Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Regorafenib is a standard treatment option for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) refractory to conventional therapies. However, outcomes remain heterogeneous, and simple and reproducible prognostic tools applicable in routine clinical practice are needed to optimize patient selection. This study aimed to perform an external real-world validation of the REBECCA prognostic score and the Tabernero classification in a multicenter cohort of refractory mCRC patients treated with regorafenib. Methods We conducted a retrospective multicenter study including 130 patients with refractory mCRC treated with regorafenib across five university hospitals in Galicia, Spain. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and disease control rate (DCR) were analyzed according to the REBECCA prognostic score and the Tabernero classification. Kaplan–Meier estimates, log-rank tests, and chi-squared analyses were used to compare outcomes between prognostic subgroups. Results Median age was 63 years, and 94.6% of patients had ECOG performance status 0–1. Median OS and PFS were 6.7 and 2.9 months, respectively. According to the REBECCA prognostic score, median OS was 9.2, 6.9, and 5.3 months for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively ( p  = 0.138). In contrast, the Tabernero classification identified significant OS differences, with median OS of 10.5, 6.9, and 5.2 months in patients with best, good, and poor prognostic characteristics, respectively ( p  = 0.022). DCR was also significantly stratified by the Tabernero classification (48.0%, 21.1%, and 24.4%; p  = 0.004). Treatment was well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with previous studies. Conclusions In this multicenter real-world study, the Tabernero classification demonstrated robust prognostic stratification in a real-world setting in refractory mCRC patients treated with regorafenib, whereas the REBECCA prognostic score showed limited discriminatory ability in this contemporary cohort. Given its simplicity, objectivity, and reproducibility, the Tabernero model may represent a practical tool to support prognostic assessment and clinical decision-making in routine practice.

Trifluridine/tipiracil increases overall survival (OS) in patients with refractory, metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). A post hoc exploratory analysis of the RECOURSE randomized clinical trial (RCT) established two categories, a good prognosis corresponding to subjects having a low tumor burden and indolent disease. Other models in refractory mCRC are the FAS-CORRECT and Colon Life nomogram. The main objective was to externally validate the prognostic factors of the RECOURSE and FAS-CORRECT trials, and the Colon Life nomogram in a multicenter, real-world series of mCRC treated in 3rd and successive lines with trifluridine/tipiracil. The secondary aim was to develop an OS predictive model, TAS-RECOSMO. Between 2016 and 2019, 244 patients were recruited. Median OS was 8.15 vs 8.12 months for the poor (85% of the subjects) and good (15%) prognosis groups from the RESOURCE trial, respectively, log-rank p = 0.9. The most common grade 3–4 toxicities were neutropenia (17%), asthenia (6%), and anemia (5%). The AFT lognormal model TAS-RECOSMO included six variables: ECOG-PS, KRAS/NRAS/BRAF mutation status, time between diagnosis of metastasis and beginning of trifluridine/tipiracil, NLR, CEA, and alkaline phosphatase. The model’s bootstrapped bias-corrected c-index was 0.682 (95% CI, 0.636–0.722). The factors from the Colon Life model, FAS-CORRECT, and RECOURSE displayed a c-index of 0.690, 0.630, and 0.507, respectively. TAS-RECOSMO, FAS-CORRECT, and the Colon Life nomogram appear to predict OS in patients with refractory mCCR who begin trifluridine/tipiracil treatment in the real world. The prognostic groups of the RECOURCE RCT were unable to capture the situation of real-world subjects treated with trifluridine/tipiracil in this series.

