Pain in Long-Term Cancer Survivors: Prevalence and Impact in a Cohort Composed Mostly of Breast Cancer Survivors.

Cancer survival is becoming more common which means that there is now a growing population of cancer survivors, in whom pain may be common. However, its prevalence has hardly been addressed systematically. We aimed to assess the prevalence and explore the pathophysiology and impact of pain on health outcomes in cancer survivors. We conducted a retrospective-prospective cohort study in cancer-free patients diagnosed with cancer at least five years before the study start date. We used multivariable regression to establish the association of patients' cancer characteristics with pain, and then the association of patients' pain features with health outcomes and related symptoms. Between March and July 2021, 278 long-term cancer survivors were evaluated. Almost half of them (130/278, 46.8%) had pain, of whom 58.9% had a probable neuropathic component, but only 18 (13.8%) were taking specific drugs for neuropathic pain. A history of surgery-related pain syndrome in breast cancer patients was more than twice as frequent in the pain cohort. Post-chemotherapy and post-radiotherapy pain syndromes were uncommon. Pain was associated with lower QoL, emotional functioning, professional performance, and disability scores. Pain is a frequent health determinant in cancer survivors. Referral to specialised pain services may be a reasonable move in some cases.

Is older age an independent prognostic factor of survival in metastatic colorectal cancer?

INTRODUCTION: Older patients (>75 years) with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) may have worse survival than non-older patients. We hypothesized that, rather than age alone, concurrent factors may be more relevant for real-world survival. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with CRC in a 5-year period (2014-2018) were analyzed to determine which factors influenced in overall survival (OS). Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate OS. Univariate and multivariate analysis was conducted by Cox regression analysis. The study was approved by Ethic Committee. RESULTS: Out of 477 patients diagnosed with CRC, 231 had advanced disease. 92 patients (40%) were older than 75 years, median OS (mOS) was 17.1m (CI95% 14.3-23.3), p<0.001. In non-older patients, mOS was 26.7m (CI95% 21.9-32.6), p<0.001. We evaluated eighteen concurrent factors that included: characteristics related to the patient (age, sex, comorbidities, polypharmacy, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) and nutritional status), to the tumor (stage at diagnosis, tumor side, molecular profile, tumor burden, location, and number of metastasis) and to the treatment administered (systemic treatment for advanced disease, chemotherapy schedule and number of lines, severe adverse events and dose reductions, and surgery of liver metastasis). In the univariate analysis, age at diagnosis, ECOG, nutritional status, tumor side, molecular profile, tumor burden, systemic treatment for advanced disease, and surgery of liver metastases had significant impact on survival. However, multivariate analysis revealed that only four factors (tumor burden, nutritional status, systemic treatment for advanced disease, and surgery of liver metastases) were independently associated with OS, but not older age at diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Older age is not an independent survival prognostic factor for advanced CRC. Tumor burden, nutritional status, systemic treatment for advanced disease and surgery of liver met were significant factors associated with OS. These findings suggest that older patients should not be excluded from cancer treatment based on age alone.

Usefulness and real-world outcomes of next generation sequencing testing in patients with cancer: an observational study on the impact of selection based on clinical judgement.

