Explore the vast range of titles available.

The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and RAS/RAF signaling pathway plays pivotal roles in tumor progression via proliferation, survival, invasion, and immune evasion. Two anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies, cetuximab and panitumumab, have become essential components in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Treatment with these anti-EGFR antibodies has shown definite benefits when administered in all treatment lines and is strongly recommended as the preferred regimen to prolong survival, especially when administered in the first- and third-lines. Recent efforts have revealed not only mechanisms responsible for resistance to anti-EGFR antibodies, including expanded RAS mutations as a negative predictive biomarker, but also the possibility of continuing anti-EGFR antibody treatment in combination with chemotherapy. Furthermore, the challenges associated with the pharmaceutical development of treatments for patients with mutant-type BRAF mCRC are ongoing. In this review, we provide an overview of the EGFR and RAS/RAF signaling pathway and antitumor activity, focusing on practical aspects such as established treatments including patient selection, treatment strategies, and future perspectives for drug development targeting the EGFR and RAS/RAF signaling pathway.

Background Most advanced elderly cancer patients experience fatigue, anorexia, and declining physical function due to cancer cachexia, for which effective interventions have not been established. We performed a phase I study of a new nonpharmacological multimodal intervention called the nutritional and exercise treatment for advanced cancer (NEXTAC) program and reported the excellent feasibility of and compliance with this program in elderly patients with advanced cancer who were at risk for cancer cachexia. We report here the background, hypothesis, and design of the next-step multicenter, randomized phase II study to evaluate the efficacy of the program, the NEXTAC-TWO study. Methods Patients with chemo-naïve advanced non-small cell lung cancer or pancreatic cancer, age ≥ 70 years, performance status ≤2, with adequate organ function and without disability according to the modified Katz index will be eligible. In total, 130 participants will be recruited from 15 Japanese institutions and will be randomized into either the intervention group or a control group. Computer-generated random numbers are allocated to each participant. Stratification factors include performance status (0 to 1 vs. 2), site of primary cancer (lung vs. pancreas), stage (III vs. IV), and type of chemotherapy (cytotoxic vs. others). Interventions and assessment will be performed 4 times every 4 ± 2 weeks from the date of randomization. Interventions will consist of nutritional counseling, nutritional supplements (rich in branched-chain amino acids), and a home-based exercise program. The exercise program will include low-intensity daily muscle training and lifestyle education to promote physical activity. The primary endpoint is disability-free survival. It is defined as the period from the date of randomization to the date of developing disability or death due to any cause. This trial also plans to evaluate the improvements in nutritional status, physical condition, quality of life, activities of daily living, overall survival, and safety as secondary endpoints. Enrollment began in August 2017. The study results will demonstrate the efficacy of multimodal interventions for elderly cancer patients and their application for the maintenance of physical and nutritional conditions in patients with cancer cachexia. This work is supported by a grant-in-aid from the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development. Discussion This is the first randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a multimodal intervention specific for elderly patients with advanced cancer. Trial registration Registered at August 23, 2017. Registry number: UMIN000028801 .

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is one of the most disabling disorders with significant comorbidity and mortality. Incidence and prevalence of CKD in cancer survivors are remarkably high in both adults and pediatric patients. The reasons for this high incidence/prevalence are multifold but kidney damage by cancer itself and cancer treatment (pharmacotherapy/surgery/radiation) are the main reasons. Since cancer survivors commonly have significant comorbidities, risk of cancer recurrence, limited physical function or life expectancy, special attentions should be paid when considering the treatment of CKD and its complications. Especially, shared decision-making should be considered when selecting the renal replacement therapies with as much information/facts/evidence as possible.

