Preoperative ultra-hypofractionation radiotherapy in extremity/trunk wall soft tissue sarcoma - A meta-analysis of prospective studies

PURPOSE

The neoadjuvant radiotherapy is now standard treatment in soft tissue sarcoma. Using ultra-hypofractionation radiotherapy shorten the treatment time. In the era of COVID pandemic, using less fraction to treat patient is an urgent need. Thus, we aim to use meta-analysis to investigate the clinical efficacy of preoperative stereotactic body radiotherapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PRISMA guideline was used in this study. PubMed, Cochrane and Embase were used. We include only prospective study. The main endpoint was set as wound complication rate. Other endpoints include R0 resection rate, overall survival, local control, and distant metastasis free survival.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included. The pooled wound complication rate is 0.30 (95% CI=0.26-0.35). The pooled R0 resection rate is 0.87(95%CI: 0.74-0.94). The pooled 2-year overall survival is 0.86 (95%CI: 0.72-0.94). The pooled 2-year local control rate is 0.96(95%CI: 0.89-0.99). The pooled 2-year distant metastasis free survival is 0.60 (95%CI=0.50-0.70).

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant ultra-hypofractionation radiotherapy in soft tissue sarcoma is a feasible and well tolerable treatment.

Prognostic factors for 495 nonoperative esophageal squamous cancer patients receiving IMRT plus chemotherapy: A retrospective analysis

PURPOSE

Chemoradiotherapy is regarded as a standard scheme for inoperable and unresectable esophageal cancers. Our aims were to explore the prognostic factors relevant to esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) following intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plus chemotherapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Totally 495 ESCC patients undergoing IMRT combined with chemotherapy in our hospital between 2011 and 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Potential clinical prognosis-related factors were assessed by uni- and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

The median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of the ESCC patients were 2.25 and 1.24years, respectively. Uni- and multivariate analyses demonstrated the relevant independent prognostic factors of OS and PFS were gender, T stage, N stage, clinical stage, and tumor location (P<0.05), but not chemotherapy or radiotherapy dose. We further compared the 5-year OS rates among different T stages, N stages, clinical stages, genders, and tumor locations. The survival rate at the higher clinical stage was significantly lower (P<0.001). The 5-year OS in the upper thorax of the tumor was 46.0% and exceeded other tumor locations (P<0.05). The 5-year OS was 56.1% among females and 33.3% among males (P=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

For ESCC patients receiving IMRT combined with chemotherapy, their long-term curative effects are influenced by T stages, N stages, clinical stages, genders, and tumor locations. ESCC patients who are females, or have upper thoracic tumor, or are at early clinical stage own better prognosis.

[Re-visiting the Pronopall score ten years later: A multicenter retrospective study]

INTRODUCTION

The Pronopall score, which distinguishes 3 prognostic groups in patients with advanced cancer, was initially proposed in 2008 and validated in a study published in 2018 but including patients between 2009 and 2010. Since the last decade, cancer management and therapeutic options have progressed. The objective of this study was to confirm the value of this score in patients with digestive and thoracic cancer.

METHODS

From July 2019 to November 2020, this retrospective multi-center study included patients with digestive or thoracic cancers who fulfilled the same inclusion criteria as those used in the initial study, and in whom the Pronopall score could be calculated using its four variables (albumin serum level, LDH level, ECOG score, number of metastatic sites). Survival curves were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

One hundred patients were included. According to the Pronopall score, patients were separated into group A (score 8-10, 7 patients), group B (score 4-7, 41 patients) and group C (score 0-3, 52 patients). Median overall survival was 73 days, CI [17-129], 228 days, CI [128-328] and 575 days, CI [432-718] for groups A, B and C, respectively. Survival at 2 months was 28 % for population A, 61 % for population B, and 94 % for population C.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms that the Pronopall score still allows clinically relevant discrimination of patients, score C being associated with a good prognosis compared to scores A and B.

[Survival and associated factors with long-term survival of penile prosthesis]

INTRODUCTION

Implantation of penile prosthesis is constantly growing but little long-term data is available concerning the associated factors of prosthesis survival. Our aim was to describe the long-term survival of penile prostheses and to identify factors influencing long-term prosthesis survival.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, monocentric cohort of patients who underwent their first implantation of a penile prosthesis, between May 2000 and March 2017, at the Reims University Hospital. Prosthesis survival was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. A univariate and multivariate analysis to estimate the risk of surgical removal/revision of the prosthesis was performed using a Cox model.

RESULTS

150 patients were included, and 61 patients underwent surgical removal of the prosthesis (40.7%). Mean follow-up was 76.12 months (0-176 months). Prosthesis survival was 69.7% at 5 years (95% CI, 62.2-77.3) and 58.5% at 10 years (95% CI, 50.0-66.9). In multivariate analysis, the factors influencing prosthesis survival were: type of prosthesis (other vs. Coloplast TITAN®, HR 1.89, CI 95%, 1.03-3.45) and prosthesis final length (20-29cm vs. 12-17cm, HR 0.27, 95% CI, 0.09-0.77).

