No study has unequivocally proven that chemotherapy prolongs overall survival (OS) in advanced esophageal cancer. We conducted a Phase III randomized study in first-line advanced unresectable/metastatic esophageal/GEJ cancer. Patients aged 18-70 years, with performance status 0-2, were randomized to best supportive care (BSC) alone, or BSC with weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2. BSC comprised, as indicated, education, counselling, radiation, stenting, feeding tube placement, nutritional supplementation, medications like analgesics, and referral to a support group and palliative care. The primary endpoint was OS; secondary endpoints included progression free survival (PFS), response, toxicity, and QoL. Between May 2016-December 2020, we recruited 281 patients: 143 to chemotherapy and 138 to BSC. Histopathology was squamous in 269 (95.7%) patients. Median number of paclitaxel doses was 12 (IQR, 7-23). Median OS was 4.2 months (95% CI, 3.42-5.32) in BSC, and 9.2 months (95% CI, 8.02-10.48) in chemotherapy; HR, 0.49 (95% CI, 0.39-0.64); p < .001. As compared to BSC, chemotherapy increased response (2.9% to 39%), median PFS (2.1 to 4.2 months), 1-year OS (11% to 32%), 2-year OS (0 to 9%), median dysphagia-free survival (2.9 to 14.8 months), and global and esophagus-specific QoL, without significantly increasing all-grade or grade ≥3 toxicities. Using ESMO clinical benefit scale and ASCO Value Framework, palliative chemotherapy scored as having \"substantial value.\" Our study provides the first level 1 evidence that chemotherapy prolongs survival in advanced esophageal/GEJ carcinoma. BSC alone is no longer appropriate. Weekly paclitaxel is an attractive option, especially in LMICs with limited access to immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Bone and soft tissue sarcomas are rare malignancies, and their heterogeneity has limited the development of novel drugs. This study aimed to apply two validated tools to evaluate the clinical benefits of novel drug therapies for sarcoma developed over the last decade.
METHODS: The PubMed and Embase databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic therapies for sarcomas published between 2013 and 2023. Each trial was scored according to the European Society of Medical Oncology-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale version 1.1 (ESMO-MCBS) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology-Value Framework version 2 (ASCO-VF).
RESULTS: We included 52 RCTs in this study, of which 17 (32.7%) reported positive results that favored the experimental arm. The ESMO-MCBS grades were determined in 14/17 positive trials, and three of them (21.4%) met the threshold for meaningful clinical benefit. Likewise, ASCO-VF scores were calculated for 11/17 positive trials, and three of them (27.3%) met the threshold for meaningful clinical benefit. Weak correlation (r = 0.38, P = 0.277) and agreement (κ = 0.211, P = 0.490) were observed between the two frameworks.
CONCLUSIONS: Only a few RCTs with positive results have demonstrated substantial patient benefits for bone and soft tissue sarcomas over the past decade.

OBJECTIVE: KRAS mutations, particularly KRASG12C, are prevalent in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been a frontline treatment, but recently developed KRASG12C-selective inhibitors, such as sotorasib, present new therapeutic options. We conducted a multi-center retrospective cohort study to gain insights into real-world treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with KRASG12C-positive advanced NSCLC receiving systemic therapy post-ICI treatment.
METHODS: From the CAnadian CAncers With Rare Molecular Alterations-Basket Real-world Observational Study (CARMA-BROS), a cohort of 102 patients with KRASG12C-positive advanced NSCLC across 9 Canadian centers diagnosed between 2015 and 2021 was analyzed. Clinico-demographic and treatment data were obtained from electronic health records. Survival outcomes were assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models.
RESULTS: The patients (median age 66 years; 58 % female; 99 % current/former tobacco exposure; 59 % PD-L1 ≥ 50 %), exhibited heterogeneous treatment patterns post-ICI. Most patients received ICIs as a first-line therapy, with varying subsequent lines including chemotherapy and targeted therapy. In patients receiving systemic therapy post-ICI, median overall survival was 12.6 months, and real-world progression-free survival was 4.7 months. KRASG12C-selective targeted therapy post-ICI (n = 20) showed longer real-world progression-free survival compared to single-agent chemotherapy (aHR = 0.39, p = 0.012).
CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes valuable real-world data on KRASG12C-positive advanced NSCLC post-ICI treatment. The absence of a standard treatment sequencing post-ICI underscores the need for further investigation and consensus-building in the evolving landscape of KRASG12C-targeted therapies.

