Trainee-Led Quality Improvement Project to Improve Fertility Preservation Counseling for Patients With Cancer.

PURPOSE: Oncofertility counseling regarding the reproductive risks associated with cancer therapy is essential for quality cancer care. We aimed to increase the rate of oncofertility counseling for patients of reproductive age (18-40 years) with cancer who were initiating systemic therapy at the Johns Hopkins Cancer Center from a baseline rate of 37% (25 of 68, June 2019-January 2020) to 70% by February 2021. METHODS: We formed an interprofessional, multidisciplinary team as part of the ASCO Quality Training Program. We obtained data from the electronic medical record and verified data with patients by phone. We surveyed patients, oncologists, and fertility specialists to identify barriers. After considering a prioritization matrix, we implemented Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles. RESULTS: We identified the following improvement opportunities: (1) oncologist self-reported lack of knowledge about counseling and local fertility preservation options and (2) lack of a standardized referral mechanism to fertility services. During the first PDSA cycle (February 2020-August 2020, disrupted by COVID-19), we introduced the initiative to increase oncofertility counseling at faculty meetings. From September 2020 to November 2020, we implemented a second PDSA cycle: (1) educating and presenting the initiative at Oncology Grand Rounds, (2) distributing informative pamphlets to oncologists and patients, and (3) implementing an electronic medical record order set. In the third PDSA cycle (December 2020-February 2021), we redesigned the order set to add information (eg, contact information for fertility coordinator) to the patient after-visit summary. Postimplementation (September 2020-February 2021), counseling rates increased from 37% to 81% (38 of 47). CONCLUSION: We demonstrate how a trainee-led, patient-centered initiative improved oncofertility care. Ongoing work focuses on ensuring sustainability and assessing the quality of counseling.

An International Phase 2 Study of Pazopanib in Progressive and Metastatic Thyroglobulin Antibody Negative Radioactive Iodine Refractory Differentiated Thyroid Cancer.

Introduction: Multikinase inhibitors have clinical activity in radioactive iodine refractory (RAIR) differentiated thyroid cancers (DTCs) but are not curative; optimal management and salvage therapies remain unclear. This study assessed clinical effects of pazopanib therapy in RAIR-DTC patients with progressive disease, examining in parallel biomarker that might forecast/precede therapeutic response. Methods: Assessment of responses and toxicities and of any association between thyroglobulin (Tg) changes cycle 1 and RECIST (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors) response to pazopanib therapy were prospectively undertaken in Tg antibody negative RAIR-DTC patients. RECIST progressive metastatic disease <6 months preceding enrollment was required. With a sample size of 68 (assuming 23 attaining partial response [PR]), there would be 90% chance of detecting a difference of >30% when the proportion of patients attaining PR whose Tg values decrease by >50% is >50% cycle 1 (one-sided α = 0.10, two sample test of proportions). Mean corpuscular volume (MCV) change or mutational status or pretreatment were also explored as early correlates of eventual RECIST response. Results: From 2009 to 2011, 60 individuals were treated and evaluated; (one additional patient withdrew; another was found ineligible before therapy initiation); 91.7% had previous systemic therapy beyond RAI. Adverse events included one death (thromboembolic) deemed possibly pazopanib associated. Twenty-two confirmed RECIST PRs resulted (36.7%, confidence interval; CI [24.6-50.1]); mean administered 4-week cycles was 10. Among 44 fully accessible patients, the Tg nadir was greater among the 20 attaining PR (median: -86.8%; interquartile range [IQR]: -90.7% to -70.9%) compared with the 28 who did not (median: -69.0%; IQR: -78.1% to -27.7%, Wilcoxon rank-sum test: p = 0.002). However, the difference in the proportion of PRs among those whose Tg fell ≥50% after cycle 1 versus those that did not were not significantly correlated (-23.5% [CI: -55.3 to 8.3]; Fisher's exact test p-value = 0.27). RECIST response was also not correlated with/predicted by early MCV change, receipt of prior therapy, or tumor mutational status. Conclusions: This trial prospectively confirmed pazopanib to have clinical activity and manageable toxicities in patients with progressive RAIR-DTC. Response to pazopanib, however, was not robustly forecast by early associated changes in Tg or MCV, by prior therapy, or by tumor mutational status. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00625846.