CONCLUSION

At 10 years, the penile prosthesis survival is close to 60%. Type of implant and final length of the prosthesis may have a significant influence in long-term prosthesis survival. Patients undergoing penile prosthesis implantation must be informed about the risk of surgical removal/revision of the prosthesis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

A comparison between raltitrexed plus cisplatin and docetaxel plus cisplatin in concurrent chemoradiation for non-surgical esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

PURPOSE

Chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is considered as a standard treatment for unresectable and inoperable esophageal cancer (EC) patients. However, no consensus has been reached regarding the optimal synchronous chemotherapy regimen and the best combination of radiotherapy and chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of raltitrexed plus cisplatin and docetaxel plus cisplatin to find a safe and effective concurrent chemotherapy schedule.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Our retrospective study included 151 EC patients treated with raltitrexed and cisplatin (RP) (n=90) or docetaxel and cisplatin (DP) (n=61) from 2011 till 2018. Survival outcomes and treatment related toxicity were analyzed between the two groups.

RESULTS

PFS and OS were 18 and 34 months in the RP group, while 13 and 20 months in the DP group (P=0.118 and P=0.270). The 1-, 2-, 3-year survival rates of the RP group were 71.1, 55.4 and 46.4%. For the DP group, these were 63.9, 44.3 and 37.6%, respectively. Compared with DP group, RP group received a superior CR rate (68.9% versus 52.5%, P=0.041). There was a trend that the total number of toxic reactions in RP group was lower than that in DP group (P=0.058).

CONCLUSIONS

Even RP and DP groups have the similar survival outcomes and toxicity, raltitrexed/cisplatin get a higher complete response rate. Our study suggests that raltitrexed combined with cisplatin is a safe and effective concurrent chemotherapy regimen and it might be used as an alternative for cisplatin/5-FU and cisplatin/docetaxel in CCRT for EC patients.

[Survival in HIV-1 patients receiving antiretroviral therapy in Morocco]

BACKGROUND

The purpose was to study factors associated with the survival of HIV-1 patients receiving antiretroviral therapy in Morocco.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

This was a retrospective study of a cohort of 182 HIV-1 patients receiving antiretroviral therapy in the department of dermatology venereology at the Military Instruction Hospital Mohamed V in Rabat during the period from 1 January 2006 to 1 January 2017. Death of any cause during the study period was considered to be the result of HIV infection. The log-rank test was used to compare the survival curves based on determinants. The Cox regression model analyzed the determinants of survival since induction of antiretroviral therapy.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 4.7 years (IQR: 1.97-8.18). The mortality rate was 75 deaths per 1000 person-years. Advanced clinical stage CDC C (RR: 2.72; CI 95%: 1.33-5.56) and treatment with indinavir (RR: 1.41; CI 95%: 0.77-2.59) were significantly associated with death.

CONCLUSION

Initiation of antiretroviral therapy in the early stage of the disease and use of less toxic molecules are recommended to reduce mortality.

[Key concepts of survival analysis: Checking appropriateness]

Analysis of cancer survival data and related outcomes is necessary to assess cancer treatment. The survival analysis, although considered a cornerstone of oncology papers, is the weak point for the interpretation of results when used without robust data, without verifying the conditions of usage, and without defining the terminology we are using; leading to missing the real message. Unfortunately, a lot of scientific papers dealing with oncology violates the assumptions necessary for the usage of these tests, consequently, the conclusions in these papers cannot be assumed by the methodology used.

; CENSUR working survival group. Challenges in the estimation of Net SURvival: The CENSUR working survival group

BACKGROUND

Net survival, the survival probability that would be observed, in a hypothetical world, where the cancer of interest would be the only possible cause of death, is a key indicator in population-based cancer studies. Accounting for mortality due to other causes, it allows cross-country comparisons or trends analysis and provides a useful indicator for public health decision-making. The objective of this study was to show how the creation and formalization of a network comprising established research teams, which already had substantial and complementary experience in both cancer survival analysis and methodological development, make it possible to meet challenges and thus provide more adequate tools, to improve the quality and the comparability of cancer survival data, and to promote methodological transfers in areas of emerging interest.

METHOD

The Challenges in the Estimation of Net SURvival (CENSUR) working survival group is composed of international researchers highly skilled in biostatistics, methodology, and epidemiology, from different research organizations in France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Slovenia, and Canada, and involved in French (FRANCIM) and European (EUROCARE) cancer registry networks.

RESULTS

The expected advantages are an interdisciplinary, international, synergistic network capable of addressing problems in public health, for decision-makers at different levels; tools for those in charge of net survival analyses; a common methodology that makes unbiased cross-national comparisons of cancer survival feasible; transfer of methods for net survival estimations to other specific applications (clinical research, occupational epidemiology); and dissemination of results during an international training course.

CONCLUSION

The formalization of the international CENSUR working survival group was motivated by a need felt by scientists conducting population-based cancer research to discuss, develop, and monitor implementation of a common methodology to analyze net survival in order to provide useful information for cancer control and cancer policy. A "team science" approach is necessary to address new challenges concerning the estimation of net survival.