European Society For Medical Oncology Research Articles

MASCC 2023 Patient-Centered Antiemetic Guidelines and Education Statements: an evidence-based and consensus resource for patients.

The Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC)/European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) Patient Antiemetic Guideline Committee aimed to (1) adapt the updated evidence-based, clinical guidelines to patient-centered antiemetic guidelines and (2) develop patient education materials and statements. The MASCC 2023 Patient Antiemetic Guidelines were created and reviewed by antiemetic experts and patient advocates by incorporating the 2023 MASCC/ESMO antiemetic guidelines into patient-friendly language. Patient Education Statements were developed based on current literature and by utilizing an expert modified Delphi consensus (≥ 75% agreement). Patient advocate/focus group input and patient survey results were further integrated into Patient-Centered Antiemetic Guidelines and Education Statements. Patient-Centered Antiemetic Guidelines were created using patient-friendly language and visual slides. Patient-friendly language was also utilized to communicate the Educational Statements. Key content categories identified for the Educational Statements included the following: nausea/vomiting definitions, causes, risk factors, categories, complications, accompanying symptoms, prophylactic antiemetic treatment, general management, when to call/what to ask the healthcare team, what caregivers can do, and available resources. All identified content met the ≥ 75% expert agreement threshold. Fifteen (15) items demonstrated 100% agreement, 11 items achieved ≥ 90% agreement, and three content items demonstrated 80 ~ 82% agreement. The inaugural MASCC 2023 Patient Antiemetic Guidelines can help patients and caregivers understand the prevention of nausea and vomiting related to their cancer treatment. Educational Statements provide further patient information. Educating patients on how to utilize guideline antiemetics and the education statements can contribute improvements in the control of anticancer treatment-related nausea and vomiting.

A Comparison of Additional Benefit Assessment Methods for Time-to-Event Endpoints Using Hazard Ratio Point Estimates or Confidence Interval Limits by Means of a Simulation Study

Background For time-to-event endpoints, three additional benefit assessment methods have been developed aiming at an unbiased knowledge about the magnitude of clinical benefit of newly approved treatments. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) defines a continuous score using the hazard ratio point estimate (HR-PE). The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) developed methods with an ordinal outcome using lower and upper limits of the 95% HR confidence interval (HR-CI), respectively. We describe all three frameworks for additional benefit assessment aiming at a fair comparison across different stakeholders. Furthermore, we determine which ASCO score is consistent with which ESMO/IQWiG category. Methods In a comprehensive simulation study with different failure time distributions and treatment effects, we compare all methods using Spearman’s correlation and descriptive measures. For determination of ASCO values consistent with categories of ESMO/IQWiG, maximizing weighted Cohen’s Kappa approach was used. Results Our research depicts a high positive relationship between ASCO/IQWiG and a low positive relationship between ASCO/ESMO. An ASCO score smaller than 17, 17 to 20, 20 to 24, and greater than 24 corresponds to ESMO categories. Using ASCO values of 21 and 38 as cutoffs represents IQWiG categories. Limitations We investigated the statistical aspects of the methods and hence implemented slightly reduced versions of all methods. Conclusions IQWiG and ASCO are more conservative than ESMO, which often awards the maximal category independent of the true effect and is at risk of overcompensating with various failure time distributions. ASCO has similar characteristics as IQWiG. Delayed treatment effects and underpowered/overpowered studies influence all methods in some degree. Nevertheless, ESMO is the most liberal one. Highlights For the additional benefit assessment, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) uses the hazard ratio point estimate (HR-PE) for their continuous score. In contrast, the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) use the lower and upper 95% HR confidence interval (HR-CI) to specific thresholds, respectively. ESMO generously assigns maximal scores, while IQWiG is more conservative. This research provides the first comparison between IQWiG and ASCO and describes all three frameworks for additional benefit assessment aiming for a fair comparison across different stakeholders. Furthermore, thresholds for ASCO consistent with ESMO and IQWiG categories are determined, enabling a comparison of the methods in practice in a fair manner. IQWiG and ASCO are the more conservative methods, while ESMO awards high percentages of maximal categories, especially with various failure time distributions. ASCO has similar characteristics as IQWiG. Delayed treatment effects and under/-overpowered studies influence all methods. Nevertheless, ESMO is the most liberal one. An ASCO score smaller than 17, 17 to 20, 20 to 24, and greater than 24 correspond to the categories of ESMO. Using ASCO values of 21 and 38 as cutoffs represents categories of IQWiG.

