No abstract

BACKGROUND.The purpose of this study was to investigate whether tumor‐infiltrating immune cells in biopsy specimens can be used to predict the clinical outcome of stage IV nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.METHOD.The authors performed an immunohistochemical study to identify and count the number of CD68+ macrophages, c‐kit+ mast cells, and CD8+ T cells in both cancer nests and cancer stroma in pretreatment biopsy specimens obtained from 199 patients with stage IV NSCLC treated by chemotherapy, and then analyzed for correlations between the number of immune cells and clinical outcome, including chemotherapy response and prognosis.RESULTS.There was no correlation between the number of immune cells in either cancer nests or stroma and chemotherapy response. Patients with more tumor‐infiltrating macrophages in cancer nests than in cancer stroma (macrophages, nests > stroma) had significantly better survival than nests < stroma cases median survival time (MST 440 days vs 199 days; P < .0001). Patients with more tumor‐infiltrating CD8+ T cells in cancer nests than in cancer stroma (CD8+ T cells: nests > stroma) showed significantly better survival than in nests < stroma cases (MST 388 days vs 256 days; P = .0070). The proportion of tumor‐infiltrating macrophages or CD8+ T cells between cancer nests and stroma became independent prognostic factors in the multivariate analysis. Neither the number of mast cells in nests nor in stroma correlated with the clinical outcome.CONCLUSIONS.Evaluation of the numbers of macrophages and CD8+ T cells in cancer nests and stroma are useful biomarkers for predicting the prognosis of stage IV NSCLC patients treated with chemotherapy, but could fail to predict chemotherapy response. Cancer 2008. © 2008 American Cancer Society.

IMPORTANCEPatients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) have a median overall survival of less than 2 years. In a phase 2 study, an overall survival benefit in this population was observed with the addition of olaratumab to doxorubicin over doxorubicin alone.OBJECTIVE To determine the efficacy of doxorubicin plus olaratumab in patients with advanced/metastatic STS.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS ANNOUNCE was a confirmatory, phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial conducted at 110 sites in 25 countries from September 2015 to December 2018; the final date of follow-up was December 5, 2018. Eligible patients were anthracycline-naive adults with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic STS, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1, and cardiac ejection fraction of 50% or greater.INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive doxorubicin, 75 mg/m 2 (day 1), combined with olaratumab (n = 258), 20 mg/kg in cycle 1 and 15 mg/kg in subsequent cycles, or placebo (n = 251) on days 1 and 8 for up to 8 21-day cycles, followed by olaratumab/ placebo monotherapy.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Dual primary end points were overall survival with doxorubicin plus olaratumab vs doxorubicin plus placebo in total STS and leiomyosarcoma (LMS) populations. RESULTS Among the 509 patients randomized (mean age, 56.9 years; 58.2% women; 46.0% with LMS), all were included in the primary analysis and had a median length of follow-up of 31 months. No statistically significant difference in overall survival was observed between the doxorubicin plus olaratumab group vs the doxorubicin plus placebo group in either population (total STS: hazard ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.84-1.30], P = .69, median overall survival, 20.4 months vs 19.7 months; LMS: hazard ratio, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.69-1.31], P = .76, median overall survival, 21.6 months vs 21.9 months). Adverse events of grade 3 or greater reported in 15% or more of total patients with STS were neutropenia (46.3% vs 49.0%), leukopenia (23.3% vs 23.7%), and febrile neutropenia (17.5% vs 16.5%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this phase 3 clinical trial of patients with advanced STS, treatment with doxorubicin plus olaratumab vs doxorubicin plus placebo resulted in no significant difference in overall survival. The findings did not confirm the overall survival benefit observed in the phase 2 trial.

To define prognostic factors for breast cancer patients with brain metastases, compare their clinical courses and prognoses according to breast cancer subtypes, and analyze the causes of death in such patients. We retrospectively analyzed 1,466 patients diagnosed with brain metastases between April 1, 2001 and December 31, 2012, from 24 institutions of the Japan Clinical Oncology Group. Overall, 1,256 patients with brain metastases were included. The median overall survival (OS) was 8.7 months (95 % confidence interval [CI] 7.8-9.6 months). Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that patients diagnosed with brain metastasis within 6 months of metastatic breast cancer diagnoses, asymptomatic brain disease, or HER2-positive/estrogen receptor-positive tumors had increased OS. Median OS after the development of brain metastases was 9.3 months (95 % CI 7.2-11.3) for the luminal type, 16.5 months (95 % CI 11.9-21.1) for the luminal-HER2 type, 11.5 months (95 % CI 9.1-13.8) for the HER2 type, and 4.9 months (95 % CI 3.9-5.9) for the triple-negative type. Luminal-HER2 type patients had significantly longer OS than patients with the luminal type (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.50, P < 0.0001) and triple-negative type (HR = 1.97, P < 0.0001); no significant differences were noted compared to HER2-type patients (HR = 1.19, P = 0.117). The prognosis and clinical course of patients with brain metastasis from breast cancer before and after developing brain metastases vary according to subtype. Focusing on the subtypes of breast cancer can optimize the prevention, early detection, and improved treatment of brain metastases.