycles of R-CHOP-14: RR 0·51 0·40–0·65, p<0·0001; eight cycles of R-CHOP-14: RR 0·54 0·43–0·69, p<0·0001). Progression-free survival improved after six cycles of R-CHOP-14 (RR 0·50 0·38–0·67, p<0·0001), and eight cycles of R-CHOP-14 (RR 0·59 0·45–0·77, p=0·0001). Overall survival improved only after six cycles of R-CHOP-14 (RR 0·63 0·46–0·85, p=0·0031). In patients with a partial response after four cycles of chemotherapy, eight cycles were not better than six cycles. Interpretation Six cycles of R-CHOP-14 significantly improved event-free, progression-free, and overall survival over six cycles of CHOP-14 treatment. Response-adapted addition of chemotherapy beyond six cycles, though widely practiced, is not justified. Of the four regimens assessed in this study, six cycles of R-CHOP-14 is the preferred treatment for elderly patients, with which other approaches should be compared.
The prognosis of patients with central nervous system relapse of aggressive lymphoma is very poor with no therapy established so far. In a prospective multicenter phase II study, we evaluated a ...potentially curative chemotherapy-only regimen in these patients. Adult immunocompetent patients 65 years of age or under received induction chemotherapy with MTX/IFO/DEP (methotrexate 4 g/m(2) intravenously (i.v.) Day 1, ifosfamide 2 g/m(2) i.v. Days 3- 5 and liposomal cytarabine 50 mg intrathecally (i.th) Day 6) and AraC/TT/DEP (cytarabine 3g/m(2) i.v. Days 1-2, thiotepa 40 mg/m(2) i.v. Day 2 and i.th. liposomal cytarabine 50 mg i.th. Day 3) followed by high-dose chemotherapy with carmustine 400 mg/m(2) i.v. Day -5, thiotepa 2×5 mg/kg i.v. Days -4 to -3 and etoposide 150 mg/m(2) i.v. Days -5 to -3, and autologous stem cell transplantation Day 0 (HD-ASCT). Thirty eligible patients (median age 58 years) were enrolled. After HD-ASCT (n=24), there was a complete remission in 15 (63%), partial remission in 2 (8%) and progressive disease in 7 (29%) patients. Myelotoxicity was the most adverse event with CTC grade 3/4 infections in 12% of MTX/IFO/DEP courses, 21% of AraC/TT/DEP courses and 46% of HD-ASCT courses. The 2-year time to treatment failure was 49%±19 for all patients and 58%±22 for patients completing HD-ASCT. The protocol assessed proved feasible and highly active with long-lasting remissions in a large proportion of patients. (ClinicalTrials.govIdentifier NCT01148173).
Background
Granulopoiesis‐stimulating factors, such as granulocyte‐colony‐stimulating factor (G‐CSF) and granulocyte‐macrophage‐colony‐stimulating factor (GM‐CSF), are being used to prevent febrile ...neutropenia and infection in patients undergoing treatment for malignant lymphoma. The question of whether G‐CSF and GM‐CSF improve dose intensity, tumour response, and overall survival in this patient population has not been answered yet. Since the results from single studies are inconclusive, a systematic review was undertaken.
Objectives
To determine the effectiveness of G‐CSF and GM‐CSF in patients with malignant lymphoma with respect to preventing neutropenia, febrile neutropenia and infection; improving quality of life, adherence to treatment protocol, tumour response, freedom from treatment failure (FFTF) and overall survival (OS); and adverse effects.
Search methods
We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CancerLit, and other relevant literature databases; Internet databases of ongoing trials; and conference proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society of Hematology (1980 ‐ 2007). We included full‐text and publications as well as unpublished data.
Selection criteria
Randomised controlled trials comparing prophylaxis with G‐CSF or GM‐CSF versus placebo/no prophylaxis in adult patients with malignant lymphoma undergoing chemotherapy were included for review. Both study arms had to receive identical chemotherapy and supportive care.
Data collection and analysis
Trial eligibility and quality assessment, data extraction and analysis were done by two reviewers independently. Authors were contacted to obtain missing data.
Main results
We included 13 eligible randomised controlled trials with 2607 randomised patients. Compared with no prophylaxis, both G‐CSF and GM‐CSF did not improve overall survival (hazard ratio 0.97; 95% CI 0.87 to 1.09) or FFTF (hazard ratio 1.11; 95% CI 0.91 to 1.35). Prophylaxis significantly reduced the relative risk (RR) for severe neutropenia (RR 0.67; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60 to 0.73), febrile neutropenia (RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.62 to 0.89) and infection (RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.85). There was no evidence that either G‐CSF or GM‐CSF reduced the number of patients requiring intravenous antibiotics (RR 0.82; 95%CI 0.57 to 1.18); lowered infection related mortality (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.51 to 1.71); or improved complete tumour response (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.10).One study evaluated quality of life parameters and found no differences between the treatment groups.
Authors' conclusions
G‐CSF and GM‐CSF, when used as a prophylaxis in patients with malignant lymphoma undergoing conventional chemotherapy, reduce the risk of neutropenia, febrile neutropenia and infection. However, based on the randomised trials currently available, there is no evidence that either G‐CSF or GM‐CSF provide a significant advantage in terms of complete tumour response, FFTF or OS.