Should All Patients With Stage IE Gastric Mucosa-Associated Lymphoid Tissue Lymphoma Receive Antibiotic Eradication Therapy for Helicobacter pylori?

H. pylori eradication therapy (HPE) can lead to tumor regression in H. pylori-positive (HPP) gastric mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphoma. However, some patients do not have detectable H. pylori (HP) infection (H. pylori-negative [HPN]) and the guidelines differ in their initial approach to HPN patients. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommends proceeding to radiation therapy, whereas European Society for Medical Oncology suggests HPE for every patient, even those who are HPN. To address this issue, we evaluated the effectiveness of HPE in limited-stage gastric MALT lymphoma. We retrospectively reviewed patients newly diagnosed with stage IE gastric MALT lymphoma between January 2002 and December 2022. The primary outcome was the complete remission (CR) rate defined as no macroscopic findings of lymphoma and negative gastric biopsy at the follow-up gastric endoscopy. Fifty-two patients were reviewed, and HP infection was detected in 19 (36.5%) patients-14 by immunostaining, three by serology, and one each by stool antigen and urea breath test. All 19 HPP and eight of the 33 HPN patients received HPE treatment. The CR rate was 63% (12/19) in HPP patients and 13% (1/8) in HPN patients (P = .033). After a median follow-up of 89.7 months, only two of the 12 HPP patients achieving CR have relapsed; the one HPN patient who received HPE remains in CR at 12+ months. For limited-stage HPP gastric MALT lymphoma, HPE is an effective and durable first-line treatment and should be used. For HPN patients, the CR rate with HPE is very low in our experience and is thus in support of the NCCN guideline.

Abstract PO4-10-12: Value of Molecular Targets and Genome-Targeted Therapies FDA-Approved for Metastatic Breast Cancer, 2006-2023

Abstract Title: Value of Molecular Targets and Genome-Targeted Therapies FDA-Approved for Metastatic Breast Cancer, 2006-2023 Background: The number of FDA-approved genome-targeted cancer drugs for metastatic breast cancer has increased, providing the potential for personalized therapy. To help physicians, patients, and policymakers differentiate meaningful from trivial innovation in this field, we assessed the validity of the targets and value of the outcomes used in the pivotal trials supporting approval. Methods: We analyzed trials supporting genome-targeted breast cancer drugs FDA-approved between 2006-2023, defined as those using a genomic test in which the drug targeted a given genomic alteration. From FDA drug labels and trial reports, we extracted characteristics of pivotal trials. For Accelerated Approvals—a special FDA program allowing approval based on unvalidated surrogate measures—if the drug later received traditional approval based on a confirmatory trial, only the latter was analyzed. Strength of evidence supporting molecular targetability was evaluated using the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Scale for Clinical Actionability of molecular Targets (ESCAT). Clinical benefit for approved indications was assessed using the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). Molecular targets qualifying for ESCAT category level I-A or I-B associated with ESMO-MCBS grade 4 or 5 were rated as high-benefit genomic-targeted breast cancer treatments. Results: Fifteen genome-targeted drugs covered 17 indications and targeted 8 driver alterations. Among the 17 pivotal trials supporting these indications, most were randomized (11, 65%), phase 3 (11, 65%) and open-label (14, 82%). The most common primary endpoint leading to approval (10, 59%) was progression-free survival. Eleven trials (65%) had a I-A ESCAT targetability, 5 (29%) had a I-C targetability score and 1 (6%) was categorized as II-A. ERBB2 amplification, germline BRCA1/2 mutations, PIK3CA mutations, and ESR1 mutation were classified as tier I-A due to randomized trials demonstrating the effectiveness of approved targeted therapies in patients with these alterations. RET fusions, NTRK fusions, and microsatellite instability were classified as tier I-C, while high-tumor mutational burden was categorized as tier II-A. Eighteen percent of trials (3/17) demonstrated ESMO-MCBS grades 4-5. Overall, 3 of 17 (18%) indications had high-benefit genomic-based cancer treatments. Conclusions: Among molecular-targeted cancer therapies approved for metastatic breast cancer, fewer than a fifth demonstrated substantial patient benefits at approval. Benefit frameworks like ESCAT and ESMO-MCBS can help stakeholders identify therapies with the greatest potential. Citation Format: Ariadna Tibau, Thomas J. Hwang, Consolacion Molto Valiente, Jerry Avorn, Aaron Kesselheim. Value of Molecular Targets and Genome-Targeted Therapies FDA-Approved for Metastatic Breast Cancer, 2006-2023 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO4-10-12.