Background We developed and refined an S-1 dosage formula based on renal function, sex, and body surface area (BSA) to achieve the target area under the concentration–time curve of 5-fluorouracil in two prospective pharmacokinetic studies. The clinical validity of the refined formula (BBT formula) was evaluated using data from the two phase III trials of fist-line chemotherapy including S-1 for advanced gastric cancer, which demonstrated that overall survival and progression-free survival tended to be shorter in patients whose S-1 standard dose, based on BSA alone, was lower than that determined using the BBT formula. Methods Chemo-naïve patients with HER2-negative advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer, whose standard S-1 dose is lower than that determined using the BBT formula, receive S-1 at an increased dose based on the BBT formula plus oxaliplatin (130 mg/m 2 ) and nivolumab (360 mg/body). The primary endpoint is the incidence of dose-limiting toxicity in six patients in the phase I part and the proportion of patients requiring S-1 dose reduction in a total of 20 patients, expecting 30% and rejecting 50% with an alpha error of 0.1 and beta error of 0.2. The secondary endpoints are adverse events, relative dose intensity, response rate, disease control rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. A correlation study is conducted to investigate the immune profiles associated with efficacy. Discussion This phase I/II trial evaluates the safety and efficacy of S-1 at increased doses, determined by the BBT formula, in combination with oxaliplatin and nivolumab in patients with HER2-negative advanced gastric cancer, whose standard dose of S- 1 is lower than the dose recommended dose by the BBT formula. Trial registration This study was approved by the University of Tokyo Clinical Research Review Board (URL: https://www.ut-crescent.jp/patients/chiken_jisshi/ , review number: 2022529SP) and was initiated at 19 institutions in June 2023 (registered as jRCTs031230127).

Summary Background. Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) and irinotecan are treatment options for heavily pretreated patients with advanced gastric cancer, but their efficacies are limited. We investigated the combination of FTD/TPI and irinotecan for such patients. Methods. Patients who were refractory to fluoropyrimidine, platinum and taxane were enrolled into four cohorts (Level 1A/1B/2A/2B) and treated with irinotecan (100 [Level 1] or 125 [Level 2] mg/m2 on days 1 and 15) and FTD/TPI (35 mg/m2/dose, twice daily, on days 1–5 and 8–12 [Level A] or on days 1–5 and days 15–19 [Level B]) of a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoints were the maximum tolerated dose, dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and recommended phase II dose (RP2D); the secondary endpoint was the disease control rate (DCR). Results. Eleven patients were enrolled: 2 at Level 1A, 3 at Level 1B, and 6 at Level 2B. DLTs occurred in 2/2 patients at Level 1A and 2/6 patients at Level 2B. Grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (90.9%), leukopenia (54.5%), anemia (45.5%) and febrile neutropenia (18.2%). One patient at Level 2B achieved a partial response, and the DCR was 72.7% (95% CI, 39.0%-94.0%). The median progression-free survival and overall survival periods were 3.0 months (95% CI, 0.92-not reached) and 10.2 months (95% CI, 2.2-not reached), respectively. Conclusion. The RP2D of FTD/TPI combined with irinotecan was determined to be Level 1B; this level was associated with manageable hematologic toxicities and feasible non-hematologic toxicities. Further evaluation of the efficacy of RP2D treatment is necessary.