The concept of lines of therapy (LOT) in cancer treatment is often considered for decision making in tumor boards and clinical management, but lacks a common definition across medical specialties. ...The complexity and heterogeneity of malignancies and treatment modalities contribute to an inconsistent understanding of LOT among physicians. This study assesses the heterogeneity of understandings of the LOT concept, its major dimensions, and criteria from the perspective of physicians of different specialties with an oncological focus in Germany. Semi-structured expert interviews with nine physicians were conducted and evaluated using qualitative content analysis.
Most interviewees agreed that there is no single definition for LOT and found it difficult to explicate their understanding. A majority of experts stated that they had already encountered misunderstandings with colleagues regarding LOT and that they had problems with deciphering LOT from the medical records of their patients. Disagreement emerged about the roles of the following within the LOT concept: maintenance therapy, treatment intention, different therapy modalities, changing pharmaceutical agents, and therapy breaks. Respondents predominantly considered the same criteria as decisive for the definition of LOT as for a change in LOT (e.g., the occurrence of a progression event or tumor recurrence).
We recently reported fibroblast growth factor receptor-type 1 (FGFR1) amplification to be associated with therapeutically tractable FGFR1 dependency in squamous cell lung cancer. This makes FGFR1 a ...novel target for directed therapy in these tumors. To reproducibly identify patients for clinical studies, we developed a standardized reading and evaluation strategy for FGFR1 fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) and propose evaluation criteria, describe different patterns of low- and high-level amplifications and report on the prevalence of FGFR1 amplifications in pulmonary carcinomas. A total of 420 lung cancer patients including 307 squamous carcinomas, 100 adenocarcinomas of the lung and 13 carcinomas of other types were analyzed for FGFR1 amplification using a dual color FISH. We found heterogeneous and different patterns of gene copy numbers. FGFR1 amplifications were observed in 20% of pulmonary squamous carcinomas but not in adenocarcinomas. High-level amplification (as defined by an FGFR1/centromer 8 (CEN8) ratio ≥2.0, or average number of FGFR1 signals per tumor cell nucleus ≥6, or the percentage of tumor cells containing ≥15 FGFR1 signals or large clusters ≥10%) was detected at a frequency of 16% and low-level amplification (as defined by ≥5 FGFR1 signals in ≥50% of tumor cells) at a frequency of 4%. We conclude that FGFR1 amplification is one of the most frequent therapeutically tractable genetic lesions in pulmonary carcinomas. Standardized reporting of FGFR1 amplification in squamous carcinomas of the lung will become increasingly important to correlate therapeutic responses with FGFR1 inhibitors in clinical studies. Thus, our reading and evaluation strategy might serve as a basis for identifying patients for ongoing and upcoming clinical trials.
Because nodular lymphocyte-predominant Hodgkin lymphoma (NLPHL) express CD20, rituximab may be used as a nonmutagenic treatment option to avoid late toxicities in this rather indolent entity. Between ...1999 and 2004, the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) investigated the activity of rituximab (375 mg/m2 in 4 doses) in a phase 2 trial in 21 relapsed or refractory NLPHL patients. The initial diagnosis of NLPHL was confirmed in 15 of the 21 enrolled patients by reference pathology. The remaining cases were reclassified as Hodgkin lymphoma transformed to T-cell rich B-cell lymphoma (TCRBCL; n = 2) or CD20+ classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL; n = 4). In NLPHL patients the overall response rate was 94%, including 8 complete remission (CR) and 6 partial remission (PR). With a median follow-up of 63 months (range, 3-84), the median time to progression was 33 months, with the median overall survival (OS) not reached. Thus, rituximab is highly effective in relapsed and refractory NLPHL. This study is registered at http://www.klinisches-studienzentrum.de/trial/285.
Gemcitabine/erlotinib treatment offers limited benefit in unselected patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Development of skin rash has been associated with favorable outcomes in ...patients treated with gemcitabine/erlotinib. This study aimed to extend knowledge on the effectiveness of gemcitabine/erlotinib in metastatic PDAC in the context of clinical practice and with focus on skin rash.
This multicenter, non-interventional study enrolled 376 patients with metastatic PDAC receiving gemcitabine/erlotinib. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) in patients with skin rash versus no skin rash. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), treatment satisfaction and safety. All data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Survival time and time to disease progression were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Effectiveness endpoints were analyzed for subgroups by skin rash grade (no rash, rash grade 1, rash grade ≥ 2), duration of erlotinib treatment (≤8 weeks, > 8 weeks), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status at baseline (0-1, 2) and age (≤65 years, > 65 years).
Within the full analysis set (FAS; N = 270), 48 patients (17.8%) developed grade 1 rash, 51 patients (18.9%) grade ≥ 2 rash, while 171 patients (63.3%) did not develop a rash. Median OS of all patients was 9.11 months with an OS of 9.93 months in rash-positive and 8.68 months in rash-negative patients. Median PFS was 5.06 months for rash-positive and 4.11 months for rash-negative patients. PFS was longer in patients with rash grade ≥ 2 and in older patients (> 65 years). Examination using a multivariate Cox proportional model revealed that an age > 65 years was associated with longer OS (hazard ratio 0.640; p = 0.0327) and PFS (hazard ratio 0.642; p = 0.0026). Out of the 338 patients in the SAF, 310 patients (91.7%) experienced at least one AE, and 176 patients (52.1%) experienced skin-related side effects, all of which were CTC grade 1 to 3.
Comparing rash-positive with rash-negative patients showed no significant difference in survival. While patients with rash grade ≥ 2 and older patients (independent of skin reactions) showed longer PFS, this did not translate into prolonged OS. The study did not reveal new safety signals.
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01782690, retrospectively registered on 4 February 2013.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
PDF
