MGMT Promoter Methylation Is a Strong Prognostic Biomarker for Benefit from Dose-Intensified Temozolomide Rechallenge in Progressive Glioblastoma: The DIRECTOR Trial.

PURPOSE: Rechallenge with temozolomide (TMZ) at first progression of glioblastoma after temozolomide chemoradiotherapy (TMZ/RT→TMZ) has been studied in retrospective and single-arm prospective studies, applying temozolomide continuously or using 7/14 or 21/28 days schedules. The DIRECTOR trial sought to show superiority of the 7/14 regimen. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with glioblastoma at first progression after TMZ/RT→TMZ and at least two maintenance temozolomide cycles were randomized to Arm A [one week on (120 mg/m(2) per day)/one week off] or Arm B [3 weeks on (80 mg/m(2) per day)/one week off]. The primary endpoint was median time-to-treatment failure (TTF) defined as progression, premature temozolomide discontinuation for toxicity, or death from any cause. O(6)-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation was prospectively assessed by methylation-specific PCR. RESULTS: Because of withdrawal of support, the trial was prematurely closed to accrual after 105 patients. There was a similar outcome in both arms for median TTF [A: 1.8 months; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 1.8-3.2 vs. B: 2.0 months; 95% CI, 1.8-3.5] and overall survival [A: 9.8 months (95% CI, 6.7-13.0) vs. B: 10.6 months (95% CI, 8.1-11.6)]. Median TTF in patients with MGMT-methylated tumors was 3.2 months (95% CI, 1.8-7.4) versus 1.8 months (95% CI, 1.8-2) in MGMT-unmethylated glioblastoma. Progression-free survival rates at 6 months (PFS-6) were 39.7% with versus 6.9% without MGMT promoter methylation. CONCLUSIONS: Temozolomide rechallenge is a treatment option for MGMT promoter-methylated recurrent glioblastoma. Alternative strategies need to be considered for patients with progressive glioblastoma without MGMT promoter methylation.

Buccodental health and oral mucositis. Clinical study in patients with hematological diseases

Objectives: The objective of the present study is to assess whether a good buccodental status (evaluated by means of dentogingival indices), is associated with a lower incidence and severity of oral mucositis in patients with hematological diseases who receive treatment with chemotherapy or bone marrow transplant. Study design: The study was carried out on 97 patients admitted to the Hematology Service of the Hospital Duran y Reynals in Barcelona during 2002-2003. These patients received treatment with chemotherapy or conditioning prior to bone marrow transplant. A descriptive study was made, analyzing oral hygiene, one dental index, and two gingivales indices, and evaluating their relationship with the appearance of mucositis. Results: The patients with high plaque (PI) and gingival (GI) indices during chemotherapy presented a higher percentage of mucositis (77.4% and 65.7% respectively) against those who had little or no visible plaque. In the case of the PI, the differences were statistically significant (p=0.015). Likewise, patients who brushed their teeth 3 times/day presented mucositis in only 26.7% of cases, against those who did not brush, or brushed only once a day (65.9% and 68.4%), these differences also being statistically significant (p=0.013). The CAO showed similar results in patients with or without mucositis (7.59 and 7.03 respectively). Conclusions: In our study, a good gingival status as well as good oral hygiene during chemoradiotherapy is associated with a lower incidence and severity of mucositis.