A phase 2 study of GVAX colon vaccine with cyclophosphamide and pembrolizumab in patients with mismatch repair proficient advanced colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Mismatch repair proficient (MMRp) colorectal cancer (CRC) has been refractory to single-agent programmed cell death protein 1 (PD1) inhibitor therapy. Colon GVAX is an allogeneic, whole-cell, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor -secreting cellular immunotherapy that induces T-cell immunity against tumor-associated antigens and has previously been studied in combination with low-dose cyclophosphamide (Cy) to inhibit regulatory T cells. METHODS: We conducted a single-arm study of GVAX/Cy in combination with the PD1 inhibitor pembrolizumab in patients with advanced MMRp CRC. Patients received pembrolizumab plus Cy on day 1, GVAX on day 2, of a 21-day cycle. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. Secondary objectives included safety, overall survival, progression-free survival, changes in carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels, and immune-related correlates. RESULTS: Seventeen patients were enrolled. There were no objective responses, and the disease control rate was 18% by RECIST 1.1. The median progression-free survival was 82 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 48-97 days) and the median overall survival was 213 days (95% CI 179-441 days). Biochemical responses (≥30% decline in CEA) were observed in 7/17 (41%) of patients. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events were observed in two patients (hemolytic anemia and corneal transplant rejection). Paired pre- and on-treatment biopsy specimens showed increases in programmed death-ligand 1 expression and tumor necrosis in a subset of patients. CONCLUSIONS: GVAX/Cy plus pembrolizumab failed to meet its primary objective in MMRp CRC. Biochemical responses were observed in a subset of patients and have not previously been observed with pembrolizumab monotherapy in MMRp CRC, indicating that GVAX may modulate the antitumor immune response.

Immune-Related Adverse Events Requiring Hospitalization: Spectrum of Toxicity, Treatment, and Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) cause immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The proportion of patients who are hospitalized for irAEs and their spectrum, management, and outcomes are not well described. METHODS: We report the proportion of hospitalized patients in an academic center who were treated with ICIs from May to December 2017. Patient characteristics, toxicities, management, and outcomes for confirmed irAE admissions are reported. Associations between patient features and irAE hospitalizations are examined. RESULTS: Twenty-three percent (n = 100) of 443 patients who were admitted to an academic oncology center over 6 months had ever received ICIs. Of these patients, 41% were admitted for suspected irAEs and 23% were confirmed irAEs. IrAEs accounted for 5% of all oncology hospitalizations (n = 23). Ninety-one percent of patients with confirmed irAEs prompted a medicine subspecialist consultation, most commonly gastroenterology (22%). Fifteen patients (65%) had their irAEs improve/resolve, seven (30%) had worsening irAEs, and three (13%) died of their irAEs. The majority of patients (n = 20; 87%) discontinued ICIs after discharge. Among ICI-treated patients who required admission, an increased likelihood of irAE-related hospitalization was associated with patient age older than 65 years (odds ratio, 5.4; 95% CI, 1.6 to 17.8) and receipt of combination immunotherapy (OR, 6.8; 95% CI, 2.0 to 23.2). CONCLUSION: A notable proportion of ICI-treated patients are hospitalized for irAEs, and these patients have a high demand for multidisciplinary management. Older age and combination ICI treatment were associated with an increased risk of irAE-related hospitalization. Whereas these data are from an academic center and include patients in clinical trials, with expanding use of ICIs, these data have important implications for inpatient service planning and risk stratification.

