Social characteristics of culturally and linguistically diverse cancer patients enrolled in early phase clinical trials in South-Western Sydney.

Introduction Early phase clinical trials (EPCT) enable access to novel therapies for patients who have exhausted standard of care treatment and contribute a crucial role in drug development and research. Culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) or socially disadvantaged patients have notably lower rates of participation in these trials. We aimed to characterise the social and cultural demographics of patients enrolled on an EPCT in South Western Sydney. Methods We conducted a 10-year retrospective review of patients enrolled on a EPCT at Liverpool Hospital. CALD patients were defined as those born overseas or whose preferred language was other than English. The patient residential address was used to calculate distance travelled and the Index of Relative Socio-economic advantage and disadvantage (IRSD and IRSAD) scores were calculated and used as a surrogate for socioeconomic status (SES). Results Our study included 233 patients across 39 EPCTs. Ninety-one patients (39%) were identified as CALD. The median IRSD and IRSAD scores were 941 and 944 respectively with 62.7% - 67.4% of patients residing in an area with greater disadvantage compared to the median of Australia. The median distance travelled was 17 kilometres with only 12% of participants travelling more than 50 kilometres. CALD patients were more likely to reside in an area of low SES (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.8 - 6.5, p<0.01) and travelled shorter median distances (10 vs 23 kilometres) when compared to non-CALD patients. Conclusion Our study cohort contained a lower proportion of CALD patients and a higher SES than what we might have expected from our local population. Furthermore, there was a trend toward greater SES disadvantage (lower IRSD/IRSAD scores) for the CALD population. This study provides novel Australian data to support the underrepresentation of culturally diverse or disadvantaged patients on EPCTs. Future efforts should be made to reduce barriers to participation and improve equity in clinical trial participation.

Comparison of Prognostic Scores in Early Phase Clinical Trials: A 10-year Single Centre Australian Experience.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Early phase clinical trials (EPCTs) assess the tolerability of novel anti-cancer therapeutics in patients with advanced malignancy. Patient selection is important given the modest clinical benefit and time commitments for trials. Prognostic scores have been developed to facilitate identification of high-risk patients. This study aimed to compare five prognostic scores to predict survival for patients on an EPCT. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients enrolled in EPCT at Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, from 2013 to 2023. Demographic, biochemical, and survival data were collected from electronic medical records. The score from five prognostic scoring systems (Royal Marsden hospital, MD Anderson Cancer centre, Gustave Roussy Immune, MD Anderson Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor and Princess Margaret Hospital Index) were calculated. Overall survival was measured using the Kaplan-Meier method and predictive discrimination was assessed using Harrell's c-index. RESULTS: A total of 218 patients across 36 EPCTs were included. The median overall survival was 9.8 months with 22% of patients dying in less than 90 days. Seventeen to thirty-four percent of patients were categorised as high-risk. The MDACC score obtained the highest predictability for overall survival for the whole cohort (c-index=0.67, 95%CI=0.62-0.72) and the immunotherapy-based cohort (c-index= 0.65, 95%CI=0.59-0.71). However, all scores performed similarly with a significant overlap in the confidence intervals. CONCLUSION: Our retrospective audit confirms the utility of prognostic scores to predict survival in an Australian EPCT cohort, with similar predictive discrimination across various scoring systems. Integration of these prognostic tools into EPCT screening processes may optimise benefits and reduce risks associated with EPCTs.

Patients' perception of the benefits of palliative systemic therapy for advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced cancer who misunderstand their prognosis and chance of cure tend to overestimate the likely benefits of palliative systemic therapy. AIM: To determine patient perceptions of palliative systemic therapy benefits in advanced cancer. METHODS: We surveyed 104 outpatients with advanced cancer receiving systemic anticancer therapy and their treating oncologists. Patients recorded their understanding of treatment impact on chance of cure and symptoms. Life expectancy was estimated by patients and oncologists. A visual analogue scale (0-10) was used to record how patients and oncologists valued quality of life (QOL) and length of life (LOL) (<4 QOL most important; 4-7 QOL and LOL equal; >7 LOL most important). Patient-oncologist discordance was defined as a ≥4-point difference. RESULTS: The main reasons patients selected for receiving treatment were to live longer (54%) and cure their cancer (36%). Most patients reported treatment was very/somewhat likely to prolong life (84%) and improve symptoms (76%), whereas 20% reported treatment was very/somewhat likely to cure their cancer. 42% of patients selected a timeframe for life expectancy (choice of four timeframes between <1 year and ≥5 years); of these, 62% selected a longer timeframe than their oncologist. When making treatment decisions, 71% of patients (52% of oncologists) valued QOL and LOL equally. Patient-oncologist discordance was 21%, mostly because of oncologists valuing QOL more than their patients (70%). CONCLUSION: At least 20% of patients receiving systemic therapy for advanced cancer reported an expectation of cure. Most patients and oncologists value QOL and LOL equally when making treatment decisions.

