BACKGROUND: Germline breast cancer susceptibility gene (gBRCA) mutation in patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) is not common in clinical practice. Therefore, factors that efficiently show gBRCA mutations and the real-world outcomes of olaparib maintenance therapy have not been fully established. In the present study, we clarified the indicators for the effective detection of gBRCA mutation and the efficacy and safety of olaparib as maintenance therapy.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 84 patients with PC who underwent gBRCA testing (BRACAnalysis, Myriad Genetics, Salt Lake City, UT, USA) at our institute between January 2021 and March 2022. For each patient, clinical data were extracted from medical records.
RESULTS: The median patient age was 64 y (29-85 y), and 41 patients (48.8%) were male. The gBRCA mutations were identified in 10 (11.9%) patients; two patients had BRCA1 mutation and eight had BRCA2 mutation. All patients with gBRCA mutation had a family history of any cancer, and eight of them had a family history of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer syndrome (HBOC)-related cancer. The gBRCA mutation rate was higher for patients with PC with a family history of HBOC-related cancer compared to that in patients with PC having a family history of other cancers and no family history of cancer (22.9% vs. 4.1%; P = 0.014). In our study, eight out of 10 patients with gBRCA-positive PC received olaparib after platinum-based chemotherapy. The best responses to platinum-based chemotherapy included a complete response in one patient (12.5%) and a partial response in seven patients (87.5%). The median duration of treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy plus olaparib was 17.5 months (8-87 months), and the duration of treatment with olaparib maintenance therapy was 11 months (1-30 months). During olaparib maintenance therapy, three patients showed no disease progression. One of these three patients underwent conversion surgery after receiving olaparib for 12 months.
CONCLUSIONS: The gBRCA testing should be considered proactively, especially in patients with PC with a family history of HBOC-related cancer.

Although the significant strides in novel therapeutic approaches have prolonged the survival of multiple myeloma (MM) patients, the unfavorable prognosis of cytogenetically high-risk newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) remains intractable with the lack of consensus regarding the choice of maintenance regimens. Therefore, this study was initiated with the aim of examining the effectiveness of various maintenance treatments for this group of patients in jeopardy. Overall, 17 studies with 1937 high-risk NDMM patients were included in the network meta-analysis. Combination therapies involving novel drugs presented encouraging prospects in the maintenance phase, while the patients and circumstances for the application of different regimens still needed to be further distinguished and clarified. To investigate the current status of maintenance therapy of high-risk NDMM patients in clinical practice, a real-world cohort of high-risk NDMM was retrospectively incorporated 80 patients with lenalidomide maintenance and 53 patients with bortezomib maintenance, presenting the median PFS of 31.7 months and 30.4 months, respectively (p = 0.874, HR = 0.966, 95% CI: 0.628-1.486). Collectively, this study illuminated the present constraints of conventional approaches during the maintenance phase for high-risk NDMM patients while highlighting the future potential associated with enhanced regimens integrating novel medications.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of anlotinib as maintenance therapy in patients with advanced cholangiocarcinoma following first-line chemotherapy.
METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled 154 patients with advanced biliary tract cancer admitted to the hospital between January 2020 and December 2022. All patients received first-line intravenous chemotherapy with gemcitabine combined with cisplatin, oxaliplatin, or tegafur. Among the 106 patients who achieved disease control, 47 received oral anlotinib hydrochloride (12 mg daily, 2 weeks on/1 week off) as maintenance therapy. Clinical efficacy, including ORR, DCR, DOR, PFS, and OS, was compared between the anlotinib maintenance and non-maintenance groups. Subgroup analysis based on NLR levels was also performed.
RESULTS: Among the 47 anlotinib maintenance patients, the ORR was 21.28% and the DCR was 51.06%. The median DOR was 36 weeks, and the median PFS was 43 weeks in the anlotinib group, versus 28 weeks and 38 weeks in the non-maintenance group, respectively. The median OS was not reached in the anlotinib group but was 48 weeks in the non-maintenance group. Patients receiving anlotinib maintenance had significantly longer DOR, PFS, and OS (all p < 0.05). Patients with low NLR levels had better survival benefits from anlotinib.