BACKGROUND: Radical cystectomy (RC) is the standard treatment for muscle invasive bladder cancer, but approximately half of all patients will ultimately succumb to disease progression despite apparent cure with extirpative surgery. Elderly patients are at especially high risk of advanced disease and may benefit from perioperative systemic therapy.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the real-world benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) in patients ≥75 years old.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent RC for non-metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (UCB) from 12 participating international medical institutions. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox regression models were used to assess the association between age groups, administration of AC and oncological outcome parameters such as recurrence-free survival (RFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS: 4,335 patients were included in the analyses, of which 820 (18.9%) were ≥75 years old. These elderly patients had a higher rate of adverse pathologic features. In an univariable subgroup analysis in patients ≥75 years with lymph node metastasis, 5-year OS was significantly higher in patients who had received AC (41% vs. 30.9%, p = 0.02). In a multivariable Cox model that was adjusted for several established outcome predictors, there was a significant favorable association between the administration of AC in elderly patients and OS, but no RFS or CSS.
CONCLUSIONS: In this large observational study, the administration of AC was associated with improved OS, but not RFS or CSS, in elderly patients treated with RC for UCB. This is of clinical importance, as elderly patients are more likely to have adverse pathologic features and experience worse survival outcomes. Treatment of UCB should include both a multidisciplinary approach and a geriatric evaluation to identify patients who are most likely to tolerate and benefit from AC.

BACKGROUND: Although systemic therapies are recommended for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with main portal vein (MPV) invasion and preserved liver function, the outcome is limited. In the real-world, chemoembolization is a commonly used local treatment for advanced HCC.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the additional chemoembolization treatment yields survival benefits compared to systemic therapy for HCC patients with MPV invasion and preserved liver function (Child-Pugh score ≤ B7) in a real-world study from multiple centers.
METHODS: Between January 2020 and December 2022, 91 consecutive HCC patients with MPV invasion who received either systemic medical therapy (i.e., tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) plus anti-PD-1 immunotherapy, S group, n = 43) or in combination with chemoembolization treatment (S-T group, n = 48) from five centers were enrolled in the study. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), and the secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and treatment response. Adverse events (AEs) related to treatment were also recorded. Survival curves were constructed with the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test.
RESULTS: The baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. The mean number of chemoembolization sessions per patient was 2.1 (range 1-3). The median OS was 10.0 months and 8.0 months in the S-T group and S group, respectively (P = 0.254). The median PFS between the two groups was similar (4.0 months vs. 4.0 months, P = 0.404). The disease control rate between the S-T and S groups were comparable (60.4% vs. 62.8%, P = 0.816). Although no chemoembolization-related deaths occurred, 13 grade 3-4 AEs occurred in the S-T group.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of the real-world study demonstrated that additional chemoembolization treatment did not yield survival benefits compared to TKIs plus anti-PD-1 immunotherapy for the overall patients with advanced HCC and MPV invasion.

The overall survival (OS) improvement after the advent of several novel systemic therapies, designed for treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder (mUCUB), is not conclusively studied in either contemporary UCUB patients and/or non-UCUB patients. Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database, contemporary (2017-2020) and historical (2000-2016) systemic therapy-exposed metastatic UCUB and, subsequently, non-UCUB patients were identified. Separate Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression (CRM) analyses first addressed OS in mUCUB and, subsequently, in metastatic non-UCUB (mn-UCUB). Of 3443 systemic therapy-exposed patients, 2725 (79%) harbored mUCUB versus 709 (21%) harbored mn-UCUB. Of 2725 mUCUB patients, 582 (21%) were contemporary (2017-2020) versus 2143 (79%) were historical (2000-2016). In mUCUB, median OS was 11 months in contemporary versus 8 months in historical patients (Δ = 3 months; p < .0001). After multivariable CRM, contemporary membership status (2017-2020) independently predicted lower overall mortality (OM; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.60-0.76; p < .001). Of 709 mn-UCUB patients, 167 (24%) were contemporary (2017-2020) and 542 (76%) were historical (2000-2016). In mn-UCUB, median OS was 8 months in contemporary versus 7 months in historical patients (Δ = 1 month; p = .034). After multivariable CRM, contemporary membership status (2017-2020) was associated with HR of 0.81 (95% CI = 0.66-1.01; p = .06). In conclusion, contemporary systemic therapy-exposed metastatic patients exhibited better OS in UCUB. However, the magnitude of survival benefit was threefold higher in mUCUB and approximated the survival benefits recorded in prospective randomized trials of novel systemic therapies.

