Explore the vast range of titles available.

Recurrent and metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN) presents substantial treatment challenges due to its aggressive and heterogeneous nature. While evidence-based guidelines provide useful recommendations, they may not offer sufficient support for real-time clinical decision-making. This Delphi consensus aimed to establish expert agreement on clinical parameters guiding first- and second-line treatment decisions and the management of specific clinical scenarios in R/M SCCHN in France. A two-round Delphi consensus was conducted between December 2023 and June 2024. A scientific committee of six national experts developed consensus statements based on a literature review and supervised the process. An expert panel of 25 oncologists from across France participated in both rounds. All respondents agreed that the need for a rapid therapeutic response and the presence of comorbidities were critical factors influencing first-line treatment choice. Seven major indicators of rapid response were identified: rapidly progressive relapse, partial airway obstruction, respiratory compromise, tumour-related bleeding, uncontrolled symptoms, carotid axis lesions, and pain resistant to third-step analgesics. For patients requiring rapid response, 76% supported using cetuximab with chemotherapy as a first-line option in cases with a combined positive score (CPS) between 1 and 19. Furthermore, 84% recommended immunotherapy (alone or combined with chemotherapy) as first-line treatment for CPS ≥ 20 tumours, while 41% would consider it for CPS 1-19 cases. A strong consensus (80%) held that first-line treatment should not restrict second-line options. Notably, 100% of respondents agreed that all patients should receive immunotherapy, cetuximab, taxanes, and platinum salts within the first two treatment lines. This Delphi consensus offers valuable, expert-based perspectives on the management of R/M SCCHN in France. It highlights a progressive shift from standardized European guideline frameworks toward a more personalized approach that accounts for individual patient profiles and tumour characteristics. The insights generated provide practical guidance for clinical decision-making and lay the groundwork for future research and optimisation of treatment strategies in real-world settings.

BackgroundWe report the clinical activity and safety of bintrafusp alfa, a first-in-class bifunctional fusion protein composed of the extracellular domain of the transforming growth factor β (TGF-β)RII receptor (a TGF-β ‘trap’) fused to a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody blocking programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), in patients with heavily pretreated squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN).MethodsIn this phase I dose-expansion cohort, patients with advanced SCCHN not amenable to curative therapy that progressed/recurred after platinum therapy in the recurrent/metastatic setting, or <6 months after platinum therapy in the locally advanced setting, received bintrafusp alfa 1200 mg intravenously every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was confirmed best overall response (BOR; Response Evaluation Criteria for Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1) per independent review committee (IRC); other endpoints included BOR per investigator and safety.ResultsAs of August 24, 2018, 32 patients had received bintrafusp alfa (median follow-up 86.4 weeks; range 2–97). Per IRC, the confirmed objective response rate (ORR) was 13% (95% CI 4% to 29%; 4 partial responses (PR)); 4 patients had stable disease (SD) (disease control rate 34%; 95% CI 19% to 53%). Per investigator, there were 5 PRs (ORR, 16%), including 2 patients who developed delayed PRs after initial disease increase (total clinical response rate 22%). Responses (ORRs) were observed in patients with PD-L1-positive (12%), PD-L1-negative (17%; 73-10 antibody for immunohistochemistry), human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive (33%) and HPV-negative tumors (5%). Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 11 patients (34%), with no grade 4 TRAEs or treatment-related deaths.ConclusionsBintrafusp alfa showed clinical activity across subgroups of PD-L1 expression and in HPV-positive tumors and had a manageable safety profile in patients with heavily pretreated advanced SCCHN. Activity in HPV-positive tumors is favorable compared with historical data from PD-L1 inhibitors and is being further investigated in an ongoing study of HPV-associated tumors.Trial registration number NCT02517398.

