•This ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline provides key recommendations for managing malignant pleural mesothelioma.•The optimal diagnostic methods, pathological evaluation and staging are described.•The ...authors make recommendations on the role of surgery and macroscopic complete resection as part of multimodality therapy.•The authors discuss optimal first-line, maintenance and salvage systemic therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors.•The authors discuss the role of prophylactic, radical and palliative radiotherapy and optimal supportive care.
A number of studies have investigated the relationship between microsatellite instability (MSI) and colorectal cancer (CRC) prognosis. Although many have reported a better survival with MSI, ...estimates of the hazard ratio (HR) among studies differ. To derive a more precise estimate of the prognostic significance of MSI, we have reviewed and pooled data from published studies.
Studies stratifying survival in CRC patients by MSI status were eligible for analysis. The principal outcome measure was the HR. Data from eligible studies were pooled using standard techniques.
Thirty-two eligible studies reported survival in a total of 7,642 cases, including 1,277 with MSI. There was no evidence of publication bias. The combined HR estimate for overall survival associated with MSI was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.59 to 0.71; heterogeneity P = .16; I(2) = 20%). This benefit was maintained restricting analyses to clinical trial patients (HR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.85) and patients with locally advanced CRC (HR = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.78). In patients treated with adjuvant fluorouracil (FU) CRCs with MSI had a better prognosis (HR = 0.72; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.84). However, while data are limited, tumors with MSI derived no benefit from adjuvant FU (HR = 1.24; 95% CI, 0.72 to 2.14).
CRCs with MSI have a significantly better prognosis compared to those with intact mismatch repair. Additional studies are needed to further define the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced tumors with MSI.
Brigatinib, a next-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor, has robust efficacy in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that is refractory to crizotinib. The ...efficacy of brigatinib, as compared with crizotinib, in patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC who have not previously received an ALK inhibitor is unclear.
In an open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC who had not previously received ALK inhibitors to receive brigatinib at a dose of 180 mg once daily (with a 7-day lead-in period at 90 mg) or crizotinib at a dose of 250 mg twice daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included the objective response rate and intracranial response. The first interim analysis was planned when approximately 50% of 198 expected events of disease progression or death had occurred.
A total of 275 patients underwent randomization; 137 were assigned to brigatinib and 138 to crizotinib. At the first interim analysis (99 events), the median follow-up was 11.0 months in the brigatinib group and 9.3 months in the crizotinib group. The rate of progression-free survival was higher with brigatinib than with crizotinib (estimated 12-month progression-free survival, 67% 95% confidence interval {CI}, 56 to 75 vs. 43% 95% CI, 32 to 53; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.49 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.74; P<0.001 by the log-rank test). The confirmed objective response rate was 71% (95% CI, 62 to 78) with brigatinib and 60% (95% CI, 51 to 68) with crizotinib; the confirmed rate of intracranial response among patients with measurable lesions was 78% (95% CI, 52 to 94) and 29% (95% CI, 11 to 52), respectively. No new safety concerns were noted.
Among patients with ALK-positive NSCLC who had not previously received an ALK inhibitor, progression-free survival was significantly longer among patients who received brigatinib than among those who received crizotinib. (Funded by Ariad Pharmaceuticals; ALTA-1L ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02737501 .).
Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) assays conducted on plasma are rapidly developing a strong evidence base for use in patients with cancer. The European Society for Medical Oncology convened an expert ...working group to review the analytical and clinical validity and utility of ctDNA assays. For patients with advanced cancer, validated and adequately sensitive ctDNA assays have utility in identifying actionable mutations to direct targeted therapy, and may be used in routine clinical practice, provided the limitations of the assays are taken into account. Tissue-based testing remains the preferred test for many cancer patients, due to limitations of ctDNA assays detecting fusion events and copy number changes, although ctDNA assays may be routinely used when faster results will be clinically important, or when tissue biopsies are not possible or inappropriate. Reflex tumour testing should be considered following a non-informative ctDNA result, due to false-negative results with ctDNA testing. In patients treated for early-stage cancers, detection of molecular residual disease or molecular relapse, has high evidence of clinical validity in anticipating future relapse in many cancers. Molecular residual disease/molecular relapse detection cannot be recommended in routine clinical practice, as currently there is no evidence for clinical utility in directing treatment. Additional potential applications of ctDNA assays, under research development and not recommended for routine practice, include identifying patients not responding to therapy with early dynamic changes in ctDNA levels, monitoring therapy for the development of resistance mutations before clinical progression, and in screening asymptomatic people for cancer. Recommendations for reporting of results, future development of ctDNA assays and future clinical research are made.
PDF