BACKGROUND: Locally advanced (unresectable) or metastatic dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLPS) is a common presentation of liposarcoma. Despite established diagnostic and treatment guidelines for DDLPS, critical clinical gaps remain driven by diagnostic challenges, symptom burden and the lack of targeted, safe and effective treatments. The objective of this study was to gather expert opinions from Europe and the United States on the management, unmet needs and expectations for clinical trial design as well as the value of progression-free survival (PFS) in this disease. Other aims included raising awareness and educate key stakeholders across healthcare systems.
METHODS: An international panel of 12 sarcoma key opinion leaders (KOLs) was recruited. The study consisted of two rounds of surveys with pre-defined statements. Experts scored each statement on a 9-point Likert scale. Consensus agreement was defined as ≥75% of experts scoring a statement with ≥7. Revised statements were discussed in a consensus meeting.
RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 43 of 55 pre-defined statements across disease burden, treatment paradigm, unmet needs, value of PFS and its association with overall survival (OS), and cross-over trial design. Twelve statements were deprioritised or merged with other statements. There were no statements where experts disagreed.
CONCLUSIONS: This study constitutes the first international Delphi panel on DDLPS. It aimed to explore KOL perception of the disease burden and unmet need in DDLPS, the value of PFS, and its potential translation to OS benefit, as well as the relevance of a cross-over trial design for DDLPS therapies. Results indicate an alignment across Europe and the United States regarding DDLPS management, unmet needs, and expectations for clinical trials. Raising awareness of critical clinical gaps in relation to DDLPS can contribute to improving patient outcomes and supporting the development of innovative treatments.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess the prognostic value of total tumor volume (TTV) for early recurrence (within 6 months) and overall survival (OS) in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), treated with induction systemic therapy followed by complete local treatment.
METHODS: Patients with initially unresectable CRLM from the multicenter randomized phase 3 CAIRO5 trial (NCT02162563) who received induction systemic therapy followed by local treatment were included. Baseline TTV and change in TTV as response to systemic therapy were calculated using the CT scan before and the first after systemic treatment, and were assessed for their added prognostic value. The findings were validated in an external cohort of patients treated at a tertiary center.
RESULTS: In total, 215 CAIRO5 patients were included. Baseline TTV and absolute change in TTV were significantly associated with early recurrence (P = 0.005 and P = 0.040, respectively) and OS in multivariable analyses (P = 0.024 and P = 0.006, respectively), whereas RECIST1.1 was not prognostic for early recurrence (P = 0.88) and OS (P = 0.35). In the validation cohort (n = 85), baseline TTV and absolute change in TTV remained prognostic for early recurrence (P = 0.041 and P = 0.021, respectively) and OS in multivariable analyses (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.012, respectively), and showed added prognostic value over conventional clinicopathological variables (increase C-statistic, 0.06; 95 % CI, 0.02 to 0.14; P = 0.008).
CONCLUSIONS: Total tumor volume is strongly prognostic for early recurrence and OS in patients who underwent complete local treatment of initially unresectable CRLM, both in the CAIRO5 trial and the validation cohort. In contrast, RECIST1.1 did not show prognostic value for neither early recurrence nor OS.

OBJECTIVE: To achieve patient-centricity in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treatment, it is essential to clarify the differences in perspectives between patients and physicians. This cross-sectional analysis of a web survey aimed to clarify the differences in expectations and concerns between mRCC patients and physicians regarding systemic mRCC therapy in Japan.
METHODS: Surveys from 83 patients and 165 physicians were analyzed.
RESULTS: The top three most significant differences in expectations of systemic therapy between patients and physicians (patient-based physician value) were \"Chance of achieving treatment-free status\" (-30.1%, p < 0.001), \"Longer survival\" (+25.8%, p < 0.001), and \"Chance of eliminating all evidence of disease\" (-25.6%, p < 0.001). The top three most significant differences in concerns for systemic therapy between patients and physicians (patient-based physician value) were \"Lack of efficacy\" (+36.1%, p < 0.001), \"Lack of knowledge of treatment\" (-28.2%, p < 0.001), and \"Daily activities affected by side effects\" (+22.3%, p < 0.001). Diarrhea, fatigue/malaise, and nausea/vomiting were patients\' most distressing adverse events; 50.6% of patients had difficulty telling their physicians about adverse events such as fatigue, anxiety, and depression.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated a gap between patients with mRCC and physicians in their expectations and concerns for systemic therapy. Japanese patients with mRCC suffer from a number of adverse events, some of which are not shared with physicians. This study highlights the importance of communicating well with patients in clinical practice to achieve patient-centricity in systemic treatment for mRCC.

BACKGROUND: Upfront primary tumor resection (PTR) has been associated with longer overall survival (OS) in patients with synchronous unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in retrospective analyses. The aim of the CAIRO4 study was to investigate whether the addition of upfront PTR to systemic therapy resulted in a survival benefit in patients with synchronous mCRC without severe symptoms of their primary tumor.
METHODS: This randomized phase III trial was conducted in 45 hospitals in The Netherlands and Denmark. Eligibility criteria included previously untreated mCRC, unresectable metastases, and no severe symptoms of the primary tumor. Patients were randomized (1 : 1) to upfront PTR followed by systemic therapy or systemic therapy without upfront PTR. Systemic therapy consisted of first-line fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab in both arms. Primary endpoint was OS in the intention-to-treat population. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01606098.
RESULTS: Between August 2012 and February 2021, 206 patients were randomized. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 204 patients were included (n = 103 without upfront PTR, n = 101 with upfront PTR) of whom 116 were men (57%) with median age of 65 years (interquartile range 59-71 years). Median follow-up was 69.4 months. Median OS in the arm without upfront PTR was 18.3 months (95% confidence interval 16.0-22.2 months) compared with 20.1 months (95% confidence interval 17.0-25.1 months) in the upfront PTR arm (P = 0.32). The number of grade 3-4 events was 71 (72%) in the arm without upfront PTR and 61 (65%) in the upfront PTR arm (P = 0.33). Three deaths (3%) possibly related to treatment were reported in the arm without upfront PTR and four (4%) in the upfront PTR arm.
CONCLUSIONS: Addition of upfront PTR to palliative systemic therapy in patients with synchronous mCRC without severe symptoms of the primary tumor does not result in a survival benefit. This practice should no longer be considered standard of care.