Citations

Background In this series from the Transatlantic Australasian Retroperitoneal Sarcoma Working Group (TARPSWG), the authors examined longitudinal outcomes of patients with a second recurrence of retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) after complete resection of a first local recurrence (LR). Methods Data from patients undergoing resection of a first LR from January 2002 to December 2011were collected from 22 sarcoma centers. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) after second recurrence. Results Second recurrences occurred in 400 of 567 patients (70.5%) after an R0/R1 resection of a first locally recurrent RPS. Patterns of disease recurrence were LR in 323 patients (80.75%), distant metastases (DM) in 55 patients (13.75%), and both LR and DM in 22 patients (5.5%). The main subtype among the LR group was liposarcoma (77%), whereas DM mainly were leiomyosarcomas (43.6%). In patients with a second LR only, a total of 200 patients underwent re‐resection (61.9%). The 5‐year OS rate varied significantly based on the pattern of failure ( P < .001): 45.6% for the LR group, 25.5% for the DM group, and 0% for the group with LR and DM. The only factors found to be associated with improved OS on multivariable analysis were both time between second surgery and the development of the second recurrence (32 months vs 8 months: hazard ratio, 0.44 [ P < .001]) and surgery for second recurrence (yes vs no: hazard ratio, 3.25 [ P < .001]). The 5‐year OS rate for patients undergoing surgery for a second LR was 59% versus 18% in the patients not deemed suitable for surgical resection. Conclusions Survival rates after second recurrence of RPS varied based on patterns of disease recurrence and treatment. Durable disease‐free survivors were identified after surgery for second LR in patients selected for this intervention.

AbstractBackgroundChronic intestinal pseudo‐obstruction (CIPO) and enteric dysmotility (ED) are small intestinal motility disorders defined by radiological and manometric criteria. In the absence of consensus guidelines, we surveyed opinions on the diagnosis and management of CIPO and ED among experts from different countries.MethodsA survey questionnaire was circulated electronically to members of the European society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism, European Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility, and United European Gastroenterology. Only responses from participants completing all required components were included.Key ResultsOf 154 participants, 93% agreed that CIPO and ED should be classified separately. Overall, 73% reported an increasing incidence of CIPO and ED, with hypermobile Ehlers‐Danlos Syndrome the group with the largest increase in referrals (37%), particularly in the UK (P < .0001). The majority (95%) find diagnosing CIPO and ED difficult. Notably, antroduodenal manometry, a test mandated to diagnose ED, is infrequently used (only 21% respondents use in >50% cases) and full thickness biopsies were reported to seldom influence medical treatment, nutritional management, and prognosis. Respondents reported that very few treatments are useful for most patients, with bacterial overgrowth treatment, prucalopride, and psychological therapies felt to be the most useful. While only 23% of clinicians felt that parenteral nutrition (PN) improves gastrointestinal symptoms in >50% of cases, 68% reported PN dependency at 5 years in the majority of cases.Conclusions and InferencesThese data highlight the difficulties with diagnosing and managing CIPO and ED and underscore the urgent need for international, multidisciplinary, clinical practice guidelines.

Objectives To develop and externally validate a risk calculator for prediction of any cancer recurrence in patients with penile squamous cell carcinoma (pSCC) and inguinal lymph node metastases (ILNM), as to date no validated prognostic tool is available for patients with pSCC and ILNM. Patients and Methods The development cohort included 234 patients from seven referral centres. The external validation cohort included 273 patients from two additional referral centres. Cox regression identified predictors of any recurrence, which were used to develop a risk calculator. The risk‐calculator grouped the development and the validation cohorts according to the individual risk of any recurrence at 24 months (24m‐R). Adjuvant treatment effects were tested on overall survival (OS) according to the derived tertiles, within the development and validation cohorts. Results Positive surgical margins, pN 3 , and ILNM ratio were associated with higher recurrence rate. The 2‐year OS rates were lower for patients with high (>37%) and intermediate (19–37%) compared to low (<19%) 24m‐R risk of recurrence, for both the development (43% and 58% vs 83%, P < 0.001) and validation cohort (44% and 50% vs 85%, P < 0.001). Results were confirmed in the subgroup of patients who did not receive adjuvant treatment ( P < 0.001), but not in patients who did receive adjuvant treatments in both the development and validation cohorts ( P > 0.1). Conclusion Adjuvant treatment planning is crucial in patients with pSCC with ILNM, where only weak evidence is available. The current tool proved to successfully stratify patients according to their individual risk, potentially allowing better tailoring of adjuvant treatments.