Chemotherapy and radiotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: an update of the MAC-NPC meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A previous individual patient data meta-analysis by the Meta-Analysis of Chemotherapy in Nasopharynx Carcinoma (MAC-NPC) collaborative group to assess the addition of chemotherapy to radiotherapy showed that it improves overall survival in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. This benefit was restricted to patients receiving concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy. The aim of this study was to update the meta-analysis, include recent trials, and to analyse separately the benefit of concomitant plus adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Controlled Trials meta-register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and meeting proceedings to identify published or unpublished randomised trials assessing radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy in patients with non-metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma and obtained updated data for previously analysed studies. The primary endpoint of interest was overall survival. All trial results were combined and analysed using a fixed-effects model. The statistical analysis plan was pre-specified in a protocol. All data were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. FINDINGS: We analysed data from 19 trials and 4806 patients. Median follow-up was 7·7 years (IQR 6·2-11·9). We found that the addition of chemotherapy to radiotherapy significantly improved overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0·79, 95% CI 0·73-0·86, p<0·0001; absolute benefit at 5 years 6·3%, 95% CI 3·5-9·1). The interaction between treatment effect (benefit of chemotherapy) on overall survival and the timing of chemotherapy was significant (p=0·01) in favour of concomitant plus adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0·65, 0·56-0·76) and concomitant without adjuvant chemotherapy (0·80, 0·70-0·93) but not adjuvant chemotherapy alone (0·87, 0·68-1·12) or induction chemotherapy alone (0·96, 0·80-1·16). The benefit of the addition of chemotherapy was consistent for all endpoints analysed (all p<0·0001): progression-free survival (HR 0·75, 95% CI 0·69-0·81), locoregional control (0·73, 0·64-0·83), distant control (0·67, 0·59-0·75), and cancer mortality (0·76, 0·69-0·84). INTERPRETATION: Our results confirm that the addition of concomitant chemotherapy to radiotherapy significantly improves survival in patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. To our knowledge, this is the first analysis that examines the effect of concomitant chemotherapy with and without adjuvant chemotherapy as distinct groups. Further studies on the specific benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy after concomitant chemoradiotherapy are needed. FUNDING: French Ministry of Health (Programme d'actions intégrées de recherche VADS), Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer, and Sanofi-Aventis.

Role of brachytherapy in the treatment of cancers of the anal canal. Long-term follow-up and multivariate analysis of a large monocentric retrospective series.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There are few data on long-term clinical results and tolerance of brachytherapy in anal canal cancer. We present one of the largest retrospective analyses of anal canal cancers treated with external beam radiotherapy with/without (±) chemotherapy followed by a brachytherapy boost. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of clinical results in terms of efficacy and toxicity. The impact of different clinical and therapeutic variables on these outcomes was studied. RESULTS: From May 1992 to December 2009, 209 patients received brachytherapy after external beam radiotherapy ± chemotherapy. Of these patients, 163 were stage II or stage IIIA (UICC 2002) and 58 were N1-3. According to age, ECOG performance status (PS), and comorbidities, patients received either radiotherapy alone (58/209) or radiochemotherapy (151/209). The median follow-up was 72.8 months. The 5- and 10-year local control rates were 78.6 and 73.9 %, respectively. Globally, severe acute and late G3-4 reactions (NCI-CTC scale v. 4.0) occurred in 11.2 and 6.3 % of patients, respectively. Univariate analysis showed the statistical impact of the pelvic treatment volume (p = 0.046) and of the total dose (p = 0.02) on the risk of severe acute and late toxicities, respectively. Only six patients required permanent colostomy because of severe late anorectal toxicities. CONCLUSION: After a long follow-up time, brachytherapy showed an acceptable toxicity profile and high local control rates in patients with anal canal cancer.

Adjuvant radiotherapy for gastric carcinoma: 10 years follow-up of 244 cases from a single institution.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) of gastric carcinoma improves survival among high- risk patients. This study was undertaken to analyse long-term survival probability and the impact of certain covariates on the survival outcome in affected individuals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2000 and December 2005, 244 patients with gastric cancer underwent adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) in our institution. Data were retrieved retrospectively from patient files and analysed with SPSS version 21.0. RESULTS: A total of 244 cases, with a male to female ratio of 2.2:1, were enrolled in the study. The median age of the patients was 52 years (range, 20-78 years). Surgical margin status was positive or close in 72 (33%) out of 220 patients. Postoperative adjuvant RT dose was 46 Gy. Median follow-up was 99 months (range, 79-132 months) and 23 months (range, 2-155 months) for surviving patients and all patients, respectively. Actuarial overall survival (OS) probability for 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year was 79%, 37%, 24% and 16%, respectively. Actuarial progression free survival (PFS) probability was 69%, 34%, 23% and 16% in the same consecutive order. AJCC Stage I-II disease, subtotal gastrectomy and adjuvant CRT were significantly associated with improved OS and PFS in multivariate analyses. Surgical margin status or lymph node dissection type were not prognostic for survival. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative CRT should be considered for all patients with high risk of recurrence after gastrectomy. Beside well-known prognostic factors such as stage, lymph node status and concurrent chemotherapy, the type of gastrectomy was an important prognostic factor in our series. With our findings we add to the discussion on the definition of required surgical margin for subtotal gastrectomy. We consider that our observations in gastric cancer patients in our clinic can be useful in the future randomised trials to point the way to improved outcomes.