Background Monitoring proteinuria is important for the management of patients with cancer treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or anti-VEGF receptor (VEGFR) inhibitors (VEGF/Ri). Here we investigated the difference between the urine protein/creatinine ratio (UPCR) and a qualitative value test (QV) on the decision making of treatment continuation and the usefulness of UPCR testing in patients with gastrointestinal cancer treated with anti-VEGF/Ri. Methods From January 2017 to December 2018, a survey was conducted based on the medical records of patients with gastrointestinal cancer with a QV of ≥2+ during the use of anti-VEGF/Ri at seven Japanese institutions participating in the Onco-nephrology Consortium. The primary endpoint was the ratio of the worst UPCR < 2.0 (low UPCR) in cases with a QV2+ at the point of the first proteinuria onset. The secondary endpoints were a comparison of low UPCR and worst UPCR ≥2.0 (high UPCR), the concordance rate between UPCR and QV in the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grading, and the differences in the decision making for anti-VEGF/Ri continuation. Results Among the 71 patients enrolled, the proportion of low UPCR in onset QV2+ ( n  = 53) was 66% ( n  = 35). In a comparison between low ( n  = 36) and high UPCR cases ( n  = 24), body weight ( P  = 0.036), onset QV status ( P  = 0.0134), and worst QV status ( P  < 0.0001) were significantly associated with UPCR levels. The concordance rate for CTCAE Grade 2 of both the QV and UPCR was 83%. Regarding the judgment of anti-VEGF/Ri continuation, treatment was continued in 42.4% of cases when the QV became 3+, whereas only 25% continued treatment when the UPCR value became high. Conclusion Urine dipstick test results may overestimate proteinuria, and the UPCR result tended to be more critical than the QV when deciding the treatment policy. Trial registration This study is a multiple institutional retrospectively registered observational trial. Clinical Trial number: University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry (protocol ID UMIN000042545 ).

In patients with impaired renal function, S‐1–related toxicities increase due to higher exposure of 5‐fluorouracil (5‐FU). Our previous pharmacokinetic study in 16 cancer patients with various renal functions developed an S‐1 dosage formula based on individual creatinine clearance (CLcr) and body surface area (BSA). To evaluate and refine the formula, this prospective study was conducted. Thirty‐three patients with various renal functions received S‐1 for 4 weeks at doses determined by the nomogram derived from the previously developed formula. A series of blood samples were collected after the first dose to calculate the area under the concentration‐time curve (AUC) of 5‐FU. Thirty patients with BSA of 1.14‐1.84 m2 and CLcr of 23.8‐96.4 mL/min were assessable for pharmacokinetics. The observed daily AUC ranged from 712.6 to 2868.7 ng·h/mL, and 18 patients achieved the target AUC (1447.8 ± 545.4 ng·h/mL). Three patients experienced S‐1–related grade 3 adverse events during the first course. In the population pharmacokinetic analysis from the combined data of 46 patients in this study and the previous study, sex was identified as a statistically significant covariate for 5‐FU clearance. Hence, the refined formula includes sex as an additional factor: Recommended daily dose = target AUC × (14.5 + 8.23 × SEX [0 for female and 1 for male] + 0.301 × CLcr) × BSA. Revised nomograms for recommended daily doses derived from the refined formula can be used in clinical practice to achieve the target AUC ensuring efficacy and safety of S‐1. Our previously developed S‐1 dosage formula based on renal function was prospectively evaluated. Revised nomograms for recommended daily doses derived from the refined formula can be used in clinical practice to achieve the target AUC ensuring efficacy and safety of S‐1.

Background In our previous study (NEXTAC‐ONE), the Nutrition and Exercise Treatment for Advanced Cancer (NEXTAC) program (including home‐based exercise and branched‐chain amino acid‐containing supplements combined with nutritional counselling) was shown to potentially prevent low muscle mass‐related disability in elderly cancer patients. This randomized controlled trial (NEXTAC‐TWO) was conducted to elucidate whether the NEXTAC program prolongs disability‐free survival in elderly patients with advanced pancreatic or non‐small cell lung cancer. Methods This open‐label, multicentre, randomized phase II study was conducted at 15 Japanese hospitals. Patients aged ≥ 70 years, with pathologically proven advanced pancreatic or non‐small cell lung cancer, who were scheduled to undergo systemic chemotherapy for treatment‐naïve tumours were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo observation or receive the NEXTAC program for 12 weeks. Randomization was performed by the minimization method, using performance status and types with cancer diagnosis and anticancer treatment as adjustment factors. The primary endpoint was disability‐free survival (period from randomization to the date patients were evaluated as needing care or death due to any cause). Key secondary endpoints were change in weight, muscle mass, physical activity, nutritional assessment, safety and survival. This trial was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000028801). Results From 2017 to 2019, 131 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to NEXTAC (n = 66) or control arms (n = 65, median age 76.0 years). After randomization, two patients in the NEXTAC arm declined further participation. As a result, 64 patients (median age 75.5 years) received at least one session of the NEXTAC program. The completion rate of the planned exercise and nutrition consultation sessions was 98.4% in the NEXTAC arm. Of the 129 patients, 91 (71%) had a disability (44 in the NEXTAC arm; 47 in the control arm). In the primary analysis, median disability‐free survival periods were 478 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 358–576) in the NEXTAC arm and 499 days in the control arm (95% CI, 363–604), with no significant differences between them (p = 0.884). The hazard ratio for disability‐free survival in the NEXTAC arm compared with the control arm was 0.970 (95% CI 0.642–1.465). There were no differences in the secondary endpoints between the two arms. Conclusions The patients had good compliance with the 12‐week NEXTAC program but failed to show significant improvements in disability‐free survival as compared to observation alone. Further study on the progression of low muscle mass in the NEXTAC arm is needed.