CONCLUSIONS: Maintenance therapy with anlotinib demonstrates potential efficacy and a reliable safety profile in patients with advanced cholangiocarcinoma following first-line treatment. The efficacy of anlotinib therapy appears to be influenced by NLR levels. Further validation with larger sample sizes is warranted to strengthen the robustness and reliability of the results.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Maintenance therapy could significantly improve the prognosis of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving chemotherapy. Anlotinib is effective, tolerable, and convenient in administration as a third-line treatment for NSCLC. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of maintenance therapy with anlotinib after platinum-based induction chemotherapy for patients with advanced NSCLC.
METHODS: This pooled analysis of 2 multicenter, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 clinical trials (ALTER-L014 and ALTER-L011) enrolled patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC and without known sensitive mutations in China between September 2018 and January 2021. The primary outcome was progression-free survival. The secondary outcomes were objective response rate, disease control rate, overall survival, and safety.
RESULTS: The data of 23 patients were pooled, with 15 from ALTER-L014 and 8 from ALTER-L011. At the cutoff date of June 13, 2021, the median progression-free survival since the start of maintenance therapy was 5.95 (95% confidence interval, 4.30-8.80) months. Nineteen patients had stable disease, 1 had a partial response and 3 had progressive disease. The objective response rate was 4.35%, while disease control rate was 86.96%. The median overall survival of the patients since the start of maintenance therapy was 18.60 (95% confidence interval, 6.87-22.80) months. The incidence of adverse events of grade ≥ 3 was 21.7%.
CONCLUSIONS: Anlotinib might offer a new option for maintenance treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC without known sensitive mutations after standard first-line platinum-based chemotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: Continuous lenalidomide maintenance treatment after autologous stem cell transplantation delivers improvement in progression free and overall survival among newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients and has been the standard of care in the UK since March 2021. However, there is scant information about its impact on patients\' day-to-day lives. This service evaluation aimed to qualitatively assess patients receiving lenalidomide treatment at a cancer centre in London, in order that the service might better align with needs and expectations of patients.
METHODS: We conducted 20 semi-structured interviews among myeloma patients who were on continuous lenalidomide maintenance treatment at a specialist cancer centre in London. Members of the clinical team identified potentially eligible participants to take part, and convenience sampling was used to select 10 male and 10 female patients, median age of 58 (range, 45-71). The median treatment duration was 11 months (range, 1-60 months). Participants were qualitatively interviewed following the same semi-structured interview guide, which was designed to explore patient experience and insights of lenalidomide. Reflexive thematic analysis was used for data analysis.
RESULTS: Four overarching themes were as follows: (i) lenalidomide: understanding its role and rationale; (ii) reframing the loss of a treatment-free period to a return to normal life; (iii) the reality of being on lenalidomide: balancing hopes with hurdles; (iv) gratitude and grievances: exploring mixed perceptions of care and communication. Results will be used to enhance clinical services by tailoring communication to better meet patients\' preferences when making treatment decisions.
CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights that most patients feel gratitude for being offered continuous lenalidomide and perceive it as alleviating some fears concerning relapse. It reveals variations in side effects in different age groups; younger patients reported no/negligible side effects, whilst several older patients with comorbidities described significant symptom burden, occasionally leading to treatment discontinuation which caused distress at the perceived loss of prolonged remission. Future research should prioritise understanding the unique needs of younger patients living with multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Avelumab first-line (1 L) maintenance is a standard of care for advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) based on the JAVELIN Bladder 100 phase 3 trial, which showed that avelumab 1 L maintenance + best supportive care (BSC) significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) vs BSC alone in patients who were progression free after receiving 1 L platinum-containing chemotherapy. Here, we comprehensively screened JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial datasets to identify prognostic factors that define subpopulations of patients with longer or shorter OS irrespective of treatment, and predictive factors that select patients who could obtain a greater OS benefit from avelumab 1 L maintenance treatment.