Two cilengitide regimens in combination with standard treatment for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma and unmethylated MGMT gene promoter: results of the open-label, controlled, randomized phase II CORE study.

BACKGROUND: Survival outcomes for patients with glioblastoma remain poor, particularly for patients with unmethylated O(6)-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) gene promoter. This phase II, randomized, open-label, multicenter trial investigated the efficacy and safety of 2 dose regimens of the selective integrin inhibitor cilengitide combined with standard chemoradiotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma and an unmethylated MGMT promoter. METHODS: Overall, 265 patients were randomized (1:1:1) to standard cilengitide (2000 mg 2×/wk; n = 88), intensive cilengitide (2000 mg 5×/wk during wk 1-6, thereafter 2×/wk; n = 88), or a control arm (chemoradiotherapy alone; n = 89). Cilengitide was administered intravenously in combination with daily temozolomide (TMZ) and concomitant radiotherapy (RT; wk 1-6), followed by TMZ maintenance therapy (TMZ/RT→TMZ). The primary endpoint was overall survival; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, pharmacokinetics, and safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Median overall survival was 16.3 months in the standard cilengitide arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.686; 95% CI: 0.484, 0.972; P = .032) and 14.5 months in the intensive cilengitide arm (HR, 0.858; 95% CI: 0.612, 1.204; P = .3771) versus 13.4 months in the control arm. Median progression-free survival assessed per independent review committee was 5.6 months (HR, 0.822; 95% CI: 0.595, 1.134) and 5.9 months (HR, 0.794; 95% CI: 0.575, 1.096) in the standard and intensive cilengitide arms, respectively, versus 4.1 months in the control arm. Cilengitide was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Standard and intensive cilengitide dose regimens were well tolerated in combination with TMZ/RT→TMZ. Inconsistent overall survival and progression-free survival outcomes and a limited sample size did not allow firm conclusions regarding clinical efficacy in this exploratory phase II study.

Surgery Versus Radiotherapy for Early Oropharyngeal Tumors: a Never-Ending Debate.

OPINION STATEMENT: Therapeutic options for early stage oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) include both surgery and radiotherapy as single treatment modality. Retrospective data reporting on locoregional control and survival rates in early stage OPSCC have shown equivalent efficacy, although no prospective randomized trials are available to confirm these results. Given the assumed comparable oncologic results in both groups, complication rates and functional outcomes associated with each modality play a major role when making treatment decisions. Radiotherapy is used preferentially in many centers because few trials have reported higher complication rates in surgical patients. However, these adverse effects were mainly due to traditional invasive open surgical approaches used for access to the oropharynx. In order to decrease the morbidity of these techniques, transoral surgical (TOS) approaches have been developed progressively. They include transoral laser microsurgery (TLM), transoral robotic surgery (TORS), and conventional transoral techniques. Meta-analysis comparing these new approaches with radiotherapy showed equivalent efficacy in terms of oncologic results. Furthermore, studies reporting on functional outcomes in patients undergoing TOS for OPSCC did not show major long-term functional impairment following treatment. Given the abovementioned statements, it is our practice to treat early stage OPSCC as follows: whenever a single modality treatment seems feasible (T1-2 and N0-1), we advocate TOS resection of the primary tumor associated with selective neck dissection, as indicated. In our opinion, the advantage of this approach relies on the possibility to stratify the risk of disease progression based on the pathological features of the tumor. Depending on the results, adjuvant radiation treatment or chemoradiotherapy can be chosen for high-risk patients. For tumors without adverse features, no adjuvant treatment is given. This approach also allows prevention of potential radiation-induced late complications while keeping radiotherapy as an option for any second primary lesions whenever needed. Definitive radiotherapy is generally reserved for selected patients with specific anatomical location associated with poor functional outcome following surgery, such as tumor of the soft palate, or for patients with severe comorbidities that do not allow surgical treatment.