Abstract PO5-10-08: Clinical Value of Molecular Targets and Genome-Targeted Cancer Therapies Recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network for Advanced Breast Cancer

Abstract Background: Genomic testing has expanded the possibilities of precision cancer medicine, particularly for advanced, treatment-resistant breast cancer cases. However, the clinical significance of most genetic alterations remains uncertain, potentially overestimating tailored therapies. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines are evidence-based cancer-specific recommendations used in clinical practice and that are often determinative for insurance coverage. In this study, we assessed the validity of the targets and the clinical benefit of genome-targeted cancer drugs recommended in the NCCN guidelines for metastatic breast cancer. Methods: We identified genome-targeted oncology therapies supporting advanced breast cancer recommendations in the most recent NCCN breast cancer guideline (version 4.2023). Genome-targeted drugs were defined as involving use of a genomic test in which the drug targeted a genomic alteration. We analyzed data from trials supporting advanced genome-targeted breast cancer drugs recommendations. When multiple (or overlapping) articles for the same study were identified, the most recent publication was included. We extracted key details of each trial, including trial design, blinding, phase of clinical trial and primary efficacy end points. We cross-referenced the FDA-approved indications as of 30 June 2023 with the NCCN recommendations for each drug. Strength of evidence supporting molecular targetability was evaluated using the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Scale for Clinical Actionability of molecular Targets (ESCAT). Clinical benefit for genome-targeted oncology therapies was assessed using the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). We considered a substantial clinical benefit as a grade of 4 or 5. Molecular targets qualifying for ESCAT category level I-A and I-B associated with substantial clinical benefit by ESMO-MCBS were rated as high-benefit genomic-targeted breast cancer treatments. Results: We identified 47 recommendations supporting 17 genome-targeted drugs, which targeted 11 driver alterations. Out of these recommendations, 29 (62%) aligned with the FDA indications. We associated 47 trials with these recommendations, most randomized (24, 51%), phase 3 (23, 49%) and open-label (42, 89%). The most common primary endpoint (22, 47%) was overall response rate, followed by progression-free survival/time to progression (21, 45%). Twenty-four trials (51%) had a I-A ESCAT targetability, 7 (15%) had a I-B targetability, 6 (13%) had a I-C targetability score and 10 (21%) were categorized as II-B. ERBB2 amplification, germline BRCA1/2 mutations, PIK3CA mutations, and ESR1 mutation were mainly classified as tier I-A based on randomized trials demonstrating the effectiveness of approved targeted therapies in patients with these alterations. By contrast, RET fusions, NTRK fusions, high-tumor mutational burden and microsatellite instability were ranked as tier I-C and somatic BRCA mutations, germline PALB2 mutations and HER-2 mutations as II-B. Six trials (14%, 6/42) supporting drug approval demonstrated substantial ESMO-MCBS clinical benefit. Overall, 6 recommendations (14%) had high-benefit genomic-based cancer treatments. Conclusions: Fewer than one-fifth of molecular-targeted cancer therapies recommended in NCCN guidelines for metastatic breast cancer demonstrated substantial patient benefits. Value frameworks like ESCAT and ESMO-MCBS can help stakeholders identify therapies with the greatest potential. Citation Format: Ariadna Tibau, Thomas J. Hwang, Jerry Avorn, Aaron Kesselheim. Clinical Value of Molecular Targets and Genome-Targeted Cancer Therapies Recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network for Advanced Breast Cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO5-10-08.

