ABSTRACT
Anaplastic thyroid carcinoma (ATC) is a rare thyroid malignancy with a dire prognosis, nearly 100% disease specific mortality and a median overall survival less than 6 months. In view of the limited data from India on anaplastic thyroid cancer, we conducted this audit to analyze the treatment pattern, outcomes and factors influencing it. This is a retrospective analysis of outcomes of patients treated in a single institution between January 2008 and December 2020. Baseline characteristics, treatment received, and outcomes among adult patients with ATC were collected. Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. SPSS version 20 and RStudio version 3.1.1 were used for analysis. In this cohort of 134 patients, the median age at diagnosis was 59 years, with 63.4% of them being females. At presentation, 70.9% of them had good performance status (PS 0-1). Only 38.8% received treatment with curative intent (either surgery fb adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy fb surgery and adjuvant or definitive chemoradiotherapy) while 61.2% patients received palliative treatment (either palliation alone or palliative chemotherapy or palliative surgery or palliative RT). Predominant pattern of progression was local progression (79.8%). Median PFS and OS of the overall cohort were 58 days and 80 days respectively. PFS and OS were significantly better in patients treated with curative intent vs palliative intent (116 and 134 days vs 45 and 50 days; p = 0.00 and 0.00 respectively). Among patients treated with curative intent, OS was significantly better in patients undergoing surgery vs CTRT (155 vs 76 days; p = 0.03). Among patients treated with upfront surgery, both PFS and OS were better with the addition of adjuvant CTRT/RT vs no adjuvant (332 and 540 days vs 55 and 91 days; p = 0.00 and 0.003 respectively). ATC is a rare cancer with dismal prognosis. Local therapy with surgery followed adjuvant seems to be associated with the better outcomes. Systemic therapy seems to be a better option for palliation. Our data reflects the real world data of this rare cancer.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Treatment of malignant melanoma has undergone a paradigm shift with the advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and targeted therapies. However, access to ICI is limited in low-middle income countries (LMICs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Histologically confirmed malignant melanoma cases registered from 2013 to 2019 were analysed for pattern of care, safety, and efficacy of systemic therapies (ST). RESULTS: There were 659 patients with a median age of 53 (range 44-63) years; 58.9% were males; 55.2% were mucosal melanomas. Most common primary sites were extremities (36.6%) and anorectum (31.4%). Nearly 10.8% of the metastatic cohort were BRAF mutated. Among 368 non-metastatic patients (172 prior treated, 185 de novo, and 11 unresectable), with a median follow-up of 26 months (0-83 months), median EFS and OS were 29.5 (95% CI: 22-40) and 33.3 (95% CI: 29.5-41.2) months, respectively. In the metastatic cohort, with a median follow up of 24 (0-85) months, the median EFS for BSC was 3.1 (95% CI 1.9-4.8) months versus 3.98 (95% CI 3.2-4.7) months with any ST (HR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.52-0.92; P = 0.011). The median OS was 3.9 (95% CI 3.3-6.4) months for BSC alone versus 12.0 (95% CI 10.5-15.1) months in any ST (HR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.28-0.50; P < 0.001). The disease control rate was 51.55%. Commonest grade 3-4 toxicity was anemia with chemotherapy (9.5%) and ICI (8.8%). In multivariate analysis, any ST received had a better prognostic impact in the metastatic cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Large real-world data reflects the treatment patterns adopted in LMIC for melanomas and poor access to expensive, standard of care therapies. Other systemic therapies provide meaningful clinical benefit and are worth exploring especially when the standard therapies are challenging to administer.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Early palliative care (EPC) is an important aspect of cancer management but, to our knowledge, has never been evaluated in patients with head and neck cancer. Hence, we performed this study to determine whether the addition of EPC to standard therapy leads to an improvement in the quality of life (QOL), decrease in symptom burden, and improvement in overall survival. METHODS: Adult patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck region planned for palliative systemic therapy were allocated 1:1 to either standard systemic therapy without or with comprehensive EPC service referral. Patients were administered the revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy for head and neck cancer (FACT-H&N) questionnaire at baseline and every 1 month thereafter for 3 months. The primary endpoint was a change in the QOL measured at 3 months after random assignment. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Ninety patients were randomly assigned to each arm. There was no statistical difference in the change in the FACT-H&N total score (P = .94), FACT-H&N Trial Outcome Index (P = .95), FACT-general total (P = .84), and Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale scores at 3 months between the 2 arms. The median overall survival was similar between the 2 arms (hazard ratio for death = 1.01, 95% confidence interval = 0.74 to 1.35). There were 5 in-hospital deaths in both arms (5.6% for both, P = .99). CONCLUSIONS: In this phase III study, the integration of EPC in head and neck cancer patients did not lead to an improvement in the QOL or survival.