Objectives In the last decades, the number of cancer patients admitted in intensive care units (ICUs) for septic shock has dramatically increased. However, prognosis data remain scarce. Methods To assess the 180-day mortality rate in cancer patients admitted to the ICU for septic shock, a 5-year prospective study was performed. All adult patients admitted for septic shock were included and categorized into the following two groups and four subgroups: cancer patients (solid tumor or hematological malignancy) and non-cancer patients (immunocompromised or not). Data were collected and compared between the groups. Upon early ICU admission, the decision to forgo life-sustaining therapy (DFLST) or not was made by consultation among hematologists, oncologists, and the patients or their relatives. Results During the study period, 496 patients were admitted for septic shock: 252 cancer patients (119 hematological malignancies and 133 solid tumors) and 244 non-cancer patients. A DFLST was made for 39% of the non-cancer patients and 52% of the cancer patients. The 180-day mortality rate among the cancer patients was 51% and 68% for those with hematological malignancies and solid cancers, respectively. The mortality rate among the non-cancer patients was 44%. In a multivariate analysis, the performance status, Charlson comorbidity index, simplified acute physiology score 2, sequential organ failure assessment score, and DFLST were independent predictors of 180-day mortality. Conclusions Despite early admission to the ICU, the 180-day mortality rate due to septic shock was higher in cancer patients compared with non-cancer patients, due to excess mortality in the patients with solid tumors. The long-term prognosis of cancer patients with septic shock is modulated by their general state, severity of organ failure, and DFLST.

Background Patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M-HNSCC) have a poor prognosis and limited therapeutic options. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are effective in patients with tumor progression < 6 months following first-line, platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC), but data are missing for patients with progression ≥ 6 months after the last platinum dose. Methods Retrospective analysis (six French centers, 2008–2019) of all consecutive R/M-HNSCC patients. treated first-line with PBC and tumor progression ≥ 6 months after the last platinum dose. Primary endpoint: progression-free survival after second-line therapy (PFS2). Additional endpoints: overall survival from Day 1 of first-line (OS1) and second-line (OS2) therapy. Results R/M-HNSCC patients (n = 144) received cisplatinum (n = 67, 47%) or carboplatinum (n = 77, 53%) first-line. Response after first-line: complete response (CR; n = 16, 11%); partial response (PR; n = 77, 53%); stable disease (n = 22, 15%). Second-line therapy: PBC (n = 95, 66%); platinum-free regimen (PFR) (n = 25, 17%); ICI (n = 24, 17%). Median [95% confidence interval] PFS (months): PBC 5.0 [3.8–6.2]; PFR 4.0 [1–7.0]; ICI 2.0 [0.4–3.6] (p = 0.16). For PBC, PFR, and ICI, respectively: OS1 30, 23, and 29 months (p = 1.02); OS2 14, 10, and 16 months (p = 0.25); PR, 26%, 16%, and 21% patients; CR, 0%, 8%, and 4% patients. For subsequent lines, ICIs were administered for PBC (n = 11, 12%) and PFR (n = 2, 8%). No predictive factor for efficacy (PFS, OS) was identified. Conclusions Our retrospective study suggests similar efficacy regarding OS2 for second-line chemotherapy or ICI in R/M-HNSCC patients with progression ≥ 6 months after the last first-line platinum dose.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have radically changed the clinical outcome of several cancers with durable responses. CTLA-4 (cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4), PD-1 (programmed cell death protein 1) or PDL-1 (programmed cell death ligand protein 1) represent ICIs that can be used as monotherapy or in combination with other agents. The toxicity p of ICIs differ from the side effects of cytotoxic agents and come with new toxicities like immune-related adverse events. Typically, these toxicities occur in all organs. However, the main organs affected are the skin, digestive, hepatic, lungs, rheumatologic, and endocrine. Most of the immune toxicity that occurs is low grade but some more severe toxicities can occur that require a rapid diagnosis and appropriate treatment. The recognition of symptoms by physicians and patient is necessary to resolve them rapidly and adapt treatment to allow the toxicity to resolve. Keywords: immune check point inhibitor, toxicity, corticosteroids, immunosuppressive treatments

