The black box of the relationship between breast cancer patients and accompanying patients: the accompanied patients' point of view.

BACKGROUND: The PAROLE-Onco program was introduced in the province of Quebec, Canada in 2019. It integrates accompanying patients (APs), i.e., people who have been affected by cancer, into the clinical team as full members. These APs use their experiential knowledge with people undergoing treatment and with clinical teams. The aim of this paper is to evaluate, within the framework of two university medical centers, the perceptions of breast cancer patients who receive support from APs, particularly in terms of their active involvement in their care trajectory. METHODS: A qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews with accompanied patients was performed. Fourteen individual interviews were conducted between July and September 2021 with women presenting different profiles in terms of age, education, professional status, type of treatment, family situation, and clinical background. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis, focusing on patients' perceptions of APs' contributions and suggested improvements for accessing AP support. RESULTS: Three themes emerged from the semi-structured interviews: communication modalities used to connect patients with their APs, the characteristics of the support provided by APs, and the perceived effects of this support on the patients. Patients expressed a preference for telephone communication, highlighting its convenience and accessibility. The support provided by APs included emotional and informational support, neutrality, and adaptability. This relationship improved patient communication, reduced anxiety, helped regain control, and enhanced overall quality of life. The results emphasized the added value of APs in complementing the support offered by healthcare professionals. Patients noted the critical role of APs in helping them navigate the healthcare system, better understand their treatment processes, and manage their emotions. The ability of APs to provide practical advice and emotional reassurance was particularly valued. Overall, the findings underscored the significant impact of AP support on patients' experiences and highlighted areas for enhancing this service. CONCLUSION: This study highlights, during the care trajectory of people affected by breast cancer, APs' contribution to patients' emotional well-being because they improve, in particular, the management of emotions and communication with health professionals.

In 2019, we initiated the PAROLE-Onco program in Quebec, Canada, to support cancer patients by integrating Accompanying Patients (APs) into the medical team. These individuals, who have personally experienced cancer, join as full team members, sharing their insights with both patients and medical staff. Our study delved into the perceptions of breast cancer patients at two university hospitals regarding APs' involvement in their care trajectory. Through interviews with 14 women of diverse backgrounds and cancer experiences, we found that APs were instrumental in enhancing communication with doctors, facilitating the expression of challenging emotions, and aiding in treatment decisions. Patients valued the inclusion of APs in their care team and expressed gratitude for their support. Nonetheless, some encountered difficulties in reaching out to APs due to a lack of awareness or challenges involved in connecting. Overall, our research underscores the positive impact of involving APs in the care of breast cancer patients, and of enhancing emotional well-being and communication throughout the treatment journey.

Integrating accompanying patients into clinical oncology teams: limiting and facilitating factors.

OBJECTIVES: Since 2018, four establishments in Quebec have been instrumental in implementing the PAROLE-Onco program, which introduced accompanying patients (APs) into healthcare teams to improve cancer patients' experience. APs are patient advisors who have acquired specific experiential knowledge related to living with cancer, using services, and interacting with healthcare professionals. They are therefore in a unique and reliable position to be able to provide emotional, informational, cognitive and navigational support to patients who are dealing with cancer. We aimed to explore APs' perspectives regarding the limiting and facilitating factors in terms of how they are integrated into the clinical oncology teams. METHODS: A qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews and focus groups was conducted with 20 APs at the beginning of their intervention (T1) and, two years later, during a second data collection (T2). Limiting and facilitating factors of APs' integration into clinical teams were analyzed in terms of governance, culture, resources and tools. RESULTS: The limited factors raised by APs to be integrated into clinical teams include the following: confusion about the specific roles played by APs, lifting the egos of certain professionals who feel they are already doing what APs typically do, lack of identification of patient needs, absence of APs in project governance organizational boundaries, and team members' availability. Various communication challenges were also raised, resulting in the program being inadequately promoted among patients. Also mentioned as limiting factors were the lack of time, space and compensation. Creating opportunities for team members to meet with APs, building trust and teaching team members how APs' activities complement theirs were enhancing factors. Other facilitators include APs being involved in decision-making committees, being leaders in promoting the PAROLE-Onco program to patients and clinical team members and creating opportunities to communicate with team members to help enhance their work and provide feedback to improve patient services. Awareness of APs' added value for the team and patients is also a key facilitator. Regarding tools, offering accompanying services by telephone allows both patients and APs to benefit from the flexibility they need. CONCLUSION: Over time, APs were able to identify optimal factors for successful implementation. Recommendations include APs and professionals working in co-construction on organization, leadership, resources and status factors. This could help catalyze a change in culture within health establishments and allow people dealing with cancer to benefit from the experiential knowledge of other patients within their clinical team.