Induction chemoradiation in stage IIIA/N2 non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase 3 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: One of the standard options in the treatment of stage IIIA/N2 non-small-cell lung cancer is neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery. We did a randomised trial to investigate whether the addition of neoadjuvant radiotherapy improves outcomes. METHODS: We enrolled patients in 23 centres in Switzerland, Germany and Serbia. Eligible patients had pathologically proven, stage IIIA/N2 non-small-cell lung cancer and were randomly assigned to treatment groups in a 1:1 ratio. Those in the chemoradiotherapy group received three cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (100 mg/m(2) cisplatin and 85 mg/m(2) docetaxel) followed by radiotherapy with 44 Gy in 22 fractions over 3 weeks, and those in the control group received neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone. All patients were scheduled to undergo surgery. Randomisation was stratified by centre, mediastinal bulk (less than 5 cm vs 5 cm or more), and weight loss (5% or more vs less than 5% in the previous 6 months). The primary endpoint was event-free survival. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00030771. FINDINGS: From 2001 to 2012, 232 patients were enrolled, of whom 117 were allocated to the chemoradiotherapy group and 115 to the chemotherapy group. Median event-free survival was similar in the two groups at 12·8 months (95% CI 9·7-22·9) in the chemoradiotherapy group and 11·6 months (8·4-15·2) in the chemotherapy group (p=0·67). Median overall survival was 37·1 months (95% CI 22·6-50·0) with radiotherapy, compared with 26·2 months (19·9-52·1) in the control group. Chemotherapy-related toxic effects were reported in most patients, but 91% of patients completed three cycles of chemotherapy. Radiotherapy-induced grade 3 dysphagia was seen in seven (7%) patients. Three patients died in the control group within 30 days after surgery. INTERPRETATION: Radiotherapy did not add any benefit to induction chemotherapy followed by surgery. We suggest that one definitive local treatment modality combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy is adequate to treat resectable stage IIIA/N2 non-small-cell lung cancer. FUNDING: Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI), Swiss Cancer League, and Sanofi.

Maintenance Therapy With Tumor-Treating Fields Plus Temozolomide vs Temozolomide Alone for Glioblastoma: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Glioblastoma is the most devastating primary malignancy of the central nervous system in adults. Most patients die within 1 to 2 years of diagnosis. Tumor-treating fields (TTFields) are a locoregionally delivered antimitotic treatment that interferes with cell division and organelle assembly. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of TTFields used in combination with temozolomide maintenance treatment after chemoradiation therapy for patients with glioblastoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: After completion of chemoradiotherapy, patients with glioblastoma were randomized (2:1) to receive maintenance treatment with either TTFields plus temozolomide (n = 466) or temozolomide alone (n = 229) (median time from diagnosis to randomization, 3.8 months in both groups). The study enrolled 695 of the planned 700 patients between July 2009 and November 2014 at 83 centers in the United States, Canada, Europe, Israel, and South Korea. The trial was terminated based on the results of this planned interim analysis. INTERVENTIONS: Treatment with TTFields was delivered continuously (>18 hours/day) via 4 transducer arrays placed on the shaved scalp and connected to a portable medical device. Temozolomide (150-200 mg/m2/d) was given for 5 days of each 28-day cycle. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was progression-free survival in the intent-to-treat population (significance threshold of .01) with overall survival in the per-protocol population (n = 280) as a powered secondary end point (significance threshold of .006). This prespecified interim analysis was to be conducted on the first 315 patients after at least 18 months of follow-up. RESULTS: The interim analysis included 210 patients randomized to TTFields plus temozolomide and 105 randomized to temozolomide alone, and was conducted at a median follow-up of 38 months (range, 18-60 months). Median progression-free survival in the intent-to-treat population was 7.1 months (95% CI, 5.9-8.2 months) in the TTFields plus temozolomide group and 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.3-5.2 months) in the temozolomide alone group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62 [98.7% CI, 0.43-0.89]; P = .001). Median overall survival in the per-protocol population was 20.5 months (95% CI, 16.7-25.0 months) in the TTFields plus temozolomide group (n = 196) and 15.6 months (95% CI, 13.3-19.1 months) in the temozolomide alone group (n = 84) (HR, 0.64 [99.4% CI, 0.42-0.98]; P = .004). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this interim analysis of 315 patients with glioblastoma who had completed standard chemoradiation therapy, adding TTFields to maintenance temozolomide chemotherapy significantly prolonged progression-free and overall survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00916409.