Background The effect of the sequential combination of chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remains unclear. Here, we evaluated the efficacy of different chemotherapy regimens administered after ICIs in advanced non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), compared to the same regimens administered without previous ICIs. Methods We retrospectively included all patients treated between 2015 and 2019 for an advanced NSCLC, receiving a salvage chemotherapy just after ICI (CAI group) comparing them to ICI naive patients (CWPI group) undergoing the same chemotherapy at Bordeaux University Hospital. The primary outcome was the time to treatment discontinuation (TTD), and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and overall response rate (ORR). Results A total of 152 patients were included, with 34/23 (CAI/CWPI) receiving paclitaxel/bevacizumab (PB), 24/11 paclitaxel (P), 27/12 gemcitabine (G) and 6/15 pemetrexed (PE). Characteristics were comparable, except for CAI treated with PB (more patients with an ECOG PS ≤1 [p <0.001]). Median number of lines received was higher in CAI for all groups. There was no difference between CAI and CWPI for TTD, OS and ORR. However, PB was associated with a nonsignificant increase in OS in the CAI group (HR = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.38–1.2, p = 0.17]. Conclusion Our data showed no difference in TTD, OS and ORR regardless of chemotherapy, but a trend towards an increased OS with PB when given after an ICI, while patients received chemotherapy later in the CAI group. This suggests that a sequential combination of ICI followed by chemotherapy could be an interesting strategy in advanced NSCLC for selected patients.

BackgroundRecurrent and/or metastatic (R/M) disease develops in approximately 65% of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) and is associated with a poor prognosis. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have proven effective in multiple tumor types, including R/M SCCHN. We report the efficacy and safety of avelumab (antiprogrammed death ligand 1 antibody) in an expansion cohort of patients with platinum-refractory/ineligible R/M SCCHN enrolled in the phase I JAVELIN Solid Tumor trial (NCT01772004).MethodsEligible patients with R/M SCCHN were aged ≥18 years and had received ≥1 line of platinum-based chemotherapy with disease progression or recurrence within 6 months of the last dose or were ineligible for platinum-based chemotherapy. All patients received avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Tumor assessments were carried out by a blinded independent review committee (IRC) and investigators according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1 (RECIST 1.1). Key endpoints included best overall response, duration of response (DOR) and progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by IRC and investigator per RECIST 1.1, overall survival (OS), and safety.ResultsBetween April 24, 2015, and November 13, 2015, 153 patients were enrolled. Patients had a median of two prior lines of therapy for metastatic or locally advanced disease (range 0–6); 12 patients (7.8%) were not eligible for platinum-based chemotherapy. At data cut-off (December 31, 2017), the confirmed objective response rate was 9.2% (95% CI 5.1% to 14.9%) assessed by IRC and 13.1% (95% CI 8.2% to 19.5%) assessed by investigator. Median DOR was not reached (95% CI 4.2 to not estimable) based on IRC assessment. Median PFS was 1.4 months (95% CI 1.4 to 2.6) assessed by IRC and 1.8 months (95% CI 1.4 to 2.7) assessed by investigator; median OS was 8.0 months (95% CI 6.5 to 10.2). Any-grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 83 patients (54.2%) and were grade ≥3 in 10 patients (6.5%). The most common TRAEs were fatigue (n=19, 12.4%), fever (n=14, 9.2%), pruritus (n=12, 7.8%), and chills (n=11, 7.2%), and there were no treatment-related deaths.ConclusionAvelumab showed clinical activity and was associated with a low rate of grade ≥3 TRAEs in heavily pretreated patients with platinum-refractory/ineligible R/M SCCHN.