Gut microbiome predicts gastrointestinal toxicity outcomes from chemoradiation therapy in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: Chemoradiation (CRT) in patients with locally advanced head and neck squamous cell cancer (HNSCC) is associated with significant toxicities, including mucositis. The gut microbiome represents an emerging hallmark of cancer and a potentially important biomarker for CRT-related adverse events. This prospective study investigated the association between the gut microbiome composition and CRT-related toxicities in patients with HNSCC, including mucositis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Stool samples from patients diagnosed with locally advanced HNSCC were prospectively collected prior to CRT initiation and analyzed using shotgun metagenomic sequencing to evaluate gut microbiome composition at baseline. Concurrently, clinicopathologic data, survival outcomes and the incidence and grading of CRT-emergent adverse events were documented in all patients. RESULTS: A total of 52 patients were included, of whom 47 had baseline stool samples available for metagenomic analysis. Median age was 62, 83 % patients were men and 54 % had stage III-IV disease. All patients developed CRT-induced mucositis, including 42 % with severe events (i.e. CTCAE v5.0 grade ≥ 3) and 25 % who required enteral feeding. With a median follow-up of 26.5 months, patients with severe mucositis had shorter overall survival (HR = 3.3, 95 %CI 1.0-10.6; p = 0.02) and numerically shorter progression-free survival (HR = 2.8, 95 %CI, 0.8-9.6; p = 0.09). The gut microbiome beta-diversity of patients with severe mucositis differed from patients with grades 1-2 mucositis (p = 0.04), with enrichment in Mediterraneibacter (Ruminococcus gnavus) and Clostridiaceae family members, including Hungatella hathewayi. Grade 1-2 mucositis was associated with enrichment in Eubacterium rectale, Alistipes putredinis and Ruminococcaceae family members. Similar bacterial profiles were observed in patients who required enteral feeding. CONCLUSION: Patients who developed severe mucositis had decreased survival and enrichment in specific bacteria associated with mucosal inflammation. Interestingly, these same bacteria have been linked to immune checkpoint inhibitor resistance.

Predictors of prolonged treatment time intervals in oral cavity cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Delays in treatment time intervals have been associated with overall survival in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OCSCC). The aim of this study was to identify bottlenecks leading to prolonged treatment intervals. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted using a cohort of OCSCC patients who underwent surgery and adjuvant radiation therapy. The endpoints of interest were prolonged treatment intervals. Multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for patient and tumour characteristics. RESULTS: Median diagnosis-to-treatment interval (DTI) and surgery to initiation of postoperative radiation therapy interval (S-PORT) were 39 days (IQR 30-54) and 64 days (IQR 54-66), respectively. Prolonged DTI was associated with older age, worse Charlson Comorbidity index scores and worse T stages. Patients with prolonged DTI had longer times to preoperative imaging reports (25 vs 9 days; P < 0.01). Time to preoperative pathology did not differ. Prolonged S-PORT was associated with longer times to pathology report (28 vs 18 days; P < 0.01), to maxillofacial consult (38 vs 15 days; P < 0.01) and to maxillofacial approval of radiation (50 vs 28 days; P < 0.01). In patients requiring medical oncology consults, those with prolonged S-PORT had longer waiting times until consultation (58 vs 38 days; P = 0.02). Multivariate analysis showed independent predictors of prolonged DTI: time to preoperative imaging; and prolonged S-PORT: time to pathology report, time to maxillofacial consult, and time to medical oncology consult. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies targeting these organizational bottlenecks may be effective for shortening treatment time intervals, hence representing potential opportunities for improving oncological outcomes in OCSCC patients.