Final results of the SAKK 16/00 trial: a randomized phase III trial comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiation to chemotherapy alone in stage IIIA/N2 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Aim: One standard option in the treatment of stage IIIA/N2 NSCLC is neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery. We investigated in a randomized trial whether the addition of neoadjuvant radiotherapy would improve the outcome. Here we present the final results of this study. Methods: Patients (pts.) with pathologically proven, resectable stage IIIA/N2 NSCLC, performance status 0-1, and adequate organ function were randomized 1:1 to chemoradiation (CRT) with 3 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cisplatin 100 mg/m2 and docetaxel 85 mg/m2 d1, q3weeks) followed by accelerated concomitant boost radiotherapy (RT) with 44 Gy in 22 fractions in 3 weeks, or neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone (CT), with subsequent surgery for all pts. The primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS). Results: 232 pts. were randomized in 23 centers, the median follow-up was 53 months. Two thirds were men, median age was 60 years (range 37-76). Histology was squamous cell in 33%, adenocarcinoma in 43%. Response rate to CRT was 61% vs. 44% with CT. 85% of all pts. underwent surgery, 30-day postoperative mortality was 1%. The rate of complete resection was 91% (CRT) vs. 81% (CT) and the pathological complete remission (pCR) rate was 16% vs. 12%. The median EFS was 13.1 months (95% CI 9.9 - 23.5) for the CRT group vs. 11.8 months (95% CI 8.4 - 15.2) in the CT arm (p 0.665). The median overall survival (OS) with CRT was 37.1 months (95% CI 22.6 -50), with CT 26.1 months ( 95% CI 26.1 - 52.1, p 0.938). The local failure rate was 23% in both arms. In the CT arm 12 pts. were given postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) for R1 resection, 6 pts. received PORT in violation of the protocol. Pts. with a pCR, mediastinal downstaging to ypN0/1 and complete resection had a better outcome. Toxicity of chemotherapy was substantial, especially febrile neutropenia was common, whereas RT was well tolerated. Conclusions: This is the first completed phase III trial to evaluate the role of induction chemoradiotherapy and surgery, in comparison to neoadjuvant CT alone followed by surgery. RT was active, it increased response, complete resection and pCR rates. However, this failed to translate into an improvement of local control, EFS or OS. Notably, surgery after induction treatment was safe, including pneumonectomy. The overall survival rates of our neoadjuvant regimen are very encouraging, especially for a multicenter setting. Disclosure: M. Pless: Advisory Board for Sanofi; R. Cathomas: Advisory Board Sanofi D.C. Betticher: Advisory Board Sanofi. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Trimodal therapy for invasive bladder cancer: is it really equal to radical cystectomy?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Trimodal therapy (TMT) is considered the most effective bladder-sparing approach for muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (MIBC) and an alternative to radical cystectomy. The purpose of this article was to review and summarize the current knowledge on the equivalence of TMT and radical cystectomy based on the recent literature. RECENT FINDINGS: TMT consists of a maximal transuretral resection of the bladder, followed by a concurrent radiotherapy and chemotherapy, limiting salvage radical cystectomy to nonresponder tumors or muscle-invasive recurrence. In large population studies, less than 6% of the patients with nonmetastatic MIBC receive a chemoradiation therapy and this rate is stable. A growing body of evidence exists that TMT provides good oncologic outcomes with low morbidity when compared with radical cystectomy. TMT requires, however, a close follow-up because of the high risk of local recurrence and salvage radical cystectomy in up to 30% of the patients. Salvage radical cystectomy can be performed with adequate results but does not offer the same opportunity of reconstruction and functional outcomes than primary radical cystectomy. SUMMARY: Although radical cystectomy is still the treatment of reference for most of the patients with localized MIBC, TMT represents a reasonable alternative in highly selected patients. Any firm conclusion on the equivalence or superiority of one treatment to the other is still limited by the lack of randomized controlled trials and the heterogeneity of the available literature. Future studies and multidisciplinary approach are mandatory to optimize the patient selection and regimen of TMT.

