Favorable safety profile of moderate hypofractionated over normofractionated radiotherapy in breast cancer patients: a multicentric prospective real-life data farming analysis.

BACKGROUND: Moderately hypofractionated whole-breast radiotherapy (HFRT) has proven to be as safe and efficient as normofractionated radiotherapy (NFRT) in randomized trials resulting in major changes in clinical practice. Toxicity rates observed in selected clinical trial patients may differ from those observed in unselected patients with possible comorbidities and frailty in real-life. This study aimed to examine the influence of HFRT versus NFRT on acute toxicity and identify risks factors of dermatitis in real-life patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective data from breast cancer patients, treated with locoregional radiotherapy were collected between November 2015 and February 2020 in 3 comprehensive cancer centers. Through a systematic data-farming strategy, acute toxicity evaluation forms (CTCAEv4.0) were prospectively completed and extracted electronically. The results from each center were then anonymously merged into a single database for analysis. A Chi-2 test was used to compare HFRT and NFRT. Furthermore, risk factors of dermatitis were identified in a sub-study (622 patients) by multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: In total, 3518 T0-4 N0-3 mostly M0 (85.8%) breast cancer patients with a median age of 60.7 (24-96 years old) were analyzed. Acute grade 2-3 dermatitis, grade 1-3 breast oedema, and grade 1-2 hyperpigmentation were less frequent with HFRT versus NFRT: respectively 8.9% versus 35.1% (Chi-2 = 373.7; p < 0.001), 29.0% versus 37.0% (Chi-2 = 23.1; p < 0.001) and 27.0% versus 55.8% (Chi-2 = 279.2; p < 0.001). Fewer patients experienced pain with HFRT versus NFRT: 33.4% versus 53.7% respectively (Chi-2 = 137.1; p < 0.001). Factors such as high BMI (OR = 2.30 [95% CI, 1.28-4.26], p < 0.01), large breast size (OR = 1.88 [95% CI, 1.07-3.28], p < 0.01) and lumpectomy over mastectomy (OR = 0.52 [95% CI, 0.27-0.97], p < 0.05) were associated with greater risk factors of grade 2-3 dermatitis in multivariate analysis regardless of NFRT or HFRT. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggests that breast HFRT may be a better option even for patients with a high BMI or large breast size. Acute toxicity was low to mild, and lower with HFRT compared to NFRT. Results from real-life data were robust, and support the use of HFRT beyond randomized study populations. Long-term real-life data awaits further investigation.

Lived experience and perceived advantages of therapeutic De-escalation: A qualitative study of older patients with breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: One option for therapeutic de-escalation in older women with early breast cancer (EBC) is partial breast irradiation (PBI) instead of whole-breast irradiation (WBI) when the latter has no clear advantages. We aimed to explore the decision-making processes and the lived experiences of WBI and PBI from the perspectives of older women with EBC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thematic content analysis was performed on qualitative data collected using narrative interviews. RESULTS: Twenty-two women aged 65 and over participated (ten patients who underwent WBI and twelve who underwent PBI). We identified three themes from their narratives: 1) Acceptance of a paternalistic relationship with physicians, 2) Strong need for an informed choice, and 3) PBI can help people conceal cancer-related physical marks. Narratives underlined participants' preferences for each of the two treatments and their perceptions about therapeutic de-escalation. Misconceptions about therapeutic de-escalation were observed. DISCUSSION: When providing information about EBC treatment options, patients' perceived burden of side effects should be considered. Moreover, eliciting the value older patients place on available breast cancer treatments, as well as their related goals and preferences, could foster their participation in the therapeutic de-escalation decision-making process.

PD-1 iNhibitor and chemotherapy with concurrent IRradiation at VAried tumor sites in advanced Non-small cell lung cAncer: the Prospective Randomized Phase 3 NIRVANA-Lung Trial.

Advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains a high unmet medical need. The first line standard-of-care therapy comprises concurrent chemotherapy-immunotherapy with pembrolizumab. Concurrent irradiation with pembrolizumab has been shown to significantly improve survival benefit compared with immunotherapy alone in a pooled analysis of 2 randomized phase 2 trials. We present the rationale and study design of the "PD-1 iNhibitor and chemotherapy with concurrent IRradiation at VAried tumor sites in advanced Non-small cell lung cAncer" (NIRVANA-Lung) trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03774732). This study is a national multicenter 1:1 randomized phase III trial testing in 460 patients, the addition of multisite radiotherapy in advanced NSCLC treated with standard immune checkpoint inhibitors (pembrolizumab)-chemotherapy in first line. The primary objective of the trial is to compare the overall survival between the 2 arms at year 1 of the study. The secondary objective is to compare the progression-free survival and cancer-specific survival at year 1 and 2, as well as to determine quality of life, local and distant control in irradiated and nonirradiated sites at 6 months and year 1.

Efficacy of extracranial stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) added to standard treatment in patients with solid tumors (breast, prostate and non-small cell lung cancer) with up to 3 bone-only metastases: study protocol for a randomised phase III trial (STEREO-OS).

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) is an innovative modality based on high precision planning and delivery. Cancer with bone metastases and oligometastases are associated with an intermediate or good prognosis. We assume that prolonged survival rates would be achieved if both the primary tumor and metastases are controlled by local treatment. Our purpose is to demonstrate, via a multicenter randomized phase III trial, that local treatment of metastatic sites with curative intent with SBRT associated of systemic standard of care treatment would improve the progression-free survival in patients with solid tumor (breast, prostate and non-small cell lung cancer) with up to 3 bone-only metastases compared to patients who received systemic standard of care treatment alone. METHODS: This is an open-labeled randomized superiority multicenter phase III trial. Patients with up to 3 bone-only metastases will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio.between Arm A (Experimental group): Standard care of treatment & SBRT to all bone metastases, and Arm B (Control group): standard care of treatment. For patients receiving SBRT, radiotherapy dose and fractionation depends on the site of the bone metastasis and the proximity to critical normal structures. This study aims to accrue a total of 196 patients within 4 years. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival at 1 year, and secondary endpoints include Bone progression-free survival; Local control; Cancer-specific survival; Overall survival; Toxicity; Quality of life; Pain score analysis, Cost-utility analysis; Cost-effectiveness analysis and Budget impact analysis. DISCUSSION: The expected benefit for the patient in the experimental arm is a longer expectancy of life without skeletal recurrence and the discomfort, pain and drastic reduction of mobility and handicap that the lack of local control of bone metastases eventually inflicts. TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03143322 Registered on May 8th 2017. Ongoing study.

Zoledronate in combination with chemotherapy and surgery to treat osteosarcoma (OS2006): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Based on preclinical data for the antitumour effect of zoledronate in osteosarcoma, we assessed whether zoledronate combined with chemotherapy and surgery improved event-free survival in children and adults with osteosarcoma. METHODS: In this randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 trial (OS2006), patients aged between 5 years and 50 years with newly diagnosed high-grade osteosarcoma were randomly assigned to receive standard chemotherapy with or without ten zoledronate intravenous infusions (four preoperative and six postoperative). Adults older than 25 years received 4 mg zoledronate per infusion, patients aged 18-25 years received 0·05 mg/kg for the first two infusions and 4 mg for the remaining eight infusions, and younger patients received 0·05 mg/kg per infusion. Chemotherapy comprised high-dose methotrexate based chemotherapy in patients younger than 18 years, and doxorubicin, ifosfamide, and cisplatin in adults older than 25 years; patients aged 18-25 years were treated with either regime at the discretion of the treating centre. Balanced randomisation between the two groups was done centrally with online randomisation software, based on a minimisation algorithm taking into account centre, age, combined with chemotherapy regimen, and risk group (resectable primary and no metastasis vs other). Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment, but the endpoint adjudication committee members who reviewed suspected early progressions were masked to group allocation. The primary endpoint was event-free survival, estimated from the randomisation to the time of first failure (local or distant relapse, progression, death) or to the last follow-up visit for the patients in first complete remission, analysed on a modified intention-to-treat population, which excluded patients found not to have a malignant tumour after central review. Three interim analyses were planned. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00470223. FINDINGS: Between April 23, 2007, and March 11, 2014, 318 patients, median age 15·5 years (range 5·8-50·9), were enrolled from 40 French centres; of whom 158 were assigned to the control group (chemotherapy alone) and 160 to the zoledronate group, including 55 (17%) patients with definite metastases. The trial was stopped for futility after the second interim analysis. With a median follow-up of 3·9 years (IQR 2·7-5·1), 125 events occurred (55 in the control group and 70 in the with zoledronate group). Event-free survival at 3 years for all 315 randomly assigned patients was 60·3% (95% CI 64·5-65·9); 3-year event-free survival was 63·4% (55·2-70·9) for the control group and 57·1% (48·8-65·0) for the zoledronate group. The risk of failure was not reduced and was even marginally higher in the zoledronate group than in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·36 [95% CI 0·95-1·96]; p=0·094). No major increase in severe toxic effects of grade 3 or higher associated with zoledronate, barring expected hypocalcaemia (45 [29%] of 153 participants in the zoledronate group vs ten [6%] of 155 participants in the control group; p<0·0001) and hypophosphataemia (61 [40%] of 151 in the zoledronate group vs 26 [17%] of 156 in the control group; p<0·0001). No significant difference in orthopaedic complications was noted between the two groups (27 in the control group and 29 in the zoledronate group). Two treatment-related deaths were reported (one from cardiomyopathy in the control group and one from multiorgan failure in the zoledronate group before the first zoledronate infusion). INTERPRETATION: From the results observed in this study, we do not recommend zoledronate in osteosarcoma patients. Further biological studies are required to understand the discordance between the results of OS2006 trial and preclinical data. FUNDING: French National Cancer Institute (INCa), Novartis, Chugai, Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer, Fédération Enfants et Santé, Société Française des Cancers et Leucémies de l'Enfant.