An exploratory cross-sectional study of the effects of ongoing relationships with accompanying patients on cancer care experience, self-efficacy, and psychological distress.

BACKGROUND: Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal in Canada introduced accompanying patients (APs) into the breast cancer care trajectory. APs are patients who have been treated for breast cancer and have been integrated into the clinical team to expand the services offered to people affected by cancer. This study describes the profiles of the people who received the support and explores whether one-offs vs ongoing encounters with APs influence their experience of care, on self-efficacy in coping with cancer, and on their level of psychological distress. METHODS: An exploratory cross-sectional study was carried out among patients to compare patients who had one encounter with an AP (G1) with those who had had several encounters (G2). Five questionnaires were administered on socio-demographic characteristics, care pathway, evaluation of the support experience, self-efficacy in coping with cancer, and level of psychological distress. Logbooks, completed by the APs, determined the number of encounters. Linear regression models were used to evaluate the associations between the number of encounters, patient characteristics, care pathway, number of topics discussed, self-efficacy measures in coping with cancer, and level of psychological distress. RESULTS: Between April 2020 and December 2021, 60% of 535 patients who were offered support from an AP accepted. Of these, one hundred and twenty-four patients participated in the study. The study aimed to recruit a minimum of 70 patients with the expectation of obtaining at least 50 participants, assuming a response rate of 70%. There were no differences between G1 and G2 in terms of sociodemographic data and care pathways. Statistical differences were found between G1 and G2 for impacts on and the return to daily life (p = 0.000), the return to the work and impacts on professional life (p = 0.044), announcement of a diagnosis to family and friends (p = 0.033), and strategies for living with treatment under the best conditions (p = 0.000). Significant differences were found on the topics of cancer (p = 0.000), genetic testing (p = 0.023), therapeutic options (p = 0.000), fatigue following treatment (p = 0.005), pain and discomfort after treatment or surgery (p = 0.000), potential emotions and their management (p = 0.000) and the decision-making processes (p = 0.011). A significant relationship was found between the two groups for patients' ability to cope with cancer (p = 0.038), and their level of psychological distress at different stages of the care pathway (p = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows differences between one-time and ongoing support for cancer patients. It highlights the potential for APs to help patients develop self-efficacy and cope with the challenges of cancer treatment.

Accompanying patients in clinical oncology teams: Reported activities and perceived effects.

INTRODUCTION: Since 2018, four establishments in Quebec, Canada, have decided to implement the PAROLE-Onco programme, which introduced accompanying patients (APs) in healthcare teams to improve the experience of cancer patients. APs are patient advisors who have had a cancer treatment experience and who conduct consultations to complement the service offered by providing emotional, informational and educational support to patients undergoing treatments (e.g., radiotherapy, chemotherapy, surgery), mostly for breast cancer. We aimed to explore the evolution of APs' perspectives regarding their activities within the clinical oncology teams as well as the perceived effects of their intervention with patients, the clinical team and themselves. METHODS: A qualitative study based on semistructured interviews and focus groups was conducted with APs at the beginning of their intervention (T1) and 2 years afterwards (T2). The themes discussed were APs' activities and the perceived effects of their interventions on themselves, on the patients and on the clinical team. RESULTS: In total, 20 APs were interviewed. In T2, APs' activities shifted from listening and sharing experiences to empowering patients by helping them become partners in their care and felt generally more integrated into the clinical team. APs help patients feel understood and supported, alleviate stress and become partners in the care they receive. They also alleviate the clinical team's workload by offering a complementary service through emotional support, which, according to them, helps patients feel calmer and more prepared for their appointments with healthcare professionals. They communicate additional information about their patients' health journey, which makes the appointment more efficient for healthcare professionals. When APs accompany patients, they feel as if they can make a difference in patients' lives. Their activities are perceived by some as an opportunity to give back but also as a way of giving meaning to their own experience, in turn serving as a learning experience. CONCLUSION: By mobilizing their experiential knowledge, APs provide emotional, informational, cognitive and navigational support, which allows patients to be more empowered in their care and which complements professionals' scientific knowledge, thereby helping to refine their sensitivity to the patients' experiences. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Two patient-researchers have contributed to the study design, the conduct of the study, the data analysis and interpretation, as well as in the preparation and writing of this manuscript.

