Citations

Background: To assess the differential effect of robotic assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) versus open radical cystectomy (ORC) on survival outcomes in matched analyses performed on a large multicentric cohort. Methods: The study included 9757 patients with urothelial bladder cancer (BCa) treated in a consecutive manner at each of 25 institutions. All patients underwent radical cystectomy with bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy. To adjust for potential selection bias, propensity score matching 2:1 was performed with two ORC patients matched to one RARC patient. The propensity-matched cohort included 1374 patients. Multivariable competing risk analyses accounting for death of other causes, tested association of surgical technique with recurrence and cancer specific mortality (CSM), before and after propensity score matching. Results: Overall, 767 (7.8%) patients underwent RARC and 8990 (92.2%) ORC. The median follow-up before and after propensity matching was 81 and 102 months, respectively. In the overall population, the 3-year recurrence rates and CSM were 37% vs. 26% and 34% vs. 24% for ORC vs. RARC (all p values > 0.1), respectively. On multivariable Cox regression analyses, RARC and ORC had similar recurrence and CSM rates before and after matching (all p values > 0.1). Conclusions: Patients treated with RARC and ORC have similar survival outcomes. This data is helpful in consulting patients until long term survival outcomes of level one evidence is available.

Objective Surveillance interval protocols after complete remission of intestinal metaplasia (CRIM) post radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in Barrett’s oesophagus (BE) are currently empiric and not based on substantial evidence. We aimed to assess the timeline, location and patterns of recurrence following CRIM to inform these guidelines. Design Data on patients undergoing RFA for BE were obtained from prospectively maintained databases of five (three USA and two UK) tertiary referral centres. RFA was performed until CRIM was confirmed on two consecutive endoscopies. Results 594 patients achieved CRIM as of 1 May 2017. 151 subjects developed recurrent BE over a median (IQR) follow-up of 2.8 (1.4–4.4) years. There was 19% cumulative recurrence risk of any BE within 2 years and an additional 49% risk over the next 8.6 years. There was no evidence of a clinically meaningful change in the recurrence hazard rate of any BE, dysplastic BE or high-grade dysplasia/cancer over the duration of follow-up, with an estimated 2% (95% CI −7% to 12%) change in recurrence rate of any BE in a doubling of follow-up time. 74% of BE recurrences developed at the gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) (24.1% were dysplastic) and 26% in the tubular oesophagus. The yield of random biopsies from the tubular oesophagus, in the absence of visible lesions, was 1% (BE) and 0.2% (dysplasia). Conclusions BE recurrence risk following CRIM remained constant over time, suggesting that lengthening of follow-up intervals, at least in the first 5 years after CRIM, may not be advisable. Sampling the GOJ is critical to detecting recurrence. The requirement for random biopsies of the neosquamous epithelium in the absence of visible lesions may need to be re-evaluated.

Objectives: Preclinical studies demonstrated antitumor activity of dovitinib in pancreatic cancer models. This phase Ib study aimed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of dovitinib in combination with gemcitabine and capecitabine and to characterize the safety and pharmacokinetic profile in patients with advanced pancreatic and biliary tract cancers and solid malignancies. Materials and Methods: Patients received gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² intravenously on days 1 and 8, capecitabine 1300 mg/m² oral daily from day 1 to 14, and dovitinib oral daily 5 days on and 2 days off, every 21-day cycle. The standard 3+3 dose escalation design was utilized and the study expanded to treat an additional 20 advanced pancreatic and biliary tract cancers patients at MTD. Results: A total of 29 patients were enrolled. One patient experienced dose-limiting grade 3 colitis. Two patients developed clinically significant neuropathy after the first cycle requiring dose reduction. The MTD was not reached and dovitinib 300 mg was declared the recommended dose for expansion. The most frequent grade 2 or worse adverse events were fatigue (45%), neutropenia (41%), thrombocytopenia (34%), anemia (24%), nausea (24%), and palmer-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (21%). Partial responses were observed in 5 patients. Pharmacokinetic studies showed no drug-drug interaction between dovitinib, capecitabine and gemcitabine. Fibroblast growth factor 23 plasma level increased in 4 of 5 patients during the first cycle of treatment. Conclusions: Dovitinib 300 mg daily is the recommended dose when combined with gemcitabine and capecitabine, achieving clinically relevant plasma concentrations. The study combination demonstrated encouraging efficacy signals in advanced pancreatic cancer.