Purpose The phase III VELOUR trial demonstrated efficacy with combined FOLFIRI‐aflibercept in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with oxaliplatin with or without bevacizumab versus placebo. The effect of FOLFIRI‐aflibercept in routine clinical practice was evaluated. Methods/Patients Overall survival (OS), progression‐free survival (PFS), response and safety were analysed for 78 patients treated with FOLFIRI‐aflibercept at six GITuD institutions. Exploratory analyses of prognostic and predictive markers of efficacy were performed. Results Patients had good general status (PS 0‐1 96.2%), tumours were mostly RAS‐mutant (75.6%), synchronous (71.8%), and left‐sided (71.8%). Prior therapy included bevacizumab (47.4%) and anti‐EGFR agents (12.8%). PFS was longer for metachronous than synchronous tumours (11.0 vs 5.0 months, P = 0.028), and for left‐colon tumours (7.0 vs 3.0 months, P = 0.044). RAS‐mutant status, first‐line treatment and primary tumour surgery did not impact PFS. The disease control rate was 70.5%. The most common grade 3/4 toxicities were neutropenia (15.3%), asthenia (10.3%), diarrhea and mucositis (6.4% each). Dysphonia was reported in 39.7% of patients, and grade 3 hypertension in 3.8%. Development of hypertension (any grade) was significantly associated with a reduced risk of progression by multivariate analysis (HR = 2.7; 95%CI 1.3‐5.4; P = 0.001). Conclusions Efficacy with FOLFIRI‐aflibercept in a real‐life population was in line with results from the pivotal trial and toxicity was manageable with treatment adaptation. Survival outcomes were not impacted by primary tumour location, RAS‐mutant status, first‐line treatment or primary tumour surgery. Hypertension may be a surrogate marker of efficacy in this patient population. Real‐world data on treatment with FOLFIRI/aflibercept. Safety, efficacy, and subgroup analyses. Importance of HTA development. .

Introduction The mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signalling network aberrations in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) generate intrinsic dynamic effects and temporal variations that are crucial but often overlooked in clinical trial populations. Here, we investigate the time-varying impact of MAPK pathway mutation genotype on each treatment line’s contribution to the overall clinical course. Methods The PROMETEO study focused on mCRC patients undergoing second-line treatment at 20 hospitals. We evaluated genotypes and employed flexible models to analyse the dynamic effect of each mutation. Results We examined data derived from 1160 patients. The effects of KRAS G12C or G12V, and BRAF V600E are clearly time-varying, with unexpected consequences such as the deleterious effect of BRAF V600E vs other genotypes dissipating over time when subjects receive antiangiogenics, or KRAS G12V and G12C showing increasing aggressiveness over time. Thus, contrary to expectations, the 12-month survival rate from the second line for those who survived >6 months was 49.9% (95% CI, 32.7–67.3) for KRAS G12C and 59% (95% CI, 38.5–80.6) for BRAF V600E. Conclusions The dynamic perspective is essential for understanding the behaviour of tumours with specific genotypes, especially from the second line onward. This may be relevant in patient monitoring and treatment decision-making, particularly in cases with distinct mutations.

BackgroundThere are few third- and fourth-line therapeutic options for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In RAS/BRAF wild-type (wt) mCRC previously treated with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) (first-line) and relapsed after a good response, retreatment with anti-EGFR (rechallenge) emerges as a therapeutic alternative.ObjectiveThe aim was to show the activity and safety of anti-EGFR rechallenge in RAS/BRAF wt mCRC in real-world practice.Patients and MethodsA multicenter, retrospective, observational study (six hospitals of the Galician Group of Research in Digestive Tumors) was conducted. Adult patients with RAS/BRAF wt mCRC, evaluated by liquid biopsy, were included. They received anti-EGFR rechallenge (cetuximab, panitumumab) as monotherapy, or combined with chemotherapy, in third- or subsequent lines. Efficacy (overall response rate [ORR], disease control rate [DCR], overall survival [OS], and progression-free survival [PFS]) and safety (incidence of adverse events [AEs]) were assessed.ResultsThirty-one patients were analyzed. Rechallenge (median 6 cycles [range 1–27], mainly cetuximab [80.7%]), started at a median anti-EGFR-free time of 18.4 months (1.7–37.5 months) after two (38.7%) or more (61.3%) lines of treatment; 64.5% of patients received a full dose. Median OS and PFS were 9.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.2–11.4) and 2.6 months (95% CI 1.7–3.4), respectively. ORR was 10%, and DCR was 30%. The most common AEs were diarrhea (35.5%), anemia (29%), emesis (6.4%), and neutropenia (6.4%); < 5% grade ≥ 3; 48.4% of patients reported anti-EGFR-related skin toxicity (grade > 1). Hypomagnesemia required supplements in 29% of patients. Dose delays (≥ 3 days) and reduction (≥ 20%) were reported in 11 (35.5%) and seven patients (22.6%), respectively.ConclusionsIn RAS/BRAF wt mCRC patients, an anti-EGFR rechallenge provides a feasible therapeutic option with clinical benefit (survival) and a manageable safety profile.