Locally advanced breast cancer arising in the axilla.

Locally advanced breast cancer arising from ectopic axillary breast tissue is an unusual presentation of this malignancy. The work-up and treatment approach pose some unique challenges. We present the case of a 37-year-old female presenting with a left axillary lesion with skin involvement. Radiological studies and biopsy demonstrated an underlying axillary mass compatible with a triple-positive invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Following neoadjuvant therapy, the patient underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy with wide local excision of the involved axillary skin and axillary lymph node dissection. Ectopic locally advanced breast cancer can be treated similarly to its orthotopic counterpart, favoring a neoadjuvant therapy approach followed by surgical excision. Special considerations include the local anatomy of the tumor, the extent of surgery and reconstructive options.

Developing practice guidelines to integrate physical activity promotion as part of routine cancer care: A knowledge-to-action protocol.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is a leading cause of disease burden worldwide and the first cause of mortality in Canada with 30.2% of deaths attributable to cancer. Given aging of the population and the improvement of prevention and treatment protocols, the number of cancer survivors is steadily increasing. These individuals have unique physical and mental health needs some of which can be addressed by integrating physical activity promotion into ongoing and long-term care. Despite the benefits of being active, delivery of PA programs for cancer patients in both clinical and community settings remains challenging. This knowledge-to-action protocol-called Kiné-Onco-aims to develop a practice guideline for the delivery, implementation, and scaling-up of cancer-specific physical activity promotion programs and services in clinical and community settings located in Québec, Canada. METHOD: The Kiné-Onco project involves knowledge synthesis of scientific and grey literature to establish the benefits and added value of physical activity for cancer patients and survivors, describes current practices in delivering physical activity programs, analyses quantitative data from electronic health records (EHR) of patients participating in a novel hospital-based physical activity program, collects and analyses qualitative data from patients and healthcare providers interviews about lived experience, facilitators, and barriers to physical activity promotion, outlines deliberative workshops among multidisciplinary team members to develop implementation guidelines for physical activity promotion, and summarizes a variety of knowledge transfer and exchange activities to disseminate the practice guidelines. DISCUSSION: This paper describes the protocol for a knowledge-to-action project aimed at producing and sharing actionable evidence. Our aim is that physical activity promotion programs and services be scaled up in such a way as to successfully integrate physical activity promotion throughout cancer treatment and survivorship in order to improve the physical and mental health of the growing population of individuals having received a cancer diagnosis.

"I Want to Help Others Like Me": A Pilot Qualitative Study on Patients' Participation in a Screening for Distress Program.

Screening for distress was implemented in our academic hospital with the engagement of patients as partners. Little is known about how they appreciate such participation. This pilot qualitative study aimed to explore their experience. Six participants completed a semi-structured interview, which was transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was performed on the transcripts. Four themes emerged: "opinions about their participation", "working with others", "role of patient partners", and "barriers encountered". Mean global satisfaction reported on a Likert scale reached 8.92 over 10. Our preliminary findings suggest that patients-as-partners appreciated their participation, and also identified barriers that should be explored in future quality improvement (QI) projects.

The Experiential Learning Pathway of Cancer Survivors as They Recover Their Lives Post-Treatment: A Qualitative Study.

For many cancer survivors, post-treatment challenges are predominantly related to their personal and social lives. These challenges are part of an experiential learning process linked to a survivor's identity, their desire to preserve independence, their social roles, and responsibilities along with a return to their normal lives. We used interpretive description to describe the experiential learning process of cancer survivors as they recover post-treatment. Data from five group discussions with 27 participants were combined with data from 9 in-depth individual interviews that examined post-treatment challenges. Through an iterative qualitative analysis, we uncovered 3 experiential learning pathways. Narrative vignettes are used to portray and highlight learning involved in accepting loss, asking for help, and rebuilding authentic social networks. Experiential learning shares recognizable features among individuals identified as milestones. These lead to a greater understanding of how cancer survivors acquire a new sense of self and recover their lives post-treatment.

