Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is the standard treatment for locally advanced, high-risk breast cancer. Pathological complete response (pCR) improves survival. Peripheral blood-derived indices reflecting systemic inflammation and nutritional status have long been used as predictive and prognostic markers in solid malignancies. This retrospective study investigates whether eight commonly used indices in patients receiving NACT affect pCR and survival. This study includes 624 locally advanced breast cancer patients who received NACT. The biomarker indices were calculated from peripheral blood samples taken two weeks before starting chemotherapy. The indices’ optimal cut-off values were determined using ROC Curve analysis. During a median follow-up period of 42 months, recurrence was detected in 146 patients, and 75 patients died. pCR was observed in 166 patients (26.6%). In univariate analysis, NLR, PLR, SII, PNI, HALP, and HRR were statistically significantly associated (p = 0.00; p = 0.03; p = 0.03; p = 0.02; p = 0.00; p = 0.02 respectively), but in multivariate analysis, only NLR was significantly predictive for pCR(p = 0.04). In multivariate analysis, the HGB/RDW score significantly predicted DFS(p = 0.04). The PNI score was identified as a marker predicting survival for both OS and PFS (p = 0.01, p = 0.01, respectively). In conclusion, peripheral blood-derived indices have prognostic and predictive values on pCR and survival. However, further studies are needed to validate our findings.

Background/Objectives: Nivolumab has been shown to be an effective treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC); however, patient responses vary considerably. The objective of this study is to evaluate the prognostic value of the C-PLAN index in predicting survival outcomes for patients with mRCC treated with nivolumab. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 81 mRCC patients previously treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors who subsequently received nivolumab. The C-PLAN index, which includes C-reactive protein, performance status, lactate dehydrogenase, albumin, and derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, was used to classify patients into “good” and “poor” prognostic groups. Results: The median overall survival (OS) was 22 months, and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.7 months. Patients in the “poor” C-PLAN group exhibited significantly shorter OS and PFS than those in the “good” group (median OS: 13 vs. 31 months, p = 0.003; median PFS: 3 vs. 10 months, p = 0.007). The C-PLAN index was identified as an independent predictor of both OS (HR = 1.19, 95% CI: 1.11–3.43, p = 0.020) and PFS (HR = 1.71, 95% CI: 1.04–2.78, p = 0.032) in multivariate analysis. Conclusions: These findings suggest that the C-PLAN index may serve as a valuable prognostic tool, offering insights into survival outcomes for patients undergoing nivolumab therapy. Further prospective and multicenter studies are warranted to validate its clinical utility.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have significantly improved the five-year survival rate for advanced melanoma. However, many patients exhibit resistance to ICI therapy. This study evaluated the efficacy and prognostic factors of anti-PD-1 (Group A) and nivolumab–ipilimumab (Group B) therapy in patients with advanced melanoma who were resistant to prior ICI therapy. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 56 patients with advanced melanoma who had previously shown resistance to ICI therapy. In the Group A (who have previously shown resistance to anti-CTLA-4, n = 28), the objective response rate (ORR) was 42.9%, with a disease control rate (DCR) of 53%. In the Group B (previously shown resistance to anti-PD-1, n = 28), the ORR was 17.9%, and the DCR was 25%. The ORR was lower in two subgroups: patients who showed progression or relapse in the the initial radiological assessment of prior ICI therapy (ORR 10.5%) and patients who had previously received ICI in the adjuvant setting (ORR 8.3%). A Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) score of 2–3 was a predictor of OS in both groups (Group A: HR 3.789, 95% CI 1.356–10.589, p = 0.011; Group B: HR 4.281, 95% CI 1.490–12.300, p = 0.007) and for PFS in the Group B (HR 3.167, 95% CI 1.062–9.442, p = 0.039). Anti-PD-1 therapy demonstrated efficacy following resistance to anti-CTLA-4, whereas combination ICI therapy showed lower response rates in patients resistant to anti-PD-1. Further studies are needed to confirm the RMH scores and other prognostic markers and to evaluate subgroups with lower efficacy of nivolumab-ipilimumab therapy.

Background/Objectives: In the REGOMA trial, regorafenib demonstrated an overall survival advantage over lomustine, and it has become a recommended treatment for recurrent glioblastoma in guidelines. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of regorafenib as a third-line treatment for patients with recurrent glioblastoma who progressed while taking bevacizumab-based therapy. Methods: This retrospective, multicenter study in Turkey included 65 patients treated between 2021 and 2023 across 19 oncology centers. The main inclusion criteria were histologically confirmed isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-wildtype glioblastoma, progression after second-line bevacizumab-based treatment, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score of ≤2. Patients received regorafenib 160 mg once daily for the first 3 weeks of each 4-week cycle. Results: The median age of the patients was 53 years (18–67 years), with a median progression-free survival of 2.5 months (95% Confidence Interval: 2.23–2.75) and a median overall survival of 4.1 months (95% CI: 3.52–4.68). The median overall survival was improved in patients who received subsequent therapy after regorafenib treatment compared with those who did not (p = 0.022). Progression-free survival was longer in patients with ECOG 0–1 than in those with ECOG 2 (p = 0.042). The safety profile was consistent with that of the REGOMA trial, with no drug-related deaths observed. Conclusions: Regorafenib shows good efficacy and safety as a third-line treatment for recurrent glioblastoma after bevacizumab-based therapy. This study supports the use of regorafenib and emphasizes the need for further randomized studies to validate its role and optimize treatment strategies.