Neoadjuvant treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Whom, when and how.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), which is notorious for its aggressiveness and poor prognosis, remains an area of great unmet medical need, with a 5-year survival rate of 10% - the lowest of all solid tumours. At diagnosis, only 20% of patients have resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC) or borderline RPC (BRPC) disease, while 80% of patients have unresectable tumours that are locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) or have distant metastases. Nearly 60% of patients who undergo upfront surgery for RPC are unable to receive adequate adjuvant chemotherapy (CHT) because of postoperative complications and early cancer recurrence. An important paradigm shift to achieve better outcomes has been the sequence of therapy, with neoadjuvant CHT preceding surgery. Three surgical stages have emerged for the preoperative assessment of nonmetastatic pancreatic cancers: RPC, BRPC, and LAPC. The main goal of neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) is to improve postoperative outcomes through enhanced selection of candidates for curative-intent surgery by identifying patients with aggressive or metastatic disease during initial CHT, reducing tumour volume before surgery to improve the rate of margin-negative resection (R0 resection, a microscopic margin-negative resection), reducing the rate of positive lymph node occurrence at surgery, providing early treatment of occult micrometastatic disease, and assessing tumour chemosensitivity and tolerance to treatment as potential surgical criteria. In this editorial, we summarize evidence concerning NAT of PDAC, providing insights into future practice and study design. Future research is needed to establish predictive biomarkers, measures of therapeutic response, and multidisciplinary strategies to improve patient-centered outcomes.

Dynamic monitoring of carcinoembryonic antigen, CA19-9 and inflammation-based indices in patients with advanced colorectal cancer undergoing chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The roles of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen (CA19-9) in monitoring the patient response to chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are not clearly defined, and inflammatory indices, including the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and systemic immune-inflammation index (SII), have been sparsely investigated for this purpose. AIM: To aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between the kinetics of CEA, CA19-9, NLR, LMR, PLR and SII in serum and patient response to chemotherapy estimated by computed tomography (CT) in patients with unresectable mCRC. METHODS: Patients with mCRC treated with a 1st-line and 2nd-line chemotherapy underwent at least 3 whole-body spiral CT scans during response monitoring according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumour 1.1 (RECIST 1.1), and simultaneous determination of CEA, CA19-9, neutrophil, lymphocyte, platelet and monocyte levels was performed. The kinetics of changes in the tumour markers and inflammatory indices were calculated as the percentage change from baseline or nadir, while receiver operating characteristic curves were drawn to select the thresholds to define patients with progressive or responsive disease with the highest sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp). The correlation of tumour marker kinetics with inflammatory index changes and RECIST response was determined by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis and the clinical utility index (CUI). RESULTS: A total of 102 patients with mCRC treated with chemotherapy were included. Progressive disease (PD), defined as a CEA increase of 25.52%, resulted in an Se of 80.3%, an Sp of 84%, a good CUI negative [CUI (Ve-)] value of 0.75 and a good fraction correct (FC) value of 81.2; at a CEA cut-off of -60.85% with an Se of 100% and an Sp of 35.7% for PD, CT could be avoided in 25.49% of patients. The 21.49% CA19-9 cut-off for PD had an Se of 66.5%, an Sp of 87.4%, an acceptable CUI (Ve-) value of 0.65 and an acceptable FC value of 75. An NLR increase of 11.5% for PD had an Se of 67% and an Sp of 66%; a PLR increase of 5.9% had an Se of 53% and an Sp of 69%; an SII increase above -6.04% had an Se of 72% and an Sp of 63%; and all had acceptable CUI (Ve-) values at 0.55. In the univariate logistic regression analysis, CEA (P < 0.001), CA19-9 (P < 0.05), NLR (P < 0.05), PLR (P < 0.05) and SII (P < 0.05) were important predictors of tumour progression, but in the multivariate logistic regression analysis, CEA was the only independent predictor of PD (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: CEA is a useful marker for monitoring the chemotherapy response of patients with unresectable mCRC and could replace a quarter of CT examinations. CA19-9 has poorer diagnostic characteristics than CEA but could be useful in some clinical circumstances, particularly when CEA is not increased. Dynamic changes in the inflammatory indices NLR, PLR and SII could be promising for further investigation as markers of the chemotherapy response.