COVID-19 Impact on Diagnosis and Staging of Colorectal Cancer: A Single Tertiary Canadian Oncology Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: Public health measures have imposed drastic reductions in cancer screening programs at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, with an unknown impact on the diagnosis and staging of colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: Newly diagnosed CRC cases at the Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM) were divided into two groups according to the timeline: pre-pandemic (1 January 2018-12 March 2020), and pandemic (13 March 2020-30 June 2021) periods. Colonoscopy, surgery, and staging at diagnosis during the pandemic period were compared to the pre-pandemic period. RESULTS: 254 CRC diagnoses were made during the pre-pandemic period in comparison to 125 during the pandemic period. Mean diagnosis rates were lower in the pandemic period (7.8 vs. 9.8 diagnoses/month, p = 0.048). Colonoscopy deadlines were less respected in the pandemic period (51.7% vs. 38.3%, p = 0.049). The rate of elective surgery did not differ (2.9 vs. 3.5 surgeries/month, p = 0.39) and mean delays were similar (58.6 vs. 60.4 days, p = 0.77). Stages at diagnosis did not differ (p = 0.17). Most of the delayed colonoscopies led to a stage 0 or I CRC (p = 0.2). CONCLUSION: In our center, the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a decreased rate of CRC diagnosis and increased endoscopic delays without affecting the rate of advanced stage disease. Delays to surgery were quite similar once the CRC diagnosis was established.

Upfront DPYD Genotyping and Toxicity Associated with Fluoropyrimidine-Based Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy for Oropharyngeal Carcinomas: A Work in Progress.

Background: 5-FU-based chemoradiotherapy (CRT) could be associated with severe treatment-related toxicities in patients harboring at-risk DPYD polymorphisms. Methods: The studied population included consecutive patients with locoregionally advanced oropharyngeal carcinoma treated with carboplatin and 5-FU-based CRT one year before and after the implementation of upfront DPYD*2A genotyping. We aimed to determine the effect of DPYD genotyping on grade ≥3 toxicities. Results: 181 patients were analyzed (87 patients before and 94 patients following DPYD*2A screening). Of the patients, 91% (n = 86) were prospectively genotyped for the DPYD*2A allele. Of those screened, 2% (n = 2/87) demonstrated a heterozygous DPYD*2A mutation. Extended genotyping of DPYD*2A-negative patients later allowed for the retrospective identification of six additional patients with alternative DPYD variants (two c.2846A>T and four c.1236G>A mutations). Grade ≥3 toxicities occurred in 71% of the patients before DPYD*2A screening versus 62% following upfront genotyping (p = 0.18). When retrospectively analyzing additional non-DPYD*2A variants, the relative risks for mucositis (RR 2.36 [1.39-2.13], p = 0.0063), dysphagia (RR 2.89 [1.20-5.11], p = 0.019), and aspiration pneumonia (RR 13 [2.42-61.5)], p = 0.00065) were all significantly increased. Conclusion: The DPYD*2A, c.2846A>T, and c.1236G>A polymorphisms are associated with an increased risk of grade ≥3 toxicity to 5-FU. Upfront DPYD genotyping can identify patients in whom 5-FU-related toxicity should be avoided.

Improving community and healthcare services for young adults living with cancer: Suggestions from a multiple stakeholder workshop.

Background and objectives: Despite the availability of healthcare and community services dedicated to cancer survivors, these remain underutilized by young adults living with cancer (YAC; aged 18-39). A workshop was organized in Montréal, Canada, to identify the needs of YAC during their post-treatment transition period and explore existing services dedicated to YAC. Methods: We recruited seventeen stakeholders (N = 17), including seven YAC, to participate in a one-day workshop to consult about best approaches and practices to meet the needs of YAC, post-treatment. All discussions were transcribed, and a thematic qualitative analysis was performed. Results: Two main findings were identified: differences and similarities among stakeholders about perceptions of post-treatment needs; and suggestions to meet YAC needs following treatment. Conclusions: Results demonstrate the importance of collaboration among multiple stakeholders, including YAC, when designing services for YAC. Results include suggestions to improve services available through community or healthcare centres.