AbstractUtility of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II cancer remains a matter of debate. Clinical guidelines suggest adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II tumors with high‐risk features, in particular T4 tumors. However, limited consensus exists regarding the importance of other high‐risk features (lymphovascular or perineural invasion, microsatellite instability). Our study aimed to investigate the impact of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage IIA (T3N0) colon cancer patients. Patients who underwent colectomy for stage IIA colon adenocarcinoma (2010‐2015) were identified in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) and divided in two groups based on receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy vs observation. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)‐adjusted Kaplan‐Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to compare overall survival between the two groups. Subgroup analysis of patients with specific high‐risk features LVI, PNI and MSI was performed. Among 46 688 surgical patients with stage IIA colon adenocarcinoma 5937 (12.7%) received adjuvant chemotherapy, while 40 751 (87.3%) were observed. Five‐year IPTW‐adjusted survival was higher in the adjuvant chemotherapy group (79.7% [95% CI 79.1, 80.2]) compared to the observation group (70.3% [95% CI 69.7, 70.9]). Patients with high‐risk pathological features showed an estimated 5‐year survival benefit of 11.3% (78.2% [95% CI 77.4, 79.1] vs 66.9% [95% CI 65.9, 67.8]) when treated with adjuvant chemotherapy. This NCDB analysis revealed a survival benefit for patients with stage IIA colon adenocarcinoma and high‐risk features that were treated with adjuvant chemotherapy.

Abstract The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2]-causing coronavirus disease [COVID]-19 pandemic poses major challenges for patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] to be recruited and maintained in clinical trials. However, clinical trials offer patients who have failed multiple drugs access to study medications with alternative modes of action and the potential for relief from inflammation-mediated symptoms. Therefore, the continuation of clinical trials in IBD during the COVID-19 pandemic is important both for participants and for the community of IBD patients, due to the dire need for an expanded therapeutic armamentarium. As the safety of patients in clinical trials is the leading principle, we are providing ten specific rules to guide patients and principal investigators safely through the challenging time.

109 Background: RET gene fusions are targetable oncogenic drivers in multiple tumor types, including up to 20% of papillary thyroid cancers (PTC). Pralsetinib is an investigational, highly potent, selective inhibitor of oncogenic RET alterations. In the registration-enabling Phase 1/2 ARROW study (NCT03037385), pralsetinib demonstrated an overall response rate (ORR; response-evaluable patients [REP], central review) of 73% (19/26) in treatment-naïve patients and 61% (49/80; 2 pending confirmation) in platinum-exposed patients with RET fusion+ non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and was well tolerated (data cut-off November 18, 2019). We provide an update on the clinical activity of pralsetinib in other RET fusion+ solid tumor types. Methods: ARROW consists of a phase 1 dose escalation (30–600 mg once [QD] or twice daily) followed by a phase 2 expansion (400 mg QD) in patients with advanced RET-altered solid tumors. Primary objectives were ORR and safety. Results: As of November 18, 2019, 29 patients with metastatic solid tumor types other than NSCLC (16 PTC, 1 undifferentiated thyroid, 3 pancreatic, 3 colon, 6 other) bearing a RET fusion have received pralsetinib. Efficacy data are presented for REP enrolled by July 11, 2019. In patients with thyroid cancer that is RET fusion+, ORR (investigator assessment) was 75% (9/12; all confirmed). Median (range) duration of response (DOR) was 14.5 (3.7+, 16.8) months (mo), with 67% of responding patients continuing treatment. Two patients with stable disease were continuing treatment at 11.5+ and 19.3+ mo. In other RET fusion+ cancers, ORR was 60% (3/5; all confirmed) with partial responses in 2/2 patients with pancreatic cancer (DOR 5.5, 7.4+ mo) and 1 patient with intrahepatic bile duct carcinoma (DOR 7.5 mo). Two patients with colon cancer had stable disease for 7.3 and 9.3 mo. Responses were observed across multiple fusion genotypes. In the entire safety population (all patients treated with 400 mg QD pralsetinib, regardless of diagnosis; n = 354), most treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were grade 1-2, and included increased aspartate aminotransferase (31%), anemia (22%), increased alanine aminotransferase (21%), constipation (21%) and hypertension (20%). Only 4% of patients in the safety population discontinued due to TRAEs. Conclusions: Pralsetinib demonstrated broad and durable antitumor activity across multiple advanced solid tumor types, regardless of RET fusion genotype, and was well tolerated. The study is ongoing and still enrolling patients in this cohort. Clinical trial information: NCT03037385.