Olaparib in combination with irinotecan, cisplatin, and mitomycin C in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib is an oral inhibitor of polyadenosine 5'-diphosphoribose polymerization (PARP) that has previously shown signs of activity in patients with BRCA mutations and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this phase 1 dose-escalation trial in patients with unresectable PDAC, we determined the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of olaparib (tablet formulation) in combination with irinotecan 70 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin 25 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of a 28-day cycle (olaparib plus IC). We then studied the safety and tolerability of adding mitomycin C 5 mg/m2 on day 1 to this regimen (olaparib plus ICM). RESULTS: 18 patients with unresectable PDAC were enrolled. The MTD of olaparib plus IC was olaparib 100 mg twice-daily on days 1 and 8. The addition of mitomycin C to this dose level was not tolerated. Grade ≥3 drug-related adverse events (AEs) were encountered in 16 patients (89%). The most common grade ≥3 drug-related toxicities included neutropenia (89%), lymphopenia (72%), and anemia (22%). Two patients (11%), both of whom had remained on study for more than 12 cycles, developed drug-related myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). The objective response rate (ORR) for all evaluable patients was 23%. One patient who carried a deleterious germline BRCA2 mutation had a durable clinical response lasting more than four years, but died from complications of treatment-related MDS. CONCLUSIONS: Olaparib had substantial toxicity when combined with IC or ICM in patients with PDAC, and this treatment combination did not have an acceptable risk/benefit profile for further study. However, durable clinical responses were observed in a subset of patients and further clinical investigation of PARP inhibitors in PDAC is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This clinical trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01296763.

Effects of the leucovorin shortage: Pilot study investigating cost, efficacy, and toxicity comparison of low fixed-dose versus body surface area-adjusted leucovorin dosing in patients with resectable colon or metastatic colorectal cancer.

Purpose As a result of the leucovorin shortage, we switched from BSA-adjusted to low fixed-dose leucovorin in patients with colon cancer receiving fluorouracil-containing therapy. Methods A retrospective, pilot study of adults receiving intravenous leucovorin as part of a fluorouracil-containing treatment was conducted including individuals with stage II or III colon or newly diagnosed metastatic colorectal cancer. One low fixed-dose (leucovorin 50 mg) patient was matched by the investigator to one BSA-adjusted (leucovorin 200-500 mg/m2/dose) patient on disease stage and age. The objectives were to compare cost of alternative dosing strategies as well as efficacy and adverse event rates. Only patients being treated in the first-line metastatic colorectal cancer setting were included in the efficacy analysis. Results Fifty-eight patients were included. Leucovorin cost was reduced by 7- to 14-fold, and we were able to conserve a total of 1580-3400 doses of leucovorin by changing to fixed-dose (estimated from 200 mg/m2 or 400 mg/m2 dosing strategies, respectively). No statistically significant differences in progression-free survival ( p = 0.254), overall survival ( p = 0.923), or complications resulted. Conclusion Our decision to reduce the dose of leucovorin allowed us to conserve supply and control cost. The small sample size did not allow us to detect differences in efficacy or adverse event rates, and thus a larger study would be required to confirm our findings that efficacy was not compromised nor adverse effects greater.

Phase 1 Study of ABT-751 in Combination With CAPIRI (Capecitabine and Irinotecan) and Bevacizumab in Patients With Advanced Colorectal Cancer.