Learning through the experience of cancer survivorship: differences across age groups.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and describe challenges that contribute to experiential learning among cancer survivors across different age groups. RESEARCH APPROACH: Qualitative collaborative study. PARTICIPANTS: 27 cancer survivors. METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH: Participants were invited to explain the after-cancer challenges they learned from during six focus groups. Five were organized by age-group (15-18, 19-34, 35-44, 45-59, ≥ 60) and a mixed group was held to ensure the co-construction of findings with participants. Inductive content analysis was performed. FINDINGS: While learning to live with a chronic disease, participant's experiential learning appeared through four challenges: Searching for one's identity, Autonomy, Disruption of social roles and responsibilities, Reclaiming one's life. Particular aspects of challenges were identified across ages-groups and life courses. INTERPRETATION: Results indicate that psychosocial and health professionals should be sensitive to the fact that life courses are now diverse and not always associated with biological age. This has the potential to improve care by informing how these challenges affect the experience of cancer survivorship over time.

From theory to practice: implementing a standardized, interactive education session on oral anticancer medication (OAM) for patients and their caregivers.

PURPOSE: Self-administration at home and decreased visits to see health care professionals bring patients on oral anticancer medication (OAM) and their caregivers to become experts in handling medication, managing adverse events, and making sure that they adhere to treatment. This project aimed to implement a standardized education group session for patients starting an OAM regimen and their caregivers that would build new knowledge, validate comprehension of information, increase satisfaction, and empower participants in self-management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A group session led by an oncology nurse was developed. The theoretical section consisted of short videos that include both verbal and visual explanations. The practical component consisted of quizzes with electronic recordings and instant answers. Turning Point technology was used to compile and analyze the data. RESULTS: Over a 2-year period, 124 patients and 79 caregivers participated in the group sessions. More than 111 h were saved by giving standardized group sessions instead of individual teachings. The participants' level of confidence regarding the essential concepts to master significantly increased following the group sessions. The results ranged from 18% of participants who answered 4 or 5 on a five-point Likert-type scale before the session to 100% who answered 4 or 5 after the group session. 94% of participants responded with a rating of 4 or 5 when asked if they were satisfied with the overall interactive group session. CONCLUSION: It is crucial that caregivers participate in the initial OAM teaching. The involvement of the interdisciplinary team was crucial in meeting the informational needs of patients. A standardized group session accessible for viewing and use by all health care professionals and patients simplifies the process of sharing high-quality learning materials in a technological society.

Phase I/II trial of Durvalumab plus Tremelimumab and stereotactic body radiotherapy for metastatic head and neck carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of immunotherapy targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway has previously been demonstrated in metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) aims at ablating metastatic lesions and may play a synergistic role with immunotherapy. The purpose of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of triple treatment combination (TTC) consisting of the administration of durvalumab and tremelimumab in combination with SBRT in metastatic HNSCC. METHOD: This is a phase I/II single arm study that will include 35 patients with 2-10 extracranial metastatic lesions. Patients will receive durvalumab (1500 mg IV every 4 weeks (Q4W)) and tremelimumab (75 mg IV Q4W for a total of 4 doses) until progression, unacceptable toxicity or patient withdrawal. SBRT to 2-5 metastases will be administered between cycles 2 and 3 of immunotherapy. The safety of the treatment combination will be evaluated through assessment of TTC-related toxicities, defined as grade 3-5 toxicities based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (v 4.03), occurring within 6 weeks from SBRT start, and that are definitely, probably or possibly related to the combination of all treatments. We hypothesize that dual targeting of PD-L1 and CTLA-4 pathways combined with SBRT will lead to < 35% grade 3-5 acute toxicities related to TTC. Progression free survival (PFS) will be the primary endpoint of the phase II portion of this study and will be assessed with radiological exams every 8 weeks using the RECIST version 1.1 criteria. DISCUSSION: The combination of synergistic dual checkpoints inhibition along with ablative radiation may significantly potentiate the local and systemic disease control. This study constitutes the first clinical trial combining effects of SBRT with dual checkpoint blockade with durvalumab and tremelimumab in the treatment of metastatic HNSCC. If positive, this study would lead to a phase III trial testing this treatment combination against standard of care in metastatic HNSCC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03283605 . Registration date: September 14, 2017; version 1.