Patient demographics and management landscape of metastatic colorectal cancer in the third-line setting: Real-world data in an australian population.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer and second leading cause of cancer mortality in Australia, thus carrying a significant disease burden. AIMS: This analysis aims to explore real-world treatment landscape of metastatic colorectal cancer in the third-line setting. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed treatment of recurrent and advanced colorectal cancer (TRACC) registry database from 2009 onwards. Patients treated with palliative intent who progressed after two lines of therapies were included. One treatment line was defined as any combination of systemic therapy given until progression. RESULTS: Out of 1820 patients treated palliatively, 32% (590 patients) met study criteria. Of these, 43% (254 patients) proceeded to third-line therapy, equating to 14% of all metastatic patients. In KRAS mutant or unknown tumours (97 patients), fluoropyrimidine (FP)-oxaliplatin combination was the most common choice (51%), followed by FP-irinotecan (15%), trifluridine/tipiracil (11%), mono-chemotherapy (10%), regorafenib (5%) and others (7%). Majority of FP-doublet (83%) was given as rechallenge. In 157 patients with KRAS wildtype disease, monotherapy with EGFR inhibitor was most commonly used (41%), followed by EGFR inhibitor with chemotherapy (20%), FP-doublet (18%), mono-chemotherapy (6%), trifluridine/tipiracil (6%), regorafenib (1%) and others (8%). Median overall survival was 7.1 months (range 0.4-41.2), and median time on third-line treatment was 3 months (range 0.1-40). CONCLUSIONS: In real-world Australian population, treatment choices differed based on KRAS status and will likely change with the availability of newer drugs on the pharmaceutical benefits scheme. Survival outcomes are comparable to newer agents in clinical trials for select patients.

Human Group IIA Phospholipase A2-Three Decades on from Its Discovery.

Phospholipase A2 (PLA2) enzymes were first recognized as an enzyme activity class in 1961. The secreted (sPLA2) enzymes were the first of the five major classes of human PLA2s to be identified and now number nine catalytically-active structurally homologous proteins. The best-studied of these, group IIA sPLA2, has a clear role in the physiological response to infection and minor injury and acts as an amplifier of pathological inflammation. The enzyme has been a target for anti-inflammatory drug development in multiple disorders where chronic inflammation is a driver of pathology since its cloning in 1989. Despite intensive effort, no clinically approved medicines targeting the enzyme activity have yet been developed. This review catalogues the major discoveries in the human group IIA sPLA2 field, focusing on features of enzyme function that may explain this lack of success and discusses future research that may assist in realizing the potential benefit of targeting this enzyme. Functionally-selective inhibitors together with isoform-selective inhibitors are necessary to limit the apparent toxicity of previous drugs. There is also a need to define the relevance of the catalytic function of hGIIA to human inflammatory pathology relative to its recently-discovered catalysis-independent function.

Phase I dose-escalation study to determine the safety, tolerability, preliminary efficacy and pharmacokinetics of an intratumoral injection of tigilanol tiglate (EBC-46).

BACKGROUND: Tigilanol tiglate, a short-chain diterpene ester, is being developed as intratumoral treatment of a broad range of cancers. We conducted the first-in-human study of intratumoral tigilanol tiglate in patients with solid tumors. METHODS: Tigilanol tiglate was administered in a multicentre, non randomized, single-arm study, with escalating doses beginning with 0·06 mg/m2 in tumors estimated to be at least twice the volume of injection (dose-escalation cohorts). Patients with smaller tumors were assigned to the local effects cohort and received the appropriate dose for tumor size. FINDINGS: Twenty-two patients were enrolled. The maximum dose was 3·6 mg/m2 and the maximum tolerated dose was not reached. There was one report of dose-limiting toxicity (upper airway obstruction), two serious adverse events (upper airway obstruction and septicemia), 160 treatment-emergent adverse events, and no deaths. Injection site reactions in all tumors and tumor types occurred even at the lowest dose. Six of the 22 patients experienced a treatment response, with four of the six patients achieving complete response. INTERPRETATION: Intratumoral tigilanol tiglate was generally well tolerated, the maximum tolerated dose was not reached, and clinical activity was observed in 9 tumor types including complete response in four patients. These results support the continued development of tigilanol tiglate for intratumoral administration. FUNDING: QBiotics Group Limited Brisbane, Queensland, Australia was the sponsor of the study.