ABT-751 is an orally bioavailable sulfonamide with antimitotic properties. A nonrandomized phase 1 dose-escalation study of ABT-751 in combination with CAPIRI (capecitabine and irinotecan) and bevacizumab was conducted to define the maximum tolerated dose, dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), and pharmacokinetics in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Patients were treated with ABT-751 daily for 7 days (alone) and then began 21-day cycles of treatment with ABT-751 daily and capecitabine twice daily for 14 days plus irinotecan on day 1 intravenously. Bevacizumab was added as standard of care at 7.5 mg/kg on day 1 after the first 2 dose levels. Because of intolerance to the regimen, a reduced dose of ABT-751 was also explored with reduced-dose and full-dose CAPIRI with bevacizumab. ABT-751 and irinotecan pharmacokinetics, ABT-751 glucuronidation, and protein binding were explored. Twenty-four patients were treated over 5 dose levels. The maximum tolerated dose was ABT-751 125 mg combined with full-dose CAPIRI and bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg on day 1. DLTs were hypokalemia, elevated liver tests, and febrile neutropenia. ABT-751 is metabolized by UGT1A8 and to a lesser extent UGT1A4 and UGT1A1. Irinotecan and APC exposure were increased, SN-38 exposure was similar, and SN-38 glucuronide exposure was decreased. Clinically relevant alterations in ABT-751 and irinotecan pharmacokinetics were not observed. Despite modest efficacy, the combination of ABT-751, CAPIRI, and bevacizumab will not be studied further in colorectal cancer.

PD-1 Blockade in Tumors with Mismatch-Repair Deficiency.

BACKGROUND: Somatic mutations have the potential to encode "non-self" immunogenic antigens. We hypothesized that tumors with a large number of somatic mutations due to mismatch-repair defects may be susceptible to immune checkpoint blockade. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2 study to evaluate the clinical activity of pembrolizumab, an anti-programmed death 1 immune checkpoint inhibitor, in 41 patients with progressive metastatic carcinoma with or without mismatch-repair deficiency. Pembrolizumab was administered intravenously at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram of body weight every 14 days in patients with mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancers, patients with mismatch repair-proficient colorectal cancers, and patients with mismatch repair-deficient cancers that were not colorectal. The coprimary end points were the immune-related objective response rate and the 20-week immune-related progression-free survival rate. RESULTS: The immune-related objective response rate and immune-related progression-free survival rate were 40% (4 of 10 patients) and 78% (7 of 9 patients), respectively, for mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancers and 0% (0 of 18 patients) and 11% (2 of 18 patients) for mismatch repair-proficient colorectal cancers. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were not reached in the cohort with mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancer but were 2.2 and 5.0 months, respectively, in the cohort with mismatch repair-proficient colorectal cancer (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.10 [P<0.001], and hazard ratio for death, 0.22 [P=0.05]). Patients with mismatch repair-deficient noncolorectal cancer had responses similar to those of patients with mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancer (immune-related objective response rate, 71% [5 of 7 patients]; immune-related progression-free survival rate, 67% [4 of 6 patients]). Whole-exome sequencing revealed a mean of 1782 somatic mutations per tumor in mismatch repair-deficient tumors, as compared with 73 in mismatch repair-proficient tumors (P=0.007), and high somatic mutation loads were associated with prolonged progression-free survival (P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that mismatch-repair status predicted clinical benefit of immune checkpoint blockade with pembrolizumab. (Funded by Johns Hopkins University and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01876511.).