Background: Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) panels are increasingly used in advanced patients with cancer to guide therapy. There is, however, controversy about when should these panels be used, and about their impact on the clinical course. Methods: In an observational study of 139 patients with cancer having an NGS test [from January 1st, 2017 to December 30th, 2020, in two hospitals (Hospital Universitario de La Princesa and Hospital Universitario Quironsalud Madrid) from Spain], we evaluated whether the clinical course (progression-free survival, PFS) was influenced by drug-based criteria [druggable alterations, receiving a recommended drug, having a favourable ESCAT category (ESMO Scale for Clinical Actionability of molecular Targets)] or clinical judgement criteria. Findings: In 111 of 139 cases that were successfully profiled, PFS was not significantly influenced by either having druggable alterations [median PFS for patients with druggable alterations was 170 (95% C.I.: 139-200) days compared to 299 (95% C.I.: 114-483) for those without; p = 0.37], receiving a proposed matching agent [median PFS for patients receiving a genomics-informed drug was 195 days (95% C.I.: 144-245), compared with 156 days for those that did not (95% C.I.: 85-226); p = 0.50], or having favourable ESCAT categories [median PFS for patients with ESCAT I-III was 183 days (95% C.I.: 104-261), compared with 180 (95% C.I.:144-215) for patients with ESCAT IV-X; p = 0.87]. In contrast, NGS testing performed within clinical judgement showed a significantly improved PFS [median PFS for patients that were profiled under the recommended scenarios was 319 days (95% C.I.: 0-658), compared to 123 days (95% C.I.: 89-156) in the non-recommended categories; p = 0.0020]. Interpretation: According to our data, real-world outcomes after NGS testing provide evidence of the benefit of clinical judgement in patients with either advanced cancers that routinely need multiple genetic markers, patients with advanced rare cancers, or patients that are screened for molecular clinical trials. By contrast, NGS does not seem to be valuable when performed in cases with a poor PS, rapidly progressing cancer, short expected lifetime, or cases with no standard therapeutic options. Funding: RC, NR-L and MQF are recipients of the PMP22/00032 grant, funded by the ISCIII and co-funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). The study also received funds from the CRIS Contra el Cancer Foundation.

Expert consensus of the Spanish Society of Pathology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology on the determination of biomarkers in pancreatic and biliary tract cancer.

Pancreatic cancer and biliary tract cancer have a poor prognosis. In recent years, the development of new diagnostic techniques has enabled the identification of the main genetic alterations involved in the development of these tumours. Multiple studies have assessed the ability to predict response to treatment of certain biomarkers, such as BRCA in pancreatic cancer, IDH1 or FGFR2 in biliary tract cancer and microsatellite instability or NTRK fusions in an agnostic tumour fashion. In this consensus, a group of experts selected by the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) and the Spanish Society of Pathology (SEAP) reviewed the role played by these mutations in the process of carcinogenesis and their clinical implications. Based on their results, a series of recommendations are made to optimize the determination of these biomarkers and thus help standardize the diagnosis and treatment of these tumours.

Expert consensus of the Spanish Society of Pathology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology on the determination of biomarkers in pancreatic and biliary tract cancer / Consenso de Expertos de la Sociedad Española de Patología y la Sociedad Española de Oncología Médica sobre la determinación de biomarcadores en el cáncer de páncreas y vías biliares

Pancreatic cancer and biliary tract cancer have a poor prognosis. In recent years, the development of new diagnostic techniques has enabled the identification of the main genetic alterations involved in the development of these tumours. Multiple studies have assessed the ability to predict response to treatment of certain biomarkers, such as BRCA in pancreatic cancer, IDH1 or FGFR2 in biliary tract cancer and microsatellite instability or NTRK fusions in an agnostic tumour fashion. In this consensus, a group of experts selected by the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) and the Spanish Society of Pathology (SEAP) reviewed the role played by these mutations in the process of carcinogenesis and their clinical implications. Based on their results, a series of recommendations are made to optimize the determination of these biomarkers and thus help standardize the diagnosis and treatment of these tumours.

El cáncer de páncreas y el de vías biliares son tumores de mal pronóstico. En los últimos años, el desarrollo de nuevas técnicas diagnósticas de biología molecular ha permitido conocer las principales alteraciones génicas implicadas en el desarrollo de estos tumores. Múltiples estudios han evaluado el carácter predictivo de respuesta a tratamiento de determinados biomarcadores, como BRCA en cáncer de páncreas, IDH1 y FGFR2 en tumores de vía biliar; y la inestabilidad de microsatélites y las fusiones de NTRK, para predecir la respuesta al tratamiento. En este consenso, un grupo de expertos seleccionado por la Sociedad Española de Oncología Médica (SEOM) y la Sociedad Española de Anatomía Patológica (SEAP) ha revisado el papel que desempeñan estas mutaciones en el proceso de carcinogénesis y sus implicaciones clínicas. Como resultado, en este artículo se proponen una serie de recomendaciones para optimizar la determinación de estos biomarcadores, con el fin de fomentar la estandarización en el diagnóstico y el tratamiento de estos tumores.(AU)

Expert consensus of the Spanish Society of Pathology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology on the determination of biomarkers in pancreatic and biliary tract cancer