Background: Serious adverse events (SAEs) and subject replacements occur frequently in phase 1 oncology clinical trials. Whether baseline quality-of-life (QOL) or social support can predict risk for SAEs or subject replacement among these patients is not known. Methods: Between 2011–2013, 92 patients undergoing screening for enrollment into one of 22 phase 1 solid tumor clinical trials at Roswell Park Cancer Institute were included in this study. QOL Questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G), Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey (MOSSSS), Charlson comorbidity scores (CCS) and Royal Marsden scores (RMS) were obtained at baseline. Frequency of dose limiting toxicities (DLTs), subject replacement and SAEs that occurred within the first 4 cycles of treatment were recorded. Fisher’s exact test and Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test were used to study the association between categorical and continuous variables, respectively. A linear transformation was used to standardize QOL scores. p-value ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Baseline QOL, MOSSSS, CCS and RMS were not associated with subject replacement nor DLTs. Baseline EORTC QLQ-C30 scores were significantly lower among patients who encountered SAEs within the first 4 cycles (p = 0.04). Conclusions: Lower (worse) EORTC QLQ-C30 score at baseline is associated with SAE occurrence during phase 1 oncology trials.

Vascularized lymph node (VLN) transfer has been of high interest in the past decade for the treatment of lymphedema, since it has been shown to be effective in reducing limb volumes, decreasing infectious episodes and improving quality of life. Multiple donor sites have been described in the quest for the optimal one. Herein, we describe a novel lymph node flap option based on the ileocolic artery and vein. The ileocecal vascularized lymph node (IC‐VLN) flap was used in the management of a 33‐year‐old male patient with lower extremity lymphedema secondary to left inguinal trauma. The patient had previously underwent a pedicled omentum flap transposition with minimal improvement in limb size and persistent episodes of infection. At 15 month follow‐up, the IC‐VLN flap improved the lymphatic drainage in the affected limb with a mean limb circumference reduction rate of 26.3%. No donor site complications or further episodes of infection were noted. According to our findings, the IC‐VLN flap may be another option for VLN transfer in very selected cases. Nevertheless, larger series with a longer follow‐up are required to analyze the efficacy and long‐term results of this flap.

259 Background: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and platelet derived growth factor (PDGF) are produced by bladder cancer cell lines in vitro and expressed in human tumor tissues. Preclinical studies have also shown that bladder cancer cell lines express VEGF receptor 1 and 2 on their surface membrane. Pazopanib is a vascular endothelial receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor with anti-angiogenesis and antitumor activity in several preclinical models. A two-stage phase II study was conducted to assess the activity and toxicity profile of pazopanib administered to patients with metastatic, urothelial carcinoma. Methods: Patients with one prior systemic therapy for recurrent, metastatic urothelial carcinoma were eligible. Patients received pazopanib at a dose of 800 mg orally daily for 4 week cycle. Results: Nineteen patients were enrolled. Median age was 66 years, with > 89% of patients presenting poorly differentiated bladder cancer. Adverse event data is available on 18 patients. No grade 4 or 5 events have been experienced. Nine patients have experienced 11 grade 3 adverse events of which 7 were deemed at least possibly related to treatment. Most common toxicities were anemia, thrombocytopenia, leucopenia and fatigue. For stage 1, none of the first 16 evaluable patients were deemed success (CR or PR) by the RECIST criteria during the first four 4-week cycles of treatment. Median progression- free survival was 1.9 months. This met the futility stopping rule of interim analysis, and therefore, the trial was recommended to be permanently closed. Correlative studies including measurement of VEGF levels in archived tissues and blood are pending. Conclusions: Pazopanib did not show activity in urothelial carcinoma patients. The role of anti-VEGF therapies in urothelial carcinoma may need further evaluation in rational combination strategies. [Table: see text]