Rilotumumab in combination with epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine as first-line treatment for gastric or oesophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma: an open-label, dose de-escalation phase 1b study and a double-blind, randomised phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Dysregulation of the hepatocyte growth factor (HGF)/MET pathway promotes tumour growth and metastasis. Rilotumumab is a fully human, monoclonal antibody that neutralises HGF. We aimed to assess the safety, efficacy, biomarkers, and pharmacokinetics of rilotumumab combined with epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine (ECX) in patients with advanced gastric or oesophagogastric junction cancer. METHODS: We recruited patients (≥18 years old) with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic gastric or oesophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, who had not received previous systemic therapy, from 43 sites worldwide. Phase 1b was an open-label, dose de-escalation study to identify a safe dose of rilotumumab (initial dose 15 mg/kg intravenously on day 1) plus ECX (epirubicin 50 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1, cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1, capecitabine 625 mg/m(2) twice a day orally on days 1-21, respectively), administered every 3 weeks. The phase 1b primary endpoint was the incidence of dose-limiting toxicities in all phase 1b patients who received at least one dose of rilotumumab and completed the dose-limiting toxicity assessment window (first cycle of therapy). Phase 2 was a double-blind study that randomly assigned patients (1:1:1) using an interactive voice response system to receive rilotumumab 15 mg/kg, rilotumumab 7·5 mg/kg, or placebo, plus ECX (doses as above), stratified by ECOG performance status and disease extent. The phase 2 primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), analysed by intention to treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00719550. FINDINGS: Seven of the nine patients enrolled in the phase 1b study received at least one dose of rilotumumab 15 mg/kg, only two of whom had three dose-limiting toxicities: palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, cerebral ischaemia, and deep-vein thrombosis. In phase 2, 121 patients were randomly assigned (40 to rilotumumab 15 mg/kg; 42 to rilotumumab 7·5 mg/kg; 39 to placebo). Median PFS was 5·1 months (95% CI 2·9-7·0) in the rilotumumab 15 mg/kg group, 6·8 months (4·5-7·5) in the rilotumumab 7·5 mg/kg group, 5·7 months (4·5-7·0) in both rilotumumab groups combined, and 4·2 months (2·9-4·9) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio for PFS events compared with placebo was 0·69 (80% CI 0·49-0·97; p=0·164) for rilotumumab 15 mg/kg, 0·53 (80% CI 0·38-0·73; p=0·009) for rilotumumab 7·5 mg/kg, and 0·60 (80% CI 0·45-0·79; p=0·016) for combined rilotumumab. Any grade adverse events more common in the combined rilotumumab group than in the placebo group included haematological adverse events (neutropenia in 44 [54%] of 81 patients vs 13 [33%] of 39 patients; anaemia in 32 [40%] vs 11 [28%]; and thrombocytopenia in nine [11%] vs none), peripheral oedema (22 [27%] vs three [8%]), and venous thromboembolism (16 [20%] vs five [13%]). Grade 3-4 adverse events more common with rilotumumab included neutropenia (36 [44%] vs 11 [28%]) and venous thromboembolism (16 [20%] vs four [10%]). Serious adverse events were balanced between groups except for anaemia, which occurred more frequently in the combined rilotumumab group (ten [12%] vs none). INTERPRETATION: Rilotumumab plus ECX had no unexpected safety signals and showed greater activity than placebo plus ECX. A phase 3 study of the combination in MET-positive gastric and oesophagogastric junction cancer is in progress. FUNDING: Amgen Inc.

Interventions for preventing neuropathy caused by cisplatin and related compounds.