Abstract PO2-25-12: Production of a bespoke muscle resistance exercise (MRE) programme for use in a future clinical trial, following a detailed patient engagement program (PEP) in patients with advanced breast cancer (ABC)

Abstract Background: MRE investigations in early breast cancer have been undertaken but there has been little evaluation in ABC. Cancer guidelines suggest the use of physical activity, including MRE, to improve fatigue (National Comprehensive Cancer Network, 2.2020; European Society of Medical Oncology 2020) but improvement in other outcomes in ABC is less clear. In clinical trials, adherence to exercise intervention has been a challenge and has hampered investigation of other outcomes and little data exists evaluating the possible reasons for this poor adherence and compliance. In preparation for an exercise component as part of lifestyle intervention trial in ABC, a PEP was undertaken to evaluate an on-line web-based exercise program. Results would support continued usage of the program or creation of a new program. Methods: A commercially available program was used containing a library of exercises created for multiple disease types. There was no voice over. Using an exercise science professional, 2 sets of muscular resistance exercise programmes were created (A &B), selecting exercises for upper and lower limb major muscle groups. Set A and B differed , with A involving younger leaner demonstrators and B older, less lean. Volunteers were asked to view the sets and complete a survey. The results of the survey, involving 21 volunteers of which 43% were over 60 years and presented previously, indicated that the following main modifications were needed to a program: use of demonstrators similar to patient's habitus and use of a voice-over to guide exercises. A short test video was produced incorporating these and other visual changes and viewed by a focus group of four volunteers. Results: The focus group concluded that the new visual and audio changes would allow them to more easily perform the exercises and increase the likelihood of compliance compared to the on-line program. The group advised involvement of a more diverse demonstrator group and further improvements to the voice-over. A professionally produced video has now been made with all the above changes. Conclusions: This PEP indicates that is necessary to review exercise programmes with patients and not assume they are all suitable for use in clinical trials. We believe a PEP of this kind with the resultant bespoke video is the first produced involving patients with ABC. This video will now be evaluated in a much larger diverse PPE which will help the development of a national UK clinical trial of exercise in ABC. Citation Format: Amanda Clarke, Jennifer Glendenning, Glen Davison, Catherine Harper-Wynne. Production of a bespoke muscle resistance exercise (MRE) programme for use in a future clinical trial, following a detailed patient engagement program (PEP) in patients with advanced breast cancer (ABC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO2-25-12.

Is there any difference between Eastern and Western clinical practice guidelines in management of gastric cancer?

Gastric cancer (GC) has been known as one of the most common causes of cancer mortality both in Western and Eastern countries. However, there might be differences between how it is managed in different countries. Thus, we aimed to investigate these differences. The most well-known clinical guidelines in field of GC management including Korean GC Association (KGCA), Japanese GC Association (JGCA), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), and National Institute for health and Care Excellence (NICE) have been reviewed. The contents of these guidelines were categorized under eight headings including (1) genetic predisposition, (2) prevention, (3) management of gastric polyp, atrophy, dysplasia and metaplasia, (4) diagnosis, (5) pathology and molecular biology, (6) treatment, (7) supportive and palliative care, and (8) follow up. Difference in each section was discussed. Considering KGCA and JGCA as Eastern and NCCN, ESMO, BSG, and NICE as Western guidelines, it is revealed that both sets of guidelines share common practices such as prioritizing comprehensive diagnostic evaluations, personalizing treatment plans, and palliative care. However, main differences can be seen in treatment regimens, the adoption of newer therapies like immunotherapy, and the utilization of emerging techniques such as HIPEC. These differences reflect the diverse clinical landscapes, research focuses, and healthcare systems within these regions.

Prognosis and Treatment of Gastric Cancer: A 2024 Update.