Namodenoson in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Child-Pugh B Cirrhosis: Randomized Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial.

Namodenoson, an A3 adenosine-receptor agonist, showed promising results in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and moderate hepatic dysfunction (Child-Pugh B; CPB) in a phase I/II clinical study. This phase II study investigated namodenoson as second-line therapy in such patients. Patients were randomized 2:1 to twice a day (BID) namodenoson (25 mg; n = 50) or placebo (n = 28). The primary endpoint (overall survival [OS]) was not met. Median OS was 4.1/4.3 months for namodenoson/placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-1.38; p = 0.46). Pre-planned subgroup analysis of CPB7 patients (34 namodenoson-treated, 22 placebo-treated) showed a nonsignificant improvement in OS/progression-free survival (PFS). OS: 6.9 versus 4.3 months; HR, 0.81; 95% CI: 0.45-1.43, p = 0.46. PFS: 3.5 versus 1.9 months; HR, 0.89; 95% CI: 0.51-1.55, p = 0.67 (log-rank test). The difference in 12-month OS was significant (44% versus 18%, p = 0.028). Response rates were determined in patients for whom ≥ 1 assessment post-baseline was available (34 namodenoson-treated, 21 placebo-treated). Partial response was achieved by 3/34 (8.8%) and 0/21 (0%) patients, respectively. Namodenoson was well-tolerated, with a safety profile comparable to that of the placebo group. No treatment-related deaths were reported; no patients withdrew due to toxicity. In conclusion, namodenoson demonstrated a favorable safety profile and a preliminary efficacy signal in HCC CPB.

Antiplatelet agents'-ticagrelol and eptifibatide-safety in experimental colitis in mice.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate the side effects of two antiplatelet agents - ticagrelor and eptifibatide - in mice with experimentally-induced inflammatory bowel disease. METHODS AND MATERIAL: This study was designed as a controlled, animal, drug safety investigation. C57Bl/6 mice were used to establish the ulcerative colitis model by exposure to dextran sulfate sodium (DSS), and divided into three experimental groups: eptifibatide-treated (150 µg/day intraperitoneally; n = 10), ticagrelol-treated (1 mg/day via gastric tube; n = 10), and DSS-control (plain drinking water; n = 10). An unmodeled non-DSS group served as the experimental control. Complete blood count was taken for all mice at baseline (day 0, treatment initiation) and after four days of treatment. On day 4, all animals were sacrificed for autopsy. The primary outcome measure was bleeding, and the secondary outcomes were change in platelet count, hemoglobin level, and hematocrit level. RESULTS: Neither ticagrelor nor eptifibatide treatment produced a significant effect on DSS colitis mice for the safety parameters measured. Platelet count and hemoglobin and hematocrit levels were statistically similar between the three DSS groups and the non-DSS control group (P > 0.05). Autopsy found no evidence of recent bleeding in liver, spleen, central nervous system or serous cavities. CONCLUSION: The antiplatelet agents ticagrelor and eptifibatide were safe in DSS colitis mice, suggesting their potential in humans suffering from ulcerative colitis, and supporting future safety studies.

Phase I/II trial of pimasertib plus gemcitabine in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

The selective MEK1/2 inhibitor pimasertib has shown anti-tumour activity in a pancreatic tumour model. This phase I/II, two-part trial was conducted in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPaCa) (NCT01016483). In the phase I part, oral pimasertib was given once daily discontinuously (5 days on/2 days off treatment) or twice daily continuously (n = 53) combined with weekly gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2 ) in 28-day cycles to identify the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of pimasertib. In the phase II part, patients were randomised to pimasertib (RP2D) or placebo plus weekly gemcitabine (n = 88) to investigate progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. The RP2D was determined to be 60 mg BID. PFS and OS outcomes did not indicate any treatment benefit for pimasertib over placebo in combination with gemcitabine (median PFS 3.7 and 2.8 months, respectively, HR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.58-1.42: median OS 7.3 vs. 7.6 months, respectively). KRAS status did not influence PFS or OS. The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events was 91.1% and 85.7% for pimasertib/gemcitabine and placebo/gemcitabine respectively, but there was a higher incidence of ocular events with pimasertib/gemcitabine (28.9% vs. 4.8% for placebo/gemcitabine). In conclusion, no clinical benefit was observed with first-line pimasertib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with mPaCa.