Immediate versus deferred chemotherapy after radical cystectomy in patients with pT3-pT4 or N+ M0 urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (EORTC 30994): an intergroup, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder have poor survival after cystectomy. The EORTC 30994 trial aimed to compare immediate versus deferred cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy after radical cystectomy in patients with pT3-pT4 or N+ M0 urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. METHODS: This intergroup, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial recruited patients from hospitals across Europe and Canada. Eligible patients had histologically proven urothelial carcinoma of the bladder, pT3-pT4 disease or node positive (pN1-3) M0 disease after radical cystectomy and bilateral lymphadenectomy, with no evidence of any microscopic residual disease. Within 90 days of cystectomy, patients were centrally randomly assigned (1:1) by minimisation to either immediate adjuvant chemotherapy (four cycles of gemcitabine plus cisplatin, high-dose methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin [high-dose MVAC], or MVAC) or six cycles of deferred chemotherapy at relapse, with stratification for institution, pT category, and lymph node status according to the number of nodes dissected. Neither patients nor investigators were masked. Overall survival was the primary endpoint; all analyses were by intention to treat. The trial was closed after recruitment of 284 of the planned 660 patients. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00028756. FINDINGS: From April 29, 2002, to Aug 14, 2008, 284 patients were randomly assigned (141 to immediate treatment and 143 to deferred treatment), and followed up until the data cutoff of Aug 21, 2013. After a median follow-up of 7.0 years (IQR 5.2-8.7), 66 (47%) of 141 patients in the immediate treatment group had died compared with 82 (57%) of 143 in the deferred treatment group. No significant improvement in overall survival was noted with immediate treatment when compared with deferred treatment (adjusted HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.56-1.08; p=0.13). Immediate treatment significantly prolonged progression-free survival compared with deferred treatment (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.4-0.73, p<0.0001), with 5-year progression-free survival of 47.6% (95% CI 38.8-55.9) in the immediate treatment group and 31.8% (24.2-39.6) in the deferred treatment group. Grade 3-4 myelosuppression was reported in 33 (26%) of 128 patients who received treatment in the immediate chemotherapy group versus 24 (35%) of 68 patients who received treatment in the deferred chemotherapy group, neutropenia occurred in 49 (38%) versus 36 (53%) patients, respectively, and thrombocytopenia in 36 (28%) versus 26 (38%). Two patients died due to toxicity, one in each group. INTERPRETATION: Our data did not show a significant improvement in overall survival with immediate versus deferred chemotherapy after radical cystectomy and bilateral lymphadenectomy for patients with muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma. However, the trial is limited in power, and it is possible that some subgroups of patients might still benefit from immediate chemotherapy. An updated individual patient data meta-analysis and biomarker research are needed to further elucidate the potential for survival benefit in subgroups of patients. FUNDING: Lilly, Canadian Cancer Society Research.

Phase III randomized, placebo-controlled study of cetuximab plus brivanib alaninate versus cetuximab plus placebo in patients with metastatic, chemotherapy-refractory, wild-type K-RAS colorectal carcinoma: the NCIC Clinical Trials Group and AGITG CO.20 Trial.

PURPOSE: The antiepidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody cetuximab has improved survival in patients with metastatic, chemotherapy-refractory, wild-type K-RAS colorectal cancer. The addition of brivanib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and fibroblast growth factor receptor, to cetuximab has shown encouraging early clinical activity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with combination chemotherapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive cetuximab 400 mg/m(2) intravenous loading dose followed by weekly maintenance of 250 mg/m(2) plus either brivanib 800 mg orally daily (arm A) or placebo (arm B). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 750 patients were randomly assigned (376 in arm A and 374 in arm B). Median OS in the intent-to-treat population was 8.8 months in arm A and 8.1 months in arm B (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.03; P = .12). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.0 months in arm A and 3.4 months in arm B (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.84; P < .001). Partial responses observed (13.6% v 7.2%; P = .004) were higher in arm A. Incidence of any grade ≥ 3 adverse events was 78% in arm A and 53% in arm B. Fewer patients received ≥ 90% dose-intensity of both cetuximab (57% v 83%) and brivanib/placebo (48% v 87%) in arm A versus arm B, respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite positive effects on PFS and objective response, cetuximab plus brivanib increased toxicity and did not significantly improve OS in patients with metastatic, chemotherapy-refractory, wild-type K-RAS colorectal cancer.