Due to the high death rate associated with gastric cancer, a great deal of research has been conducted on this disease. The goal of this paper was to start a trimestral review of 2024 for the year that had just started. The scientific literature from 1 January 2024 was chosen with consideration of the the guidelines of the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO), which are updated with new findings but not systematically reviewed annually. We used the search term "gastric cancer" to find the most current publications in the PubMed database related to the prognosis and treatment of gastric cancer. As previously said, the only articles that satisfied the inclusion criteria were those from 2024. Articles with case reports were eliminated since they had nothing to do with our research. The treatment of gastric cancer is the focus of the majority of articles from 2024. The primary research axes include surgery and immunonutrition, immunotherapy and Helicobacter pylori, and therapeutic targets. Patients with GC may experience less psychological, social, and financial hardship if the recently identified markers discovered in circulation are better assessed and validated. This could be achieved by either including the markers in an artificial intelligence-based diagnostic score or by using them in conjunction with traditional diagnostic methods. Due to the rising death rate associated with GC, funding for research into diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, and therapeutic targets is essential.

Molecular Profiling of H-MSI/dMMR/for Endometrial Cancer Patients: “New Challenges in Diagnostic Routine Practice”

Endometrial cancer (EC) represents one of the most newly diagnosed cancers across gynecological malignancies. In particular, a plethora of risk factors (both biological and lifestyle-related) drastically impact the incidence rate of novel diagnosis accounting for 8300 cases/year. In the recent era of precision medicine EC molecular classification, integrating ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines, four distinct diagnostic groups have been established including POLE-mutant (POLE-pos); High-instability MSI (H-MSI)–MMR-deficient (MMR-d); p53-abnormal (p53abn); and non-specific molecular profile (NSMP), also known as p53-wild-type EC patients on the basis of clinically relevant emerging biomarkers. In addition, molecular testing also plays a pivotal role in defining the best therapeutical option. In this scenario, the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) recommended d-MMR/MSI-H status evaluation in the diagnostic workflow of Lynch syndrome or selecting EC patients that could benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Although immunohistochemistry (IHC) is considered the gold standard approach for d-MMR profiling, a series of molecular PCR-based techniques have rapidly developed to integrate H-MSI status in routine practice. Here, we technically overviewed the most relevant commercially available diagnostic assays for the determination of the H-MSI/dMMR status in EC patients.

Evaluating clinical practice guidelines for the management of rectal cancer: Did they get it RIGHT?

Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) are crucial tools for clinicians seeking to deliver evidence-based patient care. We utilized the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare (RIGHT) checklist to assess the reporting quality of CPGs addressing the management of rectal cancer. Four multidisciplinary rectal cancer CPGs published 2017-2022 were evaluated: American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). We quantitatively assessed each CPG using the RIGHT checklist and qualitative analysis was performed to generate common themes. RIGHT checklist items fulfilled by each CPG ranged from 12 to 17 (out of 22). Each guideline demonstrated unique categories of weakness: ASCRS in Basic Information (1 of 4 items), ESMO in Evidence (1 of 3), NCCN in Recommendations (1 of 3), and NICE in Review and Quality Assurance (0 of 2). Common themes that emerged included sprase discussion on the financial aspects of rectal cancer management and lack of transparency in formulating recommendations. Despite their variability, each of the 22 checklist elements are present in contemporary CPGs. Utilizing the RIGHT checklist would allow experts to create guidelines adhering to high-quality reporting standards.

Statement of the Uterus Commission of the Gynecological Oncology Working Group (AGO) on Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Prior to Definitive Radiochemotherapy in Patients with Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer

AbstractThe presentation of the results of the prospective randomized international multicenter GCIG INTERLACE trial at the 2023 congress of the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) is likely to change the therapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. In the GCIG INTERLACE trial, six cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy administered weekly and consisting of carboplatin AUC2 and paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 followed by definitive radiochemotherapy with pelvic radiotherapy (40 – 50.4 Gray) and cisplatin (40 mg/m2 once a week for 5 weeks) and brachytherapy (total dose EQD2 at least 78 Gy at point A) (experimental arm) were compared with definitive radiochemotherapy alone (standard arm) in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (Fédération Internationale de Gynécologie et dʼObstétrique [FIGO] 2008 stage IB1/node positive, IB2, II, IIIB and IVA) and was found to be significantly superior with significantly longer recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64 – 0.91; p = 0.013) and significantly longer overall survival rates (HR 0.61; 95% CI: 0.40 – 0.91; p = 0.04) after 5 yearsʼ follow-up. After considering the results of the GCIG INTERLACE trial published at the congress, the Uterus Commission of the AGO is of the opinion that neoadjuvant chemotherapy with carboplatin AUC2 and paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 d1, q7, x6 may be offered to patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (FIGO stage IB1/node positive, IB2, II, IIIB and IVA) in addition to the current standard therapy after the patient has been informed about the risks, with the decision taken on a case-by-case basis. However, before this approach can be discussed at guideline level or defined as the new therapy standard, it will be necessary to wait until the data from the full publication are available.

English version of Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines 2022 for gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) issued by the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

The Japan Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guidelines 2022 for gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) have been published in accordance with the Minds Manual for Guideline Development 2014 and 2017. A specialized team independent of the working group for the revision performed a systematic review. Since GIST is a rare type of tumor, clinical evidence is not sufficient to answer several clinical and background questions. Thus, in these guidelines, we considered that consensus among the experts who manage GIST, the balance between benefits and harms, patients' wishes, medical economic perspective, etc. are important considerations in addition to the evidence. Although guidelines for the treatment of GIST have also been published by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), there are some differences between the treatments proposed in those guidelines and the treatments in the present guidelines because of the differences in health insurance systems among countries.

ESMO Guidance for reporting oncology real-world evidence (GROW)

The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) has produced the very first expert-based guidance for reporting real-world evidence (RWE) studies specifically for oncology. The publication addresses nuances of modern RWE research in oncology and provides a comprehensive list of detailed key recommendations — that have also been transcribed into an interactive informative scoring checklist tool — for full article development in different RWE research scenarios.

Review article: Contemporary management of gastrointestinal, pancreatic and hepatic toxicities of immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are effective oncologic agents which frequently cause immune-related adverse events (irAEs) which can impact multiple organ systems. Onco-Gastroenterology is a novel and emerging subspecialty within gastroenterology focused on cancer treatment-related complications. Gastroenterologists must be prepared to identify and manage diverse immune-mediated toxicities including enterocolitis, hepatitis, pancreatitis and other ICI-induced toxicities. To provide a narrative review of the epidemiology, diagnostic evaluation and management of checkpoint inhibitor-induced gastrointestinal and hepatic toxicities. We searched Cochrane and PubMed databases for articles published through August 2023. Gastrointestinal and hepatic irAEs include most commonly enterocolitis and hepatitis, but also pancreatitis, oesophagitis, gastritis, motility disorders (gastroparesis) and other rarer toxicities. Guidelines from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society for Medical Oncology, in combination with emerging cohort and clinical trial data, offer strategies for management of ICI toxicities. Evaluation of irAEs severity by formal classification and clinical stability, and a thorough workup for alternative etiologies which may clinically mimic irAEs underlie initial management. Treatments include corticosteroids, biologics and other immunosuppressive agents plus supportive care; decisions on dosing, timing and choice of steroid adjuncts and potential for subsequent checkpoint inhibitor dosing are nuanced and toxicity-specific. Expanding clinical trial and cohort data have clarified the epidemiology and clinical characteristics of gastrointestinal, pancreatic and hepatic toxicities of ICIs. Guidelines, though valuable, remain based principally on retrospective cohort data. Quality prospective, controlled studies may refine algorithms for treatment and potential immunotherapy rechallenge.