METHODS: We performed machine learning analyses to screen a large set of baseline covariates, including patient demographics, disease characteristics, laboratory values, molecular biomarkers, and patient-reported outcomes. Covariates were identified from previously reported analyses and established prognostic and predictive markers. Variables selected from random survival forest models were processed further in univariate Cox models with treatment interaction and visually inspected using correlation analysis and Kaplan-Meier curves. Results were summarized in a multivariable Cox model.
RESULTS: Prognostic baseline covariates associated with OS included in the final model were assignment to avelumab 1 L maintenance treatment, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, site of metastasis, sum of longest target lesion diameters, levels of C-reactive protein and alkaline phosphatase in blood, lymphocyte proportion in intratumoral stroma, tumor mutational burden, and tumor CD8+ T-cell infiltration. Potential predictive factors included site of metastasis, tumor mutation burden, and tumor CD8+ T-cell infiltration. An analysis in patients with PD-L1+ tumors had similar findings to those in the overall population.
CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning analyses of data from the JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial identified potential prognostic and predictive factors for avelumab 1 L maintenance treatment in patients with aUC, which warrant further evaluation in other clinical datasets.

Relapse remains a major cause of treatment failure following allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). We retrospectively investigated low-dose decitabine and venetoclax (DEC/VEN) as post-transplant maintenance in 26 older patients with AML and MDS. The cumulative incidence of day 100 gIII-IV acute graft versus host disease (GVHD) and 1-year moderate-severe chronic GVHD was 5% and 26%, respectively. One patient relapsed 14 m after transplant. The 1-year non-relapse mortality and survival were 11% and 84%, respectively. DEC/VEN is a safe and potentially effective strategy to reduce the risk of post-transplant relapse.

To assess the efficacy of maintenance chemotherapy in the management of unresectable locally advanced pancreatic head adenocarcinoma (PHA) cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CCRT). This study, a large-scale head-to-head propensity score matching (PSM) cohort study, employed real-world data. PSM was used to evaluate the impact of maintenance chemotherapy on overall survival and cancer-specific survival in patients with unresectable locally advanced PHA who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and CCRT. A total of 148 patients with locally advanced pancreatic head adenocarcinoma were included in the study after PSM. These patients were equally divided into two groups, those receiving maintenance chemotherapy and those who did not. Confounding factors were balanced between the groups. The adjusted hazard ratios for all-cause mortality and cancer-specific mortality were 0.56 (95% CI: 0.40-0.77; P = 0.0005) and 0.56 (95% CI: 0.40-0.78; P = 0.0007), respectively, in patients receiving maintenance chemotherapy compared to those who did not. Our large-scale, real-world study demonstrates that maintenance chemotherapy may enhance survival outcomes for patients with unresectable locally advanced pancreatic head adenocarcinoma who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and concurrent chemoradiation therapy.

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is a common and aggressive cancer, and its standard treatment is concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT). Maintenance chemotherapy is often used to help prevent cancer recurrence, but its efficacy for patients with ESCC receiving CCRT remains unclear. We conducted a large head-to-head propensity score matching cohort study to estimate the effects of maintenance chemotherapy on overall survival and cancer-specific survival in patients with ESCC receiving standard CCRT. After propensity score matching (PSM), we recruited 2724 patients with ESCC (2177 in the maintenance chemotherapy group and 547 in the non-maintenance chemotherapy group). The adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) of all-cause mortality and cancer-specific mortality for the maintenance chemotherapy group were 1.15 (1.06-1.26, P = 0.0014) and 1.08 (0.88-1.29, P = 0.1320), respectively, compared with the non-maintenance chemotherapy group. We also found that older age, relatively lower body mass index (BMI), higher American Joint Committee on Cancer clinical stage, and poor response to CCRT as measured using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors were poor independent predictors of all-cause mortality and cancer-specific mortality. Our findings indicated that maintenance chemotherapy may not improve the survival of patients with ESCC who have received CCRT. Additionally, we identified several key prognostic factors for patients with ESCC receiving CCRT, including relatively low BMI and poor response to CCRT. Further research is needed to understand the benefits and risks of maintenance chemotherapy in similar patient populations in order to identify new therapies that could improve treatment responses.