Health-Related Quality of Life during Chemoradiation in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Impacts and Ethnic Disparities.

Aims: There is limited data on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in locally advanced rectal cancer. We assessed HRQoL before, during and after neoadjuvant chemoradiation, correlated this to corresponding clinician-reported adverse events (CR-AEs) and explored disparities between patients of Asian ethnicity versus Caucasians. Correlation between HRQoL and treatment response was also assessed. Methods: A consecutive sample of patients was recruited. HRQoL was assessed with the EORTC QLQ-C30 before chemoradiation, week three of chemoradiation and one-week pre-surgery. Clinical variables including CR-AEs were recorded at these time-points. Patients self-reported socio-demographic variables. Treatment response was assessed by the tumour regression grade. HRQoL data were analysed with multilevel models. Results: Fifty-one patients were recruited. HRQoL completion rates were ≥86%. Cognitive and role functioning worsened significantly during treatment. Emotional, role and social functioning improved significantly at pre-surgery. Fatigue and nausea/vomiting worsened during treatment while fatigue, appetite loss, diarrhoea and financial difficulties improved from treatment to pre-surgery. Almost 30% of the cohort were Asian ethnicity. Differences were found in multiple HRQoL domains between Asians and Caucasians, with Asians faring worse. Significant differences were evident in physical, role and cognitive functioning, and in seven out of the 8 symptom scales. The correlation between patient-reported outcomes and clinician-reported outcomes was weak, with diarrhoea having the strongest correlation (r = 0.58). Vomiting during treatment correlated with poor response, whilst baseline constipation correlated with good response. Conclusion: Chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal cancer affects multiple HRQoL domains. Our findings highlight the importance of psychological aspects of treatment. Significant differences were identified between the Asian and Caucasian populations, with Asians consistently performing worse. Poor correlations between patient and clinician reporting strongly support the inclusion of patient-reported outcomes in clinical studies. HRQoL domains of vomiting and constipation are potential biomarkers of treatment response.

Improved ovarian cancer EMT-CTC isolation by immunomagnetic targeting of epithelial EpCAM and mesenchymal N-cadherin.

Epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM)-targeted capture remains the most common isolation strategy for circulating tumor cells (CTCs). However, epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) leads to decreased epithelial EpCAM expression affecting the optimal CTC capture. In this study, we tested a cohort of ovarian cancer cell lines using flow cytometry to identify N-cadherin as the additional immunomagnetic cell surface target for ovarian cancer cell isolation. Combined immunomagnetic targeting of mesenchymal N-cadherin and epithelial EpCAM enriched CTCs from advanced ovarian cancer patient blood approximately three times more efficiently than targeting of EpCAM alone. We also show that more EMT-phenotype CTCs are captured by including N-cadherin targeting into CTC isolation protocols. However, after N-cadherin-based CTC isolation, in some blood samples of healthy individuals, we also observed the presence of cells expressing markers common to CTCs. Our data show that these "false positives" can be largely distinguished from CTCs as circulating endothelial cells (CECs) by vascular endothelial-cadherin co-staining. CEC counts are highly variable in patients and healthy controls. Our data demonstrate that a combination of EpCAM with N-cadherin-targeted isolation can improve CTC detection and widen the EMT-phenotype spectrum of captured CTCs.

A phase I trial to determine safety and pharmacokinetics of ASLAN002, an oral MET superfamily kinase inhibitor, in patients with advanced or metastatic solid cancers.

Background The MET tyrosine kinase and its ligand, hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) also known as scatter factor, are associated with tumourigenesis and metastasis by promotion of scattering, proliferation, angiogenesis, motility and invasion. ASLAN-002 is a potent inhibitor of MET as well as related kinases. A phase I dose escalation study was conducted to determine the safety and pharmacokinetics of ASLAN-002 in patients with advanced cancer. Methods Patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumours, who had progressed on standard therapy or for whom standard therapy was not known, were administered ASLAN-002 orally. The starting dose was 100 mg once daily (QD) with subsequent cohorts to receive doses of 200 mg QD, 300 mg QD, 450 mg QD, 600 mg QD, 300 mg twice daily (BID), 450 mg BID, and 600 mg BID. Results Forty patients were included across 7 dose cohorts. Cohort 8 (600 mg BID) was not opened due to the lack of appreciable pharmacokinetic (PK) differences between 300 mg BID and 450 mg BID and higher incidences of grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AE) in Cohort 7 (450 mg BID). Fifteen patients (37.5%) experienced a grade 3 or 4 AE. The most commonly reported AEs were nausea (55%), fatigue (47.5%) and constipation (30%). One dose limiting toxicity (DLT) of atrial fibrillation was observed with 450 mg BID. Conclusions ASLAN-002 is well tolerated at 300 mg BID and is the recommended dose for future phase II studies (RP2D). Clinical Trials Registry Number: NCT01721148 .