Final Analysis of Outcomes and RAS/BRAF Status in a Randomized Phase 3 Study of Panitumumab and Best Supportive Care in Chemorefractory Wild Type KRAS Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Tumor rat sarcoma gene (RAS) status is a negative predictive biomarker for anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We analyzed outcomes according to RAS and v-Raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B (BRAF) mutational status, and evaluated early tumor shrinkage (ETS) and depth of response (DpR) for patients with wild type RAS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with confirmed metastatic colon or rectum adenocarcinoma, wild type Kristen rat sarcoma gene tumor exon 2 status, clinical/radiologic disease progression or toxicity during irinotecan or oxaliplatin treatment, and no previous anti-EGFR therapy were randomized 1:1 to receive best supportive care (BSC) with or without panitumumab (6.0 mg/kg, intravenously, on day 1 of each 14-day cycle) in this open-label, multicenter, phase III study (20100007). RAS and BRAF mutation status were determined using Sanger sequencing. ETS was evaluated as maximum percentage change from baseline to week 8; DpR was calculated as the percentage change for tumor shrinkage at nadir versus baseline. RESULTS: Overall, 270 patients had RAS wild type mCRC (panitumumab with BSC, n = 142; BSC, n = 128). For patients with wild type RAS tumors, median overall survival (OS; hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; P = .015) and progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 0.45; P < .0001) were improved with panitumumab with BSC versus BSC. Similar improvements were seen for patients with wild type RAS, and wild type BRAF tumors (OS: HR, 0.75; P = .04; PFS: HR, 0.45; P < .0001). Median DpR was 16.9% for the evaluable panitumumab with BSC wild type RAS population. Overall, 69.5% experienced any type of tumor shrinkage at week 8; 38.2% experienced ≥ 20% shrinkage. Similar improvements in OS and PFS were seen with stratification according to ETS. CONCLUSION: This analysis showed that panitumumab improved outcomes in wild type RAS mCRC and indicated that ETS and DpR could be used as additional efficacy markers.

Persistent prevention of oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neuropathy using calmangafodipir (PledOx®): a placebo-controlled randomised phase II study (PLIANT).

PURPOSE: Oxaliplatin causes disabling acute and chronic peripheral neuropathy. We explored the preventive effects of calmangafodipir, mimicking the mitochondrial enzyme manganese superoxide dismutase, thereby protecting cells from oxidative stress, in a placebo-controlled, double-blinded randomised phase II study (ClinicalTrials.gov.NCT01619423) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PATIENT AND METHODS: mCRC patients treated with modified FOLFOX-6 (folinic acid 200 mg/m2, 5-fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m2, oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 and 5-fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 continuous infusion for 46 h) every fortnight for 8 cycles in first or second line were eligible. Calmangafodipir was given in a phase I dose-finding and in a phase II placebo-controlled study, as a 5-min infusion 10 min prior to oxaliplatin. Neurotoxicity was evaluated by the physician using the Oxaliplatin Sanofi Specific Scale and by the patient using the cold allodynia test and the Leonard scale. RESULTS: Eleven patients were included in phase I without any detectable toxicity to calmangafodipir. In the phase II study, 173 patients were randomised to placebo (n = 60), calmangafodipir 2 µmol/kg (n = 57) and calmangafodipir 5 µmol/kg (n = 45, initially 10 µmol/kg, n = 11). Calmangafodipir-treated patients (all three doses pooled) had less physician graded neurotoxicity (odds ratio (90% confidence interval one-sided upper level) 0.62(1.15), p = .16), significantly less problems with cold allodynia (mean 1.6 versus 2.3, p < .05) and significantly fewer sensory symptoms in the Leonard scale (cycle 1-8 mean 1.9 versus 3.0, p < .05 and during follow-up after 3 and 6 months, mean 3.5 versus 7.3, p < .01). Response rate, progression-free and overall survival did not differ among groups. CONCLUSIONS: Calmangafodipir at a dose of 5 µmol/kg appears to prevent the development of oxaliplatin-induced acute and delayed CIPN without apparent influence on tumour outcomes.