Pancreatic cancer and biliary tract cancer have a poor prognosis. In recent years, the development of new diagnostic techniques has enabled the identification of the main genetic alterations involved in the development of these tumours. Multiple studies have assessed the ability of certain biomarkers, such as BRCA in pancreatic cancer, IDH1 or FGFR2 in biliary tract cancer and microsatellite instability or NTRK fusions in an agnostic tumour fashion, to predict response to treatment.In this consensus, a group of experts selected by the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) and the Spanish Society of Pathology (SEAP) reviewed the role played by these mutations in the process of carcinogenesis and their clinical implications. As a result, this article proposes a series of recommendations to optimize the determination of these biomarkers to help standardize the diagnosis and treatment of these tumours. (AU)

Excess weight and anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor’s outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer

Immune checkpoint inhibitors are one of the most effective treatments available in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. However, at present, there are no clinical or analytical biomarkers that define which patients benefit with certainty from these treatments. In our study, we evaluated whether excess weight could be a good predictive biomarker of benefit from these drugs.MethodsWe studied a population of 79 patients, divided into a study group with 39 patients diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer treated with immunotherapy and 40 patients in a control group, diagnosed with different advanced cancers, treated with non-immunotherapy treatment. We analyzed according to the presence of excess weight or not, the treatment’s outcome in the study group and in the control group (objective response, and progression-free and overall survival).ResultsIn our study, we detected a better response rate to immunotherapy in patients with excess weight (62.50 vs 26.08%, OR 4.72, p = 0.02), and a better median progression-free survival (14.19 vs 5.03 months, HR 0.50, p = 0.058) and median overall survival (33.84 months vs 20.76 months, HR 0.43, p = 0.01) in the study group. These findings were specific to the immunotherapy group since in the control group, with patients who did not receive immune checkpoint inhibitors, these findings were not found.ConclusionOur study suggests that patients with excess weight who receive anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitors diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer have a better outcome. This effect is specific to patients receiving immunotherapy. (AU)

Expert consensus of the Spanish Society of Pathology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology on the determination of biomarkers in pancreatic and biliary tract cancer.

Pancreatic cancer and biliary tract cancer have a poor prognosis. In recent years, the development of new diagnostic techniques has enabled the identification of the main genetic alterations involved in the development of these tumours. Multiple studies have assessed the ability of certain biomarkers, such as BRCA in pancreatic cancer, IDH1 or FGFR2 in biliary tract cancer and microsatellite instability or NTRK fusions in an agnostic tumour fashion, to predict response to treatment.In this consensus, a group of experts selected by the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) and the Spanish Society of Pathology (SEAP) reviewed the role played by these mutations in the process of carcinogenesis and their clinical implications. As a result, this article proposes a series of recommendations to optimize the determination of these biomarkers to help standardize the diagnosis and treatment of these tumours.

Excess weight and anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor's outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Immune checkpoint inhibitors are one of the most effective treatments available in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. However, at present, there are no clinical or analytical biomarkers that define which patients benefit with certainty from these treatments. In our study, we evaluated whether excess weight could be a good predictive biomarker of benefit from these drugs. METHODS: We studied a population of 79 patients, divided into a study group with 39 patients diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer treated with immunotherapy and 40 patients in a control group, diagnosed with different advanced cancers, treated with non-immunotherapy treatment. We analyzed according to the presence of excess weight or not, the treatment's outcome in the study group and in the control group (objective response, and progression-free and overall survival). RESULTS: In our study, we detected a better response rate to immunotherapy in patients with excess weight (62.50 vs 26.08%, OR 4.72, p = 0.02), and a better median progression-free survival (14.19 vs 5.03 months, HR 0.50, p = 0.058) and median overall survival (33.84 months vs 20.76 months, HR 0.43, p = 0.01) in the study group. These findings were specific to the immunotherapy group since in the control group, with patients who did not receive immune checkpoint inhibitors, these findings were not found. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that patients with excess weight who receive anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitors diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer have a better outcome. This effect is specific to patients receiving immunotherapy.

Correction to: SEOM Clinical Guideline update for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (2021)

In this article the title was incorrectly given as “SEOM clinical guideline emesis (2021)” but should have been “SEOM Clinical Guideline update for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (2021).”The original article has been corrected.