Background Non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is usually treated with local therapy including transurethral resection of the bladder tumor and intravesical therapy depending on the stage of the tumor. NMIBC is a rarely a metastatic diseases with lymph node invasion in less of 10%. In the other hand meningeal carcinomatosis is a rare location for metastases with extremely poor outcomes. We described a case report of a patient presenting a metastatic disease to bones and meninges, several years after the treatment of NMIBC, which had been in complete response (CR) for 4 years after chemotherapy treatment. Case presentation A 63-years old men was treated by TURBT in 2008 for a high grade NMIBC, pT1b. Three years later he presented an acute binocular diplopy with right trochlear nerve paralysis, and labial hypoesthesia. Brain scan and MRI were performed finding a clivus infiltration and a pachymeningitis. A vertebral biopsy was performed finding an invasive carcinoma, CK7+/CK20+, TTF1-, PSA-, Thyroglobulin- and GATA3+. The metastatic event was in relation to the high grade NMIBC treated 3 years previously. Palliative chemotherapy was started with cisplatin gemcitabine. After 6 cycles and to date, 4 years later, the patient is therefore considered in complete response. Conclusion Metastasis in non-muscle invasive urothelial carcinoma is rare. Meningeal carcinomatosis outcome is poor, usually appearing in widely metastatic and progressive cancers but also because most systemic agents fail to pass the blood-brain barrier and penetrate into the cerebrospinal fluid. We described an unexpected response with complete response after chemotherapy for meningeal carcinomatosis of non muscle invasive urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND Prognosis of recurrent or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) remains poor. The addition of cetuximab, to platinum and fluorouracil chemotherapy (EXTREME regimen) has been shown to improve patients’ outcomes in first‐line settings. METHODS We conducted a retrospective, multicenter study, including HNSCC that progressed after a first line of platinum‐based chemotherapy and cetuximab, treated either by paclitaxel + cetuximab (PC) or paclitaxel alone (P), between January 2010 and April 2018. The end points were overall survival (OS), progression‐free survival (PFS), and overall response rates (ORR). Patients were matched according to their propensity scores, estimated with a logistic regression model. The secondary objectives were to study the safety profile and to look for prognostic and predictive factors of effectiveness. RESULTS Of the 340 identified patients, 262 were included in the analysis, 165 received PC, and 97 received P. In unmatched population, ORR was 16.4% with PC and 6.2% for P. Median PFS was 2.9 months [95% Confidence Interval 2.7–3.0] for PC versus 2.5 months [2.2–2.7] for P, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.770 [0.596–0.996]. Median OS was 5.5 months [4.4–6.9] for PC versus 4.2 months [3.4–4.8] for P, HR = 0.774 [0.590–1.015]. In multivariate analysis, PC was associated with better PFS and OS. These results were consistent in matched‐paired population. Previous cetuximab maintenance for more than 3 months was predictive of better OS with PC. CONCLUSION Although the continuation of cetuximab in combination with paclitaxel after EXTREME provides moderate benefit, it could be an interesting option for selected patients. In this propensity score‐adjusted, multi‐institutional series, cetuximab in association with paclitaxel showed better outcomes than paclitaxel alone for patients who had disease progression after EXTREME regimen, particularly for patients who benefit the most from cetuximab in first‐line setting. This study should raise the question of the place of this association with the arrival of immune checkpoint inhibitors in first line with or without chemotherapy.

ObjectiveAnother course of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is often considered in patients with cancer progression and previous immune-related adverse events, including inflammatory arthritis (ICI-IA), but there are limited data regarding safety of ICI rechallenge in this setting. We aimed to assess the rate and clinical features associated with ICI-IA flare/recurrence on ICI rechallenge.MethodsWe conducted a multicentre observational study including cancer patients with ICI-IA who started a second course of ICI more than 3 months after ICI discontinuation in four French university hospitals. Primary outcome was the frequency of ICI flare/recurrence after ICI rechallenge.ResultsTwenty-three patients were included. At the time of ICI rechallenge, 18 patients reported no symptoms of ICI-IA (78%) and 5 had grade 1 (22%), 11 patients (48%) were not receiving any ICI-IA treatment, 11 (48%) were still on prednisone, 2 (9%) were on conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and 1 (4%) on anti-IL-6. ICI-IA flare/recurrence occurred in 12 patients (52%) with a median time of 1 month after ICI rechallenge. ICI-IA phenotype, disease activity and ICI-IA treatment at the time of ICI rechallenge did not differ according to ICI-IA flare/recurrence status.ConclusionIn this first observational study of ICI-IA patients rechallenged with ICI, about half of the patients experienced ICI-IA flare/recurrence with a similar phenotype but occurring earlier than the initial ICI-IA, warranting close monitoring during the first month of retreatment. Risk of flare did not differ according to baseline immunosuppressive treatment at the time of rechallenge.