Association between prenatal exposure to antiretroviral therapy and birth defects: an analysis of the French perinatal cohort study (ANRS CO1/CO11).

BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) has major benefits during pregnancy, both for maternal health and to prevent mother-to-child transmission of HIV. Safety issues, including teratogenic risk, need to be evaluated. We estimated the prevalence of birth defects in children born to HIV-infected women receiving ART during pregnancy, and assessed the independent association of birth defects with each antiretroviral (ARV) drug used. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The French Perinatal Cohort prospectively enrolls HIV-infected women delivering in 90 centers throughout France. Children are followed by pediatricians until 2 y of age according to national guidelines. We included 13,124 live births between 1994 and 2010, among which, 42% (n = 5,388) were exposed to ART in the first trimester of pregnancy. Birth defects were studied using both European Surveillance of Congenital Anomalies (EUROCAT) and Metropolitan Atlanta Congenital Defects Program (MACDP) classifications; associations with ART were evaluated using univariate and multivariate logistic regressions. Correction for multiple comparisons was not performed because the analyses were based on hypotheses emanating from previous findings in the literature and the robustness of the findings of the current study. The prevalence of birth defects was 4.4% (95% CI 4.0%-4.7%), according to the EUROCAT classification. In multivariate analysis adjusting for other ARV drugs, maternal age, geographical origin, intravenous drug use, and type of maternity center, a significant association was found between exposure to zidovudine in the first trimester and congenital heart defects: 2.3% (74/3,267), adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 2.2 (95% CI 1.3-3.7), p = 0.003, absolute risk difference attributed to zidovudine +1.2% (95% CI +0.5; +1.9%). Didanosine and indinavir were associated with head and neck defects, respectively: 0.5%, AOR = 3.4 (95% CI 1.1-10.4), p = 0.04; 0.9%, AOR = 3.8 (95% CI 1.1-13.8), p = 0.04. We found a significant association between efavirenz and neurological defects (n = 4) using the MACDP classification: AOR = 3.0 (95% CI 1.1-8.5), p = 0.04, absolute risk +0.7% (95% CI +0.07%; +1.3%). But the association was not significant using the less inclusive EUROCAT classification: AOR = 2.1 (95% CI 0.7-5.9), p = 0.16. No association was found between birth defects and lopinavir or ritonavir with a power >85% for an odds ratio of 1.5, nor for nevirapine, tenofovir, stavudine, or abacavir with a power >70%. Limitations of the present study were the absence of data on termination of pregnancy, stillbirths, tobacco and alcohol intake, and concomitant medication. CONCLUSIONS: We found a specific association between in utero exposure to zidovudine and heart defects; the mechanisms need to be elucidated. The association between efavirenz and neurological defects must be interpreted with caution. For the other drugs not associated with birth defects, the results were reassuring. Finally, whatever the impact that some ARV drugs may have on birth defects, it is surpassed by the major role of ART in the successful prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.