Evolución y resultados del tratamiento neoadyuvante en cáncer de mama durante un periodo de 10 años / Progress and oncological outcome of neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer patients during a 10-year period

Introducción: el cáncer de mama es la neoplasia más frecuente en mujeres españolas. Los continuos avances en su tratamiento han contribuido a mejorar de forma progresiva la supervivencia en estadios precoces. Entre los avances durante los últimos años, hay que destacar el tratamiento neoadyuvante.Material y métodoshemos valorado la evolución temporal de las indicaciones y los resultados del tratamiento neoadyuvante del cáncer de mama durante un periodo de 10 años. Para ello, se han analizado las características clínicas, la respuesta completa patológica (RCp), la supervivencia global (SG) y libre de progresión (SLP) de todos los pacientes con cáncer de mama tratados con neoadyuvancia entre el 1 de enero de 2007 y el 31 de diciembre de 2016.Resultadosse han tratado 212 pacientes con cáncer de mama. A lo largo de los 10 años hemos observado un progresivo aumento en el número de pacientes tratadas con neoadyuvancia, en la edad de los pacientes incluidos (p < 0,001), en los casos de menopausia (p = 0,029), de casos triple negativo y HER2 positivo. También, hemos observado un aumento en el número de casos en los que se ha realizado cirugía conservadora y biopsia selectiva del ganglio centinela.Conclusionesel tratamiento neoadyuvante se utiliza cada vez más en las pacientes con cáncer de mama, sobre todo en los subtipos de mal pronóstico (triple negativo y HER2). La incorporación de nuevos fármacos y el tratamiento de estadios más precoces está contribuyendo a la mejora de las tasas de RCp y las cirugías conservadoras. (AU)

Introduction: Breast cancer is the most frequent tumor in Spanish women. Continuous advances in the treatment of this neoplasm, have contributed to progressively improve survival in early stages. In the last years, neoadjuvant treatment has evolved and changes have occurred in the treatment indication and in the results.Material and methodsWe have assessed the temporal evolution of indications and results of neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer over a 10-year period. We have analyzed the clinical characteristics, the complete pathological response (CRp), overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of all patients with breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant therapy between January 1st 2007 and December 31st 2016.ResultsDuring the study period, 212 patients were treated.  Throughout the 10-year period, we observed that increasingly older patients had been treated (p < 0.001), a greater number of menopausal patients (p = 0.029), a greater number of triple negative and HER2 positive cases. In addition, a larger number of conservative surgeries and sentinel lymph node biopsies had been performed.ConclusionsNeoadjuvant therapy is increasing in patients with breast cancer, especially in subtypes with poor prognosis (triple negative and HER2). The emerging new drugs and treatment in earlier stages has increased the rate of pCR and breast conserving surgery. (AU)

Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells Predict Therapeutic Efficacy of Immunotherapy in NSCLC.

In lung cancer immunotherapy, biomarkers to guide clinical decisions are limited. We now explore whether the detailed immunophenotyping of circulating peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) can predict the efficacy of anti-PD-1 immunotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We determined 107 PBMCs subpopulations in a prospective cohort of NSCLC patients before starting single-agent anti-PD-1 immunotherapy (study group), analyzed by flow cytometry. As a control group, we studied patients with advanced malignancies before initiating non-immunotherapy treatment. The frequency of PBMCs was correlated with treatment outcome. Patients were categorized as having either high or low expression for each biomarker, defined as those above the 55th or below the 45th percentile of the overall marker expression within the cohort. In the study group, three subpopulations were associated with significant differences in outcome: high pretreatment levels of circulating CD4+CCR9+, CD4+CCR10+, or CD8+CXCR4+ T cells correlated with poorer overall survival (15.7 vs. 35.9 months, HR 0.16, p = 0.003; 22.0 vs. NR months, HR 0.10, p = 0.003, and 22.0 vs. NR months, HR 0.29, p = 0.02). These differences were specific to immunotherapy-treated patients. High baseline levels of circulating T cell subpopulations related to tissue lymphocyte recruitment are associated with poorer outcomes of immunotherapy-treated advanced NSCLC patients.

