With advances in treatment, colorectal cancer (CRC) is being transformed from a deadly disease into an illness that is increasingly curable. With this transformation has come increased interest in the unique problems, risks, needs, and concerns of survivors who have completed treatment and are cancer-free. Research has shown that physical and mental quality of life for CRC survivors was inferior compared with age-matched individuals without cancer. Although issues and symptoms were most prominent during the first 3 years, long-term effects of treatment can persist and include fatigue, sleep difficulty, fear of recurrence, anxiety, depression, negative body image, sensory neuropathy, gastrointestinal problems, urinary incontinence, and sexual dysfunction. The unique challenges and issues of CRC survivors can and should be addressed by health care providers and the research community to ensure effective interventions and models of care to manage these problems. This article discusses what is known about the long-term effects of CRC treatment on quality of life, the care of survivors, and existing models of survivorship care.

Purpose: This randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase Ib/II study assessed durvalumab and tremelimumab in combination or as monotherapy for chemotherapy-refractory gastric cancer or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer.Patients and Methods: Second-line patients were randomized 2:2:1 to receive durvalumab plus tremelimumab (arm A), or durvalumab (arm B) or tremelimumab monotherapy (arm C), and third-line patients received durvalumab plus tremelimumab (arm D). A tumor-based IFNγ gene signature was prospectively evaluated as a potential predictive biomarker in second- and third-line patients receiving the combination (arm E). The coprimary endpoints were objective response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months.Results: A total of 113 patients were treated: 6 in phase Ib and 107 (arm A, 27; arm B, 24; arm C, 12; arm D, 25; arm E, 19) in phase II. Overall response rates were 7.4%, 0%, 8.3%, 4.0%, and 15.8% in the five arms, respectively. PFS rates at 6 months were 6.1%, 0%, 20%, 15%, and 0%, and 12-month overall survival rates were 37.0%, 4.6%, 22.9%, 38.8%, and NA, respectively. Treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events were reported in 17%, 4%, 42%, 16%, and 11% of patients, respectively.Conclusions: Response rates were low regardless of monotherapy or combination strategies. No new safety signals were identified. Including use of a tumor-based IFNγ signature and change in baseline and on-treatment circulating tumor DNA are clinically feasible and may be novel strategies to improve treatment response in this difficult-to-treat population.

Improvements in curative therapies and the advent of screening have led to increased numbers of non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) survivors. Most survivors have undergone invasive treatment (surgery, radiation therapy, and/or chemotherapy) and carry a higher comorbidity burden than survivors of other cancers. Overall quality of life (QOL) and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) suffer during the treatment phase, with the potential for long-term decline, and both clinical characteristics and treatment impact these measures. Physical and mental components of HRQOL seem to be most at risk for decline. The issues faced by survivors include physical symptoms such as respiratory issues, fatigue, hearing loss, neuropathy, and postsurgical pain; psychological distress leading to depression, financial issues, and poor compliance with recommended guidelines; and fear or risk of recurrence and secondary malignancies. This article summarizes the major issues faced by NSCLC survivors and suggests appropriate management. Future collaborative efforts are needed to further elucidate the complex issues that affect overall QOL and HRQOL in NSCLC survivors and to develop appropriate interventions in this large and diverse survivor population.

Advances in early detection and curative therapies have led to an increased number of cancer survivors over the last twenty years. With this population comes the need to evaluate the late and long term effects of cancer treatment and develop recommendations about how to optimally care for these survivors. Lifestyle factors (diet, body weight, physical activity, and smoking) have been linked to a higher risk of many medical comorbidities (cardiovascular, metabolic, etc.). There is increasing evidence linking these factors to the risk of developing cancer and likely cancer-related outcomes. This link has been studied extensively in common cancers like breast, colon, prostate, and lung cancers through observational studies and is now being prospectively evaluated in interventional studies. Realizing that survivors are highly motivated to improve their overall health after a diagnosis of cancer, healthy lifestyle recommendations from oncology providers can serve as a strong tool to motivate survivors to adopt health behavior changes. Our article aims to review the evidence that links lifestyle factors to cancer outcomes and provides clinical recommendations for cancer survivors.

Survivorship is a stage in the cancer journey like diagnosis and treatment, but it tends to be somewhat neglected in the quiet afterthoughts of treatment completion. Although cancer recurrence, second cancers, and late side effects of treatment are major concerns for survivors, survivors also may experience a variety of long-term physical and psychological sequelae of a cancer diagnosis and treatment. Oncology professionals may be ill-prepared to tackle these topics, and they have few guidelines for meeting these patient needs. In this article, Dr. Jennifer A. Ligibel and Dr. Crystal S. Denlinger present highlights from the inaugural NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology on survivorship care, focusing on the subtopics of exercise, cognitive function, immunization, and sexual function. They also discuss implementing new recommendations on survivorship assessment in the clinic.

Purpose: The recombinant fusion protein ipafricept blocks Wnt signaling, and in combination with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel caused tumor regression in xenografts. This phase Ib study evaluated the combination of ipafricept with nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine in patients with untreated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC). Patients and Methods: Dose escalation started with standard dose nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine and ipafricept (3.5 mg/kg days 1, 15). Because of fragility fractures seen with different anti-Wnt agents, following cohorts had ≥6 patients treated with ipafricept 3 to 5 mg/kg on day 1, and included bone marker monitoring and prophylactic bisphosphonates as indicated. On the basis of preclinical data, sequential dosing was evaluated in cohort 4 (ipafricept day 1 followed nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine day 3). Objectives included safety, MTD, recommended phase II dose, pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, pharmacodynamics, and efficacy. Results: A total of 26 patients were enrolled, five in cohort 1 and seven each in cohorts 2–4. ipafricept-related adverse events (AEs) of any grade included fatigue, nausea, vomiting, anorexia, and pyrexia. ipafricept-related AEs grade ≥3 included two events of aspartate aminotransferase elevation, and one each of nausea, rash, vomiting, and leucopenia. No dose-limiting toxicities or fragility fractures were observed. Nine patients (34.6%) had partial response, 12 (46.2%) stable disease as best response, with clinical benefit rate of 81%. Median progression-free survival was 5.9 m [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.4–18.4], median overall survival was 9.7 m (95% CI, 7.0–14). The study was terminated by the sponsor due to bone-related toxicity within this therapeutic program and concerns for commercial viability. One patient remains on therapy under compassionate use. Conclusions: Ipafricept can be administered with nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine with reasonable tolerance. Wnt pathway remains a therapeutic target of interest in mPDAC.