A phase 3 trial evaluating panitumumab plus best supportive care vs best supportive care in chemorefractory wild-type KRAS or RAS metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the treatment effect of panitumumab plus best supportive care (BSC) vs BSC on overall survival (OS) in patients with chemorefractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and report the first prospective extended RAS analysis in a phase 3 trial. METHODS: Patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC were randomised 1 : 1 to panitumumab (6 mg kg-1 Q2W) plus BSC or BSC. On-study crossover was prohibited. RAS mutation status was determined by central laboratory testing. The primary endpoint was OS in wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC; OS in wild-type RAS mCRC (KRAS and NRAS exons 2, 3, and 4) was a secondary endpoint. RESULTS: Three hundred seventy seven patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC were randomised. Median OS was 10.0 months with panitumumab plus BSC vs 7.4 months with BSC (HR=0.73; 95% CI=0.57-0.93; P=0.0096). RAS ascertainment was 86%. In wild-type RAS mCRC, median OS for panitumumab plus BSC was 10.0 vs 6.9 months for BSC (HR=0.70; 95% CI=0.53-0.93; P=0.0135). Patients with RAS mutations did not benefit from panitumumab (OS HR=0.99; 95% CI=0.49-2.00). No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Panitumumab significantly improved OS in wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC. The effect was more pronounced in wild-type RAS mCRC, validating previous retrospective analyses.

Clamp-crushing vs. radiofrequency-assisted liver resection:changes in liver function tests.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Liver resection is the gold standard in managing patients with metastatic or primary liver cancer. The aim of our study was to compare the traditional clamp-crushing technique to the radiofrequency- assisted liver resection technique in terms of postoperative liver function. METHODOLOGY: Liver function was evaluated preoperatively and on postoperative days 3 and 7. Liver synthetic function parameters (serum albumin level, prothrombin time and international normalized ratio), markers of hepatic injury and necrosis (serum alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase and total bilirubin level) and microsomal activity (quantitative lidocaine test) were compared. RESULTS: Forty three patients completed the study (14 had clamp-crushing and 29 had radiofrequency assisted liver resection). The groups did not differ in demographic characteristics, pre-operative liver function, operative time and perioperative transfusion rate. In postoperative period, there were similar changes in monitored parameters in both groups except albumin levels, that were higher in radiofrequency-assisted liver resection group (p=0.047). CONCLUSIONS: Both, traditional clamp-crushing technique and radiofrequency assisted liver resection technique, result in similar postoperative changes of most monitored liver function parameters.

Capecitabine cardiotoxicity--case reports and literature review.

This study presents 3 case reports of patients who experienced anginous pain during treatment with capecitabine. The interruption of capecitabine and sublingual or intravenous nitroglycerine treatment lead to recovery. Rechallenge of capecitabine with dose reduction of 30% lead to repeated anginous pain in 2 patients. Treatment with capecitabine had been replaced with weekly bolus 5FU-LV, without further cardiotoxicity. The literature contains data from about 50 patients who experienced cardiotoxicity during capecitabine treatment. The most frequent manifestations of capecitabine cardiotoxicity included: anginous pain in 38/53 (71.7%), arrhythmia in 6/53 (11.3%), myocardial infarction in 6/53 (11.3%). Cardiotoxicity of capecitabine lead to death in 6/53 (11.3%) patients. Risk factors for cardiotoxicity are associated with the grade 4 and the fatal outcome of cardiotoxicity (p = 0.035, p = 0.015), but not with the symptom recurrence upon capecitabine rechallenge (p = 0.18). The combination chemotherapy regimens are associated with the grade 4 of cardiotoxicity (p = 0.048), but not with the fatal outcome (p = 0.3). Rechallenge of capecitabine lead to symptoms recurrence in 10/16 patients. Neither the dose reduction of capecitabine (p = 0.18) nor the additional medical prophylaxis (p = 0.37) were important for the outcome of capecitabine rechallenge.