SEOM Clinical Guideline update for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (2021)

Among the side effects of anticancer treatment, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is one of the most feared given its high prevalence, affecting up to 40% of patients. It can impair patient’s quality of life and provoke low adherence to cancer treatment or chemotherapy dose reductions that can comprise treatment efficacy. Suffering CINV depends on factors related to the intrinsic emetogenicity of antineoplastic drugs and on patient characteristics. CINV can appear at different times regarding the administration of antitumor treatment and the variability of risk according to the different antitumor regimens has, as a consequence, the need for a different and adapted antiemetic treatment prophylaxis to achieve the desired objective of complete protection of the patient in the acute phase, in the late phase and in the global phase of emesis. As a basis for the recommendations, the level of emetogenicity of anticancer treatment is considered and they are classified as high, moderate, low and minimal emetogenicity and these recommendations are based on the use of antiemetic drugs with a high therapeutic index: anti 5-HT, anti-NK and steroids. Despite having highly effective treatments, clinical reality shows that they are not applied enough, so evidence-based recommendations are needed to show the best options and help in decision-making. To cover all the antiemetic prophylaxis options, we have also included recommendations for oral treatments, multiday regimens and radiation-induced emesis prevention.

SEOM clinical guideline emesis (2021).

Among the side effects of anticancer treatment, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is one of the most feared given its high prevalence, affecting up to 40% of patients. It can impair patient's quality of life and provoke low adherence to cancer treatment or chemotherapy dose reductions that can comprise treatment efficacy. Suffering CINV depends on factors related to the intrinsic emetogenicity of antineoplastic drugs and on patient characteristics. CINV can appear at different times regarding the administration of antitumor treatment and the variability of risk according to the different antitumor regimens has, as a consequence, the need for a different and adapted antiemetic treatment prophylaxis to achieve the desired objective of complete protection of the patient in the acute phase, in the late phase and in the global phase of emesis. As a basis for the recommendations, the level of emetogenicity of anticancer treatment is considered and they are classified as high, moderate, low and minimal emetogenicity and these recommendations are based on the use of antiemetic drugs with a high therapeutic index: anti 5-HT, anti-NK and steroids. Despite having highly effective treatments, clinical reality shows that they are not applied enough, so evidence-based recommendations are needed to show the best options and help in decision-making. To cover all the antiemetic prophylaxis options, we have also included recommendations for oral treatments, multiday regimens and radiation-induced emesis prevention.

Emotional Distress in Cancer Patients During the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused mental health problems worldwide. The psychopathological implications of COVID-19 in cancer patients have rarely been addressed. Considering the increased vulnerability of oncology patients, this issue needs to be addressed to improve the long-term mental health status of these patients. Methods: We conducted a prospective study in outpatients under active cancer treatment during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. A semi-structured 24-question survey was designed to measure baseline sociodemographic, psychosocial and COVID-19 exposure characteristics. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale was used to measure psychological symptoms. A descriptive and analytical univariate analysis of the variables studied was performed. We used the Z-score to compare different populations (experimental and historical control cohort). Results: 104 patients were included, the majority of which were women (64.4%), were above 65 years of age (57.7%), had either lung and breast cancer (56.7%), had advanced disease (64%) and were undergoing chemotherapy (63.5%). 51% of them expressed greater fear of cancer than of COVID-19 infection or both. In relation to HADS, 52.8% of emotional distress, 42.3% of anxiety and 58.6% of depression rates were detected. The main factors related with higher rates of psychological symptomatology were history of previous psychotropic drug consumption and the adoption of additional infection prevention measures because they considered themselves at risk of severe COVID-19 infection (p = 0.008; p = 0.003 for emotional distress, p = 0.026; p = 0.004 for anxiety, and p = 0.013; p = 0.008 for depression). Tumor type, stage, oncologic treatment or rescheduling of cancer treatments were not related to higher levels of psychological symptomatology. Comparison of our results with another population of similar characteristics was not significant (Z score = -1.88; p = 0.060). Conclusions: We detected high rates of emotional distress during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic among cancer patients in active treatment (52.8%). This was higher and clinically relevant than observed in a comparable population (42.5%), although not significant. Cancer itself is the main factor of concern for cancer patients, above and beyond the emotional distress generated by COVID-19 pandemic.