Clinical Value of Molecular Targets and FDA-Approved Genome-Targeted Cancer Therapies

The number of new genome-targeted cancer drugs has increased, offering the possibility of personalized therapy, often at a very high cost. To assess the validity of molecular targets and therapeutic benefits of US Food and Drug Administration-approved genome-targeted cancer drugs based on the outcomes of their corresponding pivotal clinical trials. In this cohort study, all genome-targeted cancer drugs that were FDA-approved between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2022, were analyzed. From FDA drug labels and trial reports, key characteristics of pivotal trials were extracted, including the outcomes assessed. The strength of evidence supporting molecular targetability was assessed using the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Scale for Clinical Actionability of Molecular Targets (ESCAT). Clinical benefit for their approved indications was evaluated using the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). Substantial clinical benefit was defined as a grade of A or B for curative intent and 4 or 5 for noncurative intent. Molecular targets qualifying for ESCAT category level I-A and I-B associated with substantial clinical benefit by ESMO-MCBS were rated as high-benefit genomic-based cancer treatments. A total of 50 molecular-targeted drugs covering 84 indications were analyzed. Forty-five indications (54%) were approved based on phase 1 or phase 2 pivotal trials, 45 (54%) were supported by single-arm pivotal trials, and 48 (57%) were approved on the basis of subgroup analyses. By each indication, 46 of 84 primary end points (55%) were overall response rate (median [IQR] overall response rate, 57% [40%-69%]; median [IQR] duration of response, 11.1 [9.2-19.8] months). Among the 84 pivotal trials supporting these 84 indications, 38 trials (45%) had I-A ESCAT targetability, and 32 (38%) had I-B targetability. Overall, 24 of 84 trials (29%) demonstrated substantial clinical benefit via ESMO-MCBS. Combining these ratings, 24 of 84 indications (29%) were associated with high-benefit genomic-based cancer treatments. The results of this cohort study demonstrate that among recently approved molecular-targeted cancer therapies, fewer than one-third demonstrated substantial patient benefits at approval. Benefit frameworks such as ESMO-MCBS and ESCAT can help physicians, patients, and payers identify therapies with the greatest clinical potential.

Patient-Controlled Subcutaneous Analgesia with Hydromorphone versus Oral Oxycontin for Opioid Titration of Cancer Pain: A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Trial.

Studies have shown that oral oxycontin tablets can be used for opioid titration. The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) guidelines for adult cancer pain recommend opioid titration through the parenteral route, usually the intravenous or subcutaneous route. Patient-controlled subcutaneous analgesia (PCSA) with hydromorphone needs further evaluation for opioid titration. This prospective multicenter study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of hydromorphone PCSA with oral oxycontin tablets for opioid titration of cancer pain. Eligible patients with cancer pain were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the PCSA group or the oxycontin group for dose titration. Different titration methods were given in both groups depending on whether the patient had an opioid tolerance. The primary endpoint of this study was time to successful titration (TST). A total of 256 patients completed this study. The PCSA group had a significantly lower TST compared with the oxycontin group (median [95% confidence interval (CI)], 5.5[95% CI:2.5-11.5] hours vs.16.0 [95% CI:11.5-22.5] hours; p<0.001). The frequency (median; interquartile) of breakthrough pain (Btp) over 24 hours was significantly lower in the PCSA group (2.5;2.0-3.5) than in the oxycontin group.(3.0; 2.5-4.5) (p=0.04). The pain was evaluated by numeric rating scale (NRS) score at 12 hours after the start of titration. The pain score (median; interquartile) was significantly lower in the PCSA versus the oxycontin group (2.5;1.5-3.0) vs 4.5;3.0-6.0) (p=0.02). The equivalent dose of oral morphine (EDOM) for a successful titration was similar in both groups (p=0.29), but there was a significant improvement in quality of life (QoL) in both groups (p=0.03). No between-group difference in the incidence of opioid-related adverse effects was observed (p=0.32). Compared with oral oxycontin tablet, the use of PCSA with hydromorphone achieved a shorter titration duration for patients with cancer pain (p<0.001), without significantly increasing adverse events (p=0.32).

R WE ready for reimbursement? A round up of developments in real-world evidence relating to health technology assessment: part 15.

In this latest update we discuss real-world evidence (RWE) guidance from the leading oncology professional societies, the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the European Society for Medical Oncology, and the PRINCIPLED practical guide on the design and analysis of causal RWE studies.