International comparison of the German evidence-based S3-guidelines on the diagnosis and multimodal treatment of early and locally advanced gastric cancer, including adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines are essential in implementing and maintaining nationwide stage-specific diagnostic and therapeutic standards. In 2011, the first German expert consensus guideline defined the evidence for diagnosis and treatment of early and locally advanced esophagogastric cancers. Here, we compare this guideline with other national guidelines as well as current literature. METHODS: The German S3-guideline used an approved development process with de novo literature research, international guideline adaptation, or good clinical practice. Other recent evidence-based national guidelines and current references were compared with German recommendations. RESULTS: In the German S3 and other Western guidelines, adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) are classified according to formerly defined AEG I-III subgroups due to the high surgical impact. To stage local disease, computed tomography of the chest and abdomen and endosonography are reinforced. In contrast, laparoscopy is optional for staging. Mucosal cancers (T1a) should be endoscopically resected "en-bloc" to allow complete histological evaluation of lateral and basal margins. For locally advanced cancers of the stomach or esophagogastric junction (≥T3N+), preferred treatment is preoperative and postoperative chemotherapy. Preoperative radiochemotherapy is an evidence-based alternative for large AEG type I-II tumors (≥T3N+). Additionally, some experts recommend treating T2 tumors with a similar approach, mainly because pretherapeutic staging is often considered to be unreliable. CONCLUSIONS: The German S3 guideline represents an up-to-date European position with regard to diagnosis, staging, and treatment recommendations for patients with locally advanced esophagogastric cancer. Effects of perioperative chemotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy are still to be investigated for adenocarcinoma of the cardia and the lower esophagus.

Prévalence du VPH dans le cancer ORL localement avancé et impact sur le pronostic et l'efficacité de la chimio-radiothérapie concomitante

Problématique : Bien que le tabac et l’alcool soient les facteurs causaux principaux des cancers épidermoïdes de l’oropharynx, le virus du papillome humain (VPH) serait responsable de l’augmentation récente de l’incidence de ces cancers, particulièrement chez les patients jeunes et/ou non-fumeurs. La prévalence du VPH à haut risque, essentiellement de type 16, est passée de 20% à plus de 60% au cours des vingt dernières années. Certaines études indiquent que les cancers VPH-positifs ont un meilleur pronostic que les VPH- négatifs, mais des données prospectives à cet égard sont rares dans la littérature, surtout pour les études de phase III avec stratification basée sur les risques. Hypothèses et objectifs : Il est présumé que la présence du VPH est un facteur de bon pronostic. L’étude vise à documenter la prévalence du VPH dans les cancers de l’oropharynx, et à établir son impact sur le pronostic, chez des patients traités avec un schéma thérapeutique incluant la chimio-radiothérapie. Méthodologie : Les tumeurs proviennent de cas traités au CHUM pour des cancers épidermoïdes de la sphère ORL à un stade localement avancé (III, IVA et IVB). Elles sont conservées dans une banque tumorale, et les données cliniques sur l’efficacité du traitement et les effets secondaires, recueillies prospectivement. La présence du VPH est établie par biologie moléculaire déterminant la présence du génome VPH et son génotype. Résultats: 255 spécimens ont été soumis au test de génotypage Linear Array HPV. Après amplification par PCR, de l’ADN viral a été détecté dans 175 (68.6%) échantillons tumoraux ; le VPH de type 16 était impliqué dans 133 cas (52.25 %). Conclusion: Une proportion grandissante de cancers ORL est liée au VPH. Notre étude confirme que la présence du VPH est fortement associée à une amélioration du pronostic chez les patients atteints de cancers ORL traités par chimio-radiothérapie, et devrait être un facteur de stratification dans les essais cliniques comprenant des cas de cancers ORL.

Resultados de la cirugía laparoscópica comparada con la cirugía abierta en el cáncer colorrectal. Revisión sistemática

Determinar el efecto de la cirugía laparoscópica versus cirugía abierta sobre la supervivencia en el manejo de pacientes del cáncer colorectal.

Outcome of superficial squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus: a clinicopathological study

PURPOSE: To analyze the clinicopathological features and outcome of patients with pathologically proven superficial squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus. METHODS: A total of 234 consecutive cases of esophageal carcinoma in a 15-year period were reviewed. RESULTS: Superficial esophageal cancer was found in five patients (2.1%). They were four men and one woman and the mean age was 52.5 years. Smoking and alcohol were the main risk factors. Achalasia due to Chagas disease occurred in one patient and a second primary tumor developed in the larynx in another patient. Four patients underwent esophagectomy and one patient received chemoradiotherapy. The histopathologic diagnosis was of squamous cell carcinoma in all cases. Intramucosal tumor (Tis) was identified in three cases and superficially invasive carcinoma in two cases. Four patients are free of disease with survival times of two, four, six and nine years. The patient who developed laryngeal cancer died six years after esophagectomy. CONCLUSION: Long-term survival in patients with esophageal cancer is related to early diagnosis. Therefore, a less aggressive surgical approach, such as endoscopic resection, may be a good option for these patients, if depth of tumor invasion can be accurately predicted by the new imaging tools.