BACKGROUND: Cisplatin and several related antineoplastic drugs used to treat many types of solid tumours are neurotoxic, and most patients completing a full course of cisplatin chemotherapy develop a clinically detectable sensory neuropathy. Effective neuroprotective therapies have been sought. OBJECTIVES: To examine the efficacy and safety of purported chemoprotective agents to prevent or limit the neurotoxicity of cisplatin and related drugs. SEARCH METHODS: On 4 March 2013, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and CINAHL Plus for randomised trials designed to evaluate neuroprotective agents used to prevent or limit neurotoxicity of cisplatin and related drugs among human patients. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs in which the participants received chemotherapy with cisplatin or related compounds, with a potential chemoprotectant (acetylcysteine, amifostine, adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH), BNP7787, calcium and magnesium (Ca/Mg), diethyldithiocarbamate (DDTC), glutathione, Org 2766, oxcarbazepine, or vitamin E) compared to placebo, no treatment, or other treatments. We considered trials in which participants underwent evaluation zero to six months after completing chemotherapy using quantitative sensory testing (the primary outcome) or other measures including nerve conduction studies or neurological impairment rating using validated scales (secondary outcomes). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors assessed each study, extracted the data and reached consensus, according to standard Cochrane methodology. MAIN RESULTS: As of 2013, the review includes 29 studies describing nine possible chemoprotective agents, as well as description of two published meta-analyses. Among these trials, there were sufficient data in some instances to combine the results from different studies, most often using data from secondary non-quantitative measures. Nine of the studies were newly included at this update. Few of the included studies were at a high risk of bias overall, although often there was too little information to make an assessment. At least two review authors performed a formal review of an additional 44 articles but we did not include them in the final review for a variety of reasons.Of seven eligible amifostine trials (743 participants in total), one used quantitative sensory testing (vibration perception threshold) and demonstrated a favourable outcome in terms of amifostine neuroprotection, but the vibration perception threshold result was based on data from only 14 participants receiving amifostine who completed the post-treatment evaluation and should be regarded with caution. Furthermore the change measured was subclinical. None of the three eligible Ca/Mg trials (or four trials if a single retrospective study was included) described our primary outcome measures. The four Ca/Mg trials included a total of 886 participants. Of the seven eligible glutathione trials (387 participants), one used quantitative sensory testing but reported only qualitative analyses. Four eligible Org 2766 trials (311 participants) employed quantitative sensory testing but reported disparate results; meta-analyses of three of these trials using comparable measures showed no significant vibration perception threshold neuroprotection. The remaining trial reported only descriptive analyses. Similarly, none of the three eligible vitamin E trials (246 participants) reported quantitative sensory testing. The eligible single trials involving acetylcysteine (14 participants), diethyldithiocarbamate (195 participants), oxcarbazepine (32 participants), and retinoic acid (92 participants) did not perform quantitative sensory testing. In all, this review includes data from 2906 participants. However, only seven trials reported data for the primary outcome measure of this review, (quantitative sensory testing) and only nine trials reported our objective secondary measure, nerve conduction test results. Additionally, methodological heterogeneity precluded pooling of the results in most cases. Nonetheless, a larger number of trials reported the results of secondary (non-quantitative and subjective) measures such as the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) for neuropathy (15 trials), and these results we pooled and reported as meta-analysis. Amifostine showed a significantly reduced risk of developing neurotoxicity NCI-CTC (or equivalent) ≥ 2 compared to placebo (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.61). Glutathione was also efficacious with an RR of 0.29 (95% CI 0.10 to 0.85). In three vitamin E studies subjective measures not suitable for combination in meta analysis each favoured vitamin E. For other interventions the qualitative toxicity measures were either negative (N-acetyl cysteine, Ca/Mg, DDTC and retinoic acid) or not evaluated (oxcarbazepine and Org 2766).Adverse events were infrequent or not reported for most interventions. Amifostine was associated with transient hypotension in 8% to 62% of participants, retinoic acid with hypocalcaemia in 11%, and approximately 20% of participantss withdrew from treatment with DDTC because of toxicity. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: At present, the data are insufficient to conclude that any of the purported chemoprotective agents (acetylcysteine, amifostine, calcium and magnesium, diethyldithiocarbamate, glutathione, Org 2766, oxcarbazepine, retinoic acid, or vitamin E) prevent or limit the neurotoxicity of platin drugs among human patients, as determined using quantitative, objective measures of neuropathy. Amifostine, calcium and magnesium, glutathione, and vitamin E showed modest but promising (borderline statistically significant) results favouring their ability to reduce the neurotoxicity of cisplatin and related chemotherapies, as measured using secondary, non-quantitative and subjective measures such as the NCI-CTC neuropathy grading scale. Among these interventions, the efficacy of only vitamin E was evaluated using quantitative nerve conduction studies; the results were negative and did not support the positive findings based on the qualitative measures. In summary, the present studies are limited by the small number of participants receiving any particular agent, a lack of objective measures of neuropathy, and differing results among similar trials, which make it impossible to conclude that any of the neuroprotective agents tested prevent or limit the neurotoxicity of platinum drugs.

Incidence and prognostic impact of KRAS and BRAF mutation in patients undergoing liver surgery for colorectal metastases.