When should we order a next generation sequencing test in a patient with cancer?

Technical advances in genome sequencing and the implementation of next-generation sequencing (NGS) in clinical oncology have paved the way for individualizing cancer patient therapy based on molecular profiles. When and how to use NGS testing in the clinic is at present an unsolved issue, although new research results provide evidence favoring this approach in some types of advanced cancer. Clinical research is evolving rapidly, from basket and umbrella trials to adaptative design precision oncology clinical studies, and genomic and molecular data often displace the classical clinical validation procedures of biomarkers. In this context, physicians must be aware of the clinical evidence behind these new biomarkers and NGS tests available, in order to use them in the right moment, and with a critical point of view. This review will present the status of currently available targeted drugs that can be effective based on actionable molecular alterations, and the NGS tests that are currently available, offering a practical guide for the application of Clinical Precision Oncology in the real world routine practice.

Effect of excess weight and immune-related adverse events on the efficacy of cancer immunotherapy with anti-PD-1 antibodies.

Immunotherapy is an effective treatment in advanced cancer, although predictors of response are limited. We studied whether excess weight influences the efficacy outcomes of immunotherapy. We have also evaluated the combined prognostic effect of excess weight and immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Efficacy of anti-PD-1 treatment was evaluated with both objective radiological response (ORR) rate and progression-free survival (PFS), and toxicity with irAEs. We studied the association between excess weight and ORR, PFS or irAEs. 132 patients diagnosed with advanced cancer were included. Median body mass index (BMI) was 24.9 kg/m2. 64 patients had normal weight (BMI<25 kg/m2), and 64 patients had excess weight (BMI≥25 kg/m2). Four patients had underweight and were excluded from further analysis. ORR was achieved in 50 patients (38.0%), median PFS was 6 months. 44 patients developed irAEs (33.3%). ORR was higher in excess weight patients than in patients with normal weight (51.6% vs 25.0%; OR 3.45, p = .0009). PFS was improved in patients with excess weight (7.25 months vs 4 months, HR 1.72, p = .01). The incidence of IrAEs was not different in patients with excess weight (54.5% vs 43.2%, p = .21). When high BMI and irAEs were combined, we observed a marked prognostic trend in ORR rate (87.5% vs 6.2%; OR 161.0, p < .00001), and in PFS (14 months vs 3 months; HR 5.89, p < .0001). Excess weight patients with advanced cancer that receive single-agent anti-PD-1 antibody therapy exhibit a significantly improved clinical outcome compared with normal BMI patients. This association was especially marked when BMI and irAEs were considered combined.

Safety and Oncological Outcomes of Bevacizumab Therapy in Patients With Advanced Colorectal Cancer and Self-expandable Metal Stents.

BACKGROUND: Malignant bowel obstruction can occur in 18% of cases. Self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) can be an alternative to surgery. Bevacizumab (BV) has been associated with bowel perforation, but data on the safety of SEMS for occlusive colon cancer during BV-containing regimens are lacking. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of 78 patients with malignant bowel obstruction who underwent placement of SEMS as a palliative intent for stage IV disease. Chemotherapy and BV-containing regimens, stent-related complications, and outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: Overall, major stent-related complications were observed in 27 (35%) patients: Re-obstruction occurred in 14 (52%) patients, and there were 7 (26%) perforations, 4 (15%) minor bleeding, and 2 (7%) migrations. Sixteen patients received BV; 2 (12.5%) had a perforation. No differences were observed between chemotherapy alone and BV in overall complications. Univariate analysis did not show that BV was more likely to develop perforations, although the incidence was higher in this subset of patients. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a significant association with longer overall survival for patients treated with systemic therapy (27 vs. 11 months; P ≤ .00001). Also, there is a significant benefit of BV compared with chemotherapy alone (43 vs. 39 months; P = .02). CONCLUSION: Placement of SEMS is effective and relatively safe but with an overall complication rate of 35% in the metastatic setting. The major early risk is perforation, which can increase up to 12% during BV treatment. In patients with obstructing advanced colorectal cancer that would benefit from SEMS, we should consider the risks associated with systemic therapies, taking into account the improvement in survival observed with BV.