Management of asymptomatic primary tumours in stage IV colorectal cancer: Review of outcomes.

AIM: To compare outcomes for patients presenting with stage IV colorectal cancer and an asymptomatic primary tumour, undergoing primary tumour resection (PTR) plus palliative chemotherapy vs primary chemotherapy up-front. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE and EMBASE. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included perioperative mortality, morbidity and delayed surgical intervention rates in patients undergoing PTR and subsequent complication rates in patients with an un-resected primary tumour. Tertiary outcomes included impact on systemic treatment and identification of prognostic factors relevant for survival in this cohort. RESULTS: Twenty non-randomised studies met the inclusion criteria. Eleven studies included comparative overall survival data. Three studies showed an overall survival advantage for PTR, 7 studies showed no statistically significant advantage, and 1 study showed a significant worsening in survival in the surgical group. The perioperative mortality rate ranged from 0% to 8.5%, and post-operative morbidity rate from 10% to 35%, mainly minor complications that did not preclude subsequent chemotherapy. The rate of delayed primary-tumour related symptoms, most commonly obstruction, in patients with an un-resected primary tumour ranged from 3% to 46%. The strongest independent poor prognostic factor was extensive hepatic metastases, in addition to poor performance status, M1b stage and non-use of modern chemotherapy agents. CONCLUSION: Based on the current literature, both PTR and up front chemotherapy appear appropriate initial management strategies, with a trend towards an overall survival advantage with PTR. The procedure has a low post-operative mortality, and most complications are transient and minor. The results of recruiting randomised trials are eagerly anticipated.

Gastrointestinal perforation in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with peritoneal metastases receiving bevacizumab.

AIM: To investigate the safety and efficacy of adding bevacizumab to first-line chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with peritoneal disease. METHODS: We compared rates of gastrointestinal perforation in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and peritoneal disease receiving first-line chemotherapy with and without bevacizumab in three distinct cohorts: (1) the AGITG MAX trial (Phase III randomised clinical trial comparing capecitabine vs capecitabine and bevacizumab vs capecitabine, bevacizumab and mitomycinC); (2) the prospective Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer (TRACC) registry (any first-line regimen ± bevacizumab); and (3) two cancer centres in New South Wales, Australia [Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre and Liverpool Cancer Therapy Centre (NSWCC) from January 2005 to Decenber 2012, (any first-line regimen ± bevacizumab). For the AGITG MAX trial capecitabine was compared to the other two arms (capecitabine/bevacizumab and capecitabine/bevacizumab/mitomycinC). In the AGITG MAX trial and the TRACC registry rates of gastrointestinal perforation were also collected in patients who did not have peritoneal metastases. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, chemotherapy duration, and overall survival. Time-to-event outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS: Eighty-four MAX, 179 TRACC and 69 NSWCC patients had peritoneal disease. There were no gastrointestinal perforations recorded in either the MAX subgroup or the NSWCC cohorts. Of the patients without peritoneal disease in the MAX trial, 4/300 (1.3%) in the bevacizumab arms had gastrointestinal perforations compared to 1/123 (0.8%) in the capecitabine alone arm. In the TRACC registry 3/126 (2.4%) patients who had received bevacizumab had a gastrointestinal perforation compared to 1/53 (1.9%) in the chemotherapy alone arm. In a further analysis of patients without peritoneal metastases in the TRACC registry, the rate of gastrointestinal perforations was 9/369 (2.4%) in the chemotherapy/bevacizumab group and 5/177 (2.8%) in the chemotherapy alone group. The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy was associated with improved progression-free survival in all three cohorts: MAX 6.9 m vs 4.9 m, HR = 0.64 (95%CI: 0.42-1.02); P = 0.063; TRACC 9.1 m vs 5.5 m, HR = 0.61 (95%CI: 0.37-0.86); P = 0.009; NSWCC 8.7 m vs 6.8 m, HR = 0.75 (95%CI: 0.43-1.32); P = 0.32. Chemotherapy duration was similar across the groups. CONCLUSION: Patients with peritoneal disease do not appear to have an increased risk of gastrointestinal perforations when receiving first-line therapy with bevacizumab compared to systemic therapy alone.