Updates in BRAF V600E-Mutated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide, and the second leading cause of cancer death. Approximately one in five patients with CRC present with metastatic disease at diagnosis. The BRAF V600E mutation occurs in 8–12% of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), and is characterised by an aggressive clinical course and poor prognosis. This article is based on a webinar discussion in March 2024, between two experts in gastrointestinal cancers, Chiara Cremolini, University of Pisa, Italy; and Julien Taieb, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Université Paris-Cité, France, both of whom have a wealth of experience and expertise in the clinical management of CRC. The experts described the most important recent advances in the treatment of BRAF V600E-mutated mCRC, including data presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress in October 2023, and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Gastrointestinal (GI) Cancers Symposium in January 2024. Cremolini and Taieb gave valuable insights into topics such as the aggressive nature of BRAF V600E-mutated mCRC, and how this impacts choice of treatment, patient outcomes, and quality of life, as well as the importance of early testing and monitoring. The experts also discussed how the BRAF V600E mutation impacts treatment response and outcomes in patients with microsatellite unstable (microsatellite instability [MSI]) versus microsatellite stable (MSS) tumours, and recent key clinical trials in BRAF V600E-mutated mCRC. The importance of surgery in the multidisciplinary management of patients with BRAF V600E-mutated mCRC, BRAF as a prognostic marker in resected CRC, and real-world studies in this field were also explored. Finally, Cremolini and Taieb described what the future of the management of patients with BRAF V600E-mutated mCRC might look like, and which advancements in research they would like to see.

Upper Tract Urothelial Cancer: Guideline of Guidelines.

Upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) is a rare disease with a potentially dismal prognosis. We systematically compared international guidelines on UTUC to analyze similitudes and differences among them. We conducted a search on MEDLINE/PubMed for guidelines related to UTUC from 2010 to the present. In addition, we manually explored the websites of urological and oncological societies and journals to identify pertinent guidelines. We also assessed recommendations from the International Bladder Cancer Network, the Canadian Urological Association, the European Society for Medical Oncology, and the International Consultation on Bladder Cancer, considering their expertise and experience in the field. Among all the sources, only the American Urologist Association (AUA), European Association of Urology (EAU), and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines specifically report data on diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of UTUC. Current analysis reveals several differences between all three sources on diagnostic work-up, patient management, and follow-up. Among all, AUA and EAU guidelines show more detailed indications. Despite the growing incidence of UTUC, only AUA, EAU, and NCCN guidelines deal with this cancer. Our research depicted high variability in reporting recommendations and opinions. In this regard, we encourage further higher-quality research to gain evidence creating higher grade consensus between guidelines.

Retrospective analysis of clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with carcinoma of unknown primary from three tertiary centers in Australia.

Carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP) remains an important tumor entity and a disproportionate cause of cancer mortality. Little is known about the contemporary clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes of CUP patients based on updated international classification guidelines. We evaluated a contemporary CUP cohort to provide insight into current clinical practice and the impact of tissue of origin assignment, site-specific and empirical therapy in a real-world setting. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of CUP patients, as defined by the updated European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) 2023 guidelines, across three tertiary referral centers in Australia between 2015 and 2022. We analyzed clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and survival outcomes using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression proportional hazard model between favorable and unfavorable risk groups. We identified a total of 123 CUP patients (n = 86 unfavorable, n = 37 favorable risk as per the 2023 ESMO guidelines). Sixty-four patients (52%) were assigned a tissue of origin by the treating clinician. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 6.8 (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.1-12.1) months and overall survival (OS) 10.2 (95% CI 6.0-18.5) months. Unfavorable risk (hazard ratio [HR] 2.9, p = 0.006), poor performance status (HR 2.8, p < 0.001), and non-squamous histology (HR 2.5, p < 0.05) were associated with poor survival outcome. A total of 70 patients (57%) proceeded to systemic therapy. In patients with non-squamous histology and unfavorable risk, site-specific therapy compared to empirical chemotherapy did not improve outcome (median OS 8.2 vs. 11.8 months, p = 0.7). In this real-world cohort, CUP presentations were heterogenous. Overall survival and rates of systemic treatment were poor. Poor performance status and unfavorable risk were associated with worse survival. For most patients, site-specific therapy did not improve survival outcome. Improved and timely access to diagnostic tests and therapeutics for this group of patients is urgently required.