Background and aim Fistula is one of the known complications of T4 esophageal cancer (T4-EC). The standard treatment for T4-EC is chemoradiotherapy, but detailed data about fistula resulting from chemoradiotherapy in this condition are limited. In particular, radiographic findings of T4-EC with fistula have not been reported. This study assessed the risk factors of fistula based on clinical information on patients with chemoradiotherapy for T4-EC. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of 59 T4-EC patients who had squamous cell carcinoma without any fistula before receiving definitive or palliative chemoradiotherapy. Results A fistula was observed in 18 patients (31%) throughout their clinical course. The overall survival in the fistula group was significantly shorter than that in the non-fistula group (259 vs. 346 days; p  = 0.0341). The axial tumor size on computed tomography (CT) was confirmed as an independent risk factor for esophageal fistula in multivariate analysis of stepwise methods [OR 1.226; 95% CI 1.109–1.411; p  < 0.0001]. Twelve out of 14 patients with an axial tumor size of 50 mm or greater had developed a fistula. Conclusions A large tumor size on the axial plane on CT is a risk factor for fistula formation.

BackgroundComprehensive analyses of cancer-related genomic alterations are expected to lead to increased availability of targeted therapies. However, in patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, the utility of genomic profiling is unclear because of common non-druggable alterations and rapid disease progression that prevent a sufficient time period to seek targets.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to determine the utility of genomic profiling tests in patients with GI cancers.MethodsThe subjects of this retrospective study were patients with GI cancers and patients with non-GI cancers who underwent tissue-based genomic profiling at a single institution from April 2017 to October 2020. The profile of gene alterations, frequency of tumor mutational burden-high (≥ 10 Muts/Mb), and accessibility of recommended molecular targeted therapy were compared between patients with GI cancers and patients with non-GI cancers.ResultsIn all, 133 patients with GI cancers and 63 patients with non-GI cancers were included. The genomic profiles of GI cancers showed the highest frequencies of TP53, KRAS, and APC mutations and a significantly lower frequency of PIK3CA mutations than those of non-GI cancers. Tumor mutational burden-high was significantly less prevalent in GI cancers (4% vs 20%, p = 0.008). Twenty-nine patients with GI cancers (40%) and 35 patients with non-GI cancers (56%) were recommended for targeted therapies based on the findings. Among them, seven patients each with GI cancers and non-GI cancers received the recommended therapy on their genomic findings, which showed similar treatment accessibility between the GI and non-GI cancer groups (10% vs 11%, p = 0.791). HER2-targeted and BRAF-targeted therapies were the primary treatments administered to patients with GI cancers.ConclusionsAlthough their genomic profiles revealed fewer druggable sites, patients with GI cancers accessed targeted therapies similarly to patients with non-GI cancers. The utility of genomic profile testing in patients with GI cancers was highlighted to determine if patients can receive specific treatments, such as HER2-targeted and BRAF-targeted therapies.