Anti Helicobacter pylori IgG and IgA response in patients with gastric cancer and chronic gastritis.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Immune response against Helicobacter pylori is important for the course and outcome of infection. We conducted study looking for the difference in anti H. pylori IgG and IgA between patients with intestinal type of gastric cancer, superficial and atrophic gastritis. METHODOLOGY: For this study, 133 patients infected with H. pylori were enrolled: 50 with superficial gastritis, 42 with atrophic gastritis and 41 with gastric cancer. Anti H. pylori IgG and IgA ELISA tests were performed. The difference in antibody titers of IgG and IgA, frequency of IgA > IgG ratio and combination of low IgG and IgA > IgG ratio were analyzed. RESULTS: The patients with gastritis had higher titer of IgG that the patients with gastric cancer (p < 0.01). The patients with superficial gastritis had higher titer of IgA than the patients with gastric cancer (p < 0.05). IgA > IgG ratio is more frequent in patients with gastric cancer than in the patients with superficial gastritis (p < 0.01). Low IgG and IgA > IgG is more frequent in the patients with gastric cancer than in the patients with gastritis (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The patients with gastric cancer elicit different anti H. pylori IgG and IgA response than the patients with superficial and atrophic gastritis. Low IgG and IgA predominance seems characteristic for gastric cancer.

Radiation-induced rectal ulcer--prognostic factors and medical treatment.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: We conducted this study in order to investigate prognostic factors, and the difference of efficacy of three medical regimens, in the treatment of radiation-induced rectal ulcer. METHODOLOGY: We enrolled 38 pts, with different ages, the free interval from radiation to the appearance of symptoms, and the rectal ulcer size. Medical regimens were 1) sucralfate enema, 2) salasopyrine + hydrocortisone enemas, 3) combination of regimens. We analyzed the difference of frequency of ulcer healing and the time necessary for ulcer healing, between the patients in the different groups. RESULTS: The patients with late appearance of symptoms had significantly shorter time to ulcer healing than the patients with early appearance of symptoms (p=0.032). The patients who received sucralfate alone significantly more frequently achieved ulcer healing, than the patients with salasopyrine and hydrocortisone (p=0.046), and combination regimen (p=0.003). The patients with sucralfate (p=0.009), and with salasopyrine + hydrocortisone (p=0.0387), demanded significantly shorter time to ulcer healing than the patients who received combination treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The free interval may be an important prognostic factor, in patients with rectal ulcer concerning treatment duration. It seems that treatment with sucralfate alone may be the treatment of choice, for patients with radiation-induced rectal ulcer.

Systemic humoral anti-Helicobacter pylori immune response in patients with gastric malignancies and benign gastroduodenal disease.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Helicobacter pylori elicits a strong local and systemic humoral immune response, but it is not able to eliminate bacteria. Immune response may be important for the course of infection that may lead to different gastroduodenal disease. In order to investigate differences in systemic humoral immune response between patients with different gastroduodenal diseases, we conducted clinical and serological studies. METHODOLOGY: From 1999 to 2001 we enrolled 80 patients with dyspeptic symptoms: 26 with gastritis, 12 with duodenal ulcer, 29 with gastric cancer and 13 with gastric lymphoma. In all patients during diagnostic work-up we performed ELISA test with Helicobacter pylori-specific IgG and IgA. We investigated difference in stimulation of different immunoglobulin classes in patients with different gastroduodenal diseases, particularly benign and malignant. We estimated significance of differences with Mann-Whitney and Fisher exact probability test. RESULTS: All patients enrolled in the study were seropositive. Patients with gastritis had statistically significant higher level of IgG than patients with gastric cancer (p=0.0001), and gastric lymphoma (p=0.006). Patients with duodenal ulcer had statistically significant higher level of IgG than patients with gastric cancer (p=0.02), and gastric lymphoma (p=0.046). IgA level was significantly higher in patients with gastritis than in patients with gastric cancer (p=0.03). IgA>IgG ratio was significantly more frequent in patients with gastric cancer and gastric lymphoma than in patients with gastritis and duodenal ulcer (p=0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: Result of our study suggested that Helicobacter pylori elicits different systemic humoral immune response in patients with gastritis and duodenal ulcer than in patients with gastric cancer and gastric lymphoma at least in intensity of stimulation of different immunoglobulin classes.