Background: In recent years, abundant scientific evidence has been generated based on clinical trials (CT) in the field of oncology. The general objective of this paper is to find out the extent to which decision making is based on knowledge of the most recent CT. Its specific objectives are to pinpoint difficulties with decision making based on the CT performed and find out the motivations patients and clinicians have when taking part in a CT. Methodology: Combined, prospective study, based on the Delphi method. A lack of correspondence between the people who take part in CT and patients who come for consultation has been identified. A need for training in analysing and interpreting CT has also been identified and a lack of trust in the results of CT financed by the pharmaceutical industry itself has been perceived. Conclusions: There is a difficulty in selecting oncological treatment due to the lack of correspondence between the patients included in the CT and patients seen in consultation. In this process, real world data studies may be highly useful, as they may provide this group with greater training in interpreting CT and their results.

Lung cancer (LC) is associated with ageing, with the average age of affected individuals being approximately 70 years. However, despite a higher incidence and prevalence among older people, the older adult population is underrepresented in clinical trials. For LC with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor ( EGFR ) mutations, there is no clear association of this mutation with age. Geriatric assessments (GAs) and a multidisciplinary approach are essential for defining the optimal treatment. In this consensus, a group of experts selected from the Oncogeriatrics Section of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (Sección de Oncogeriatría de la Sociedad Española de Oncología Médica—SEOM), the Spanish Lung Cancer Group (Grupo Español de Cáncer de Pulmón—GECP) and the Association for Research on Lung Cancer in Women (Asociación para la Investigación del Cáncer de Pulmón en Mujeres—ICAPEM) evaluate the scientific evidence currently available and propose a series of recommendations to optimize the management of older adult patients with advanced LC with EGFR mutations.

Background Outcomes are poorer in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients with BRAF V600E mutations than those without it, but the effect of these mutations on treatment response is unclear. This real-world study assessed the effects of antiangiogenic-based treatment and systemic inflammatory factors on outcomes in patients with BRAF V600-mutated mCRC. Methods/patients This real-world, multicenter, retrospective, observational study included patients with BRAF V600-mutated mCRC treated in eight hospitals in Spain. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS); overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were also assessed. The effect of first- and second-line treatment type on OS, PFS, ORR, and DCR were evaluated, plus the impact of systemic inflammatory markers on these outcomes. A systemic inflammation score (SIS) of 1–3 was assigned based on one point each for platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) ≥200, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) ≥3, and serum albumin <3.6 g/dL. Results Of 72 patients, data from 64 were analyzed. After a median of 69.1 months, median OS was 11.9 months and median first-line PFS was 4.4 months. First-line treatment was triplet chemotherapy-antiangiogenic (12.5%), doublet chemotherapy-antiangiogenic (47.2%), doublet chemotherapy-anti-EGFR (11.1%), or doublet chemotherapy (18.1%). Although first-line treatment showed no significant effect on OS, antiangiogenic-based regimens were associated with prolonged median PFS versus non-antiangiogenic regimens. Negative predictors of survival with antiangiogenic-based treatment were NLR, serum albumin, and SIS 1–3, but not PLR. Patients with SIS 1–3 showed significantly prolonged PFS with antiangiogenic-based treatment versus non-antiangiogenic-based treatment, while those with SIS=0 showed no PFS benefit. Conclusions Antiangiogenic-based regimens, SIS, NLR, and albumin were predictors of survival in patients with mCRC, while SIS, NLR and serum albumin may predict response to antiangiogenic-based chemotherapy. Trial registration GIT-BRAF-2017-01.