BACKGROUND: Molecular biomarkers offer the potential for refining prognostic determinants in patients undergoing cancer surgery. Among patients with colorectal cancer, KRAS and BRAF are important biomarkers, but their role in patients undergoing surgical therapy for liver metastases is unknown. In this study, the incidence and prognostic significance of KRAS and BRAF mutations were determined in patients undergoing surgical therapy of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). METHODS: KRAS and BRAF analysis was performed on 202 patients undergoing surgery for CRLM between 2003 and 2008. Tumor samples were analyzed for somatic mutations using sequencing analysis (KRAS, codon12/13, BRAF, V600E). The frequency of mutations was ascertained, and their impact on outcome was determined relative to other clinicopathologic factors. RESULTS: KRAS gene mutations were detected in 58/202 patients (29%). In contrast, mutation in the BRAF gene was identified in very low frequency in this surgical cohort, found in only 4/202 (2%) patients. On multivariate analysis, KRAS mutation was associated with worse survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-3.26), as well as recurrence risk (HR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.04-2.70). Although other clinicopathologic features, including tumor number, carcinoembryonic antigen, and primary stage were also associated with survival, KRAS status remained independently predictive of outcome. The low incidence of BRAF mutation limited assessment of its prognostic impact. CONCLUSION: Whereas KRAS mutations were found in approximately one third of patients, BFAF mutations were found in only 2% of patients undergoing surgery for CRLM. KRAS status was an independent predictor of overall and recurrence-free survival. Molecular biomarkers such as KRAS may help to refine our prognostic assessment of patients undergoing surgical therapy for CRLM.

Evaluation of ipilimumab in combination with allogeneic pancreatic tumor cells transfected with a GM-CSF gene in previously treated pancreatic cancer.

Preclinical reports support the concept of synergy between cancer vaccines and immune checkpoint blockade in nonimmunogenic tumors. In particular, cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) antibodies have been successfully combined with GM-CSF cell-based vaccines (GVAX). Ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4) has been tested as a single agent in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) resulting in a delayed response at a dose of 3 mg/kg. Our study evaluated ipilimumab 10 mg/kg (arm 1) and ipilimumab 10 mg/kg + GVAX (arm 2). A total of 30 patients with previously treated advanced PDA were randomized (1:1). Induction doses were administered every 3 weeks for a total of 4 doses followed by maintenance dosing every 12 weeks. Two patients in arm 1 showed evidence of stable disease (7 and 22 wk) but none demonstrated CA19-9 biochemical responses. In contrast, 3 patients in arm 2 had evidence of prolonged disease stabilization (31, 71, and 81 wk) and 7 patients experienced CA19-9 declines. In 2 of these patients, disease stabilization occurred after an initial period of progression. The median overall survival (OS) (3.6 vs. 5.7 mo, hazards ratio: 0.51, P = 0.072) and 1 year OS (7 vs. 27%) favored arm 2. Similar to prior ipilimumab studies, 20% of patients in each arm had grade 3/4 immune-related adverse events. Among patients with OS > 4.3 months, there was an increase in the peak mesothelin-specific T cells (P = 0.014) and enhancement of the T-cell repertoire (P = 0.031). In conclusion, checkpoint blockade in combination with GVAX has the potential for clinical benefit and should be evaluated in a larger study.

Phase 2 study of erlotinib combined with adjuvant chemoradiation and chemotherapy in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer.

PURPOSE: Long-term survival rates for patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) have stagnated at 20% for more than a decade, demonstrating the need to develop novel adjuvant therapies. Gemcitabine-erlotinib therapy has demonstrated a survival benefit for patients with metastatic PDAC. Here we report the first phase 2 study of erlotinib in combination with adjuvant chemoradiation and chemotherapy for resected PDAC. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Forty-eight patients with resected PDAC received adjuvant erlotinib (100 mg daily) and capecitabine (800 mg/m(2) twice daily Monday-Friday) concurrently with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), 50.4 Gy over 28 fractions followed by 4 cycles of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days) and erlotinib (100 mg daily). The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS). RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 18.2 months (interquartile range, 13.8-27.1). Lymph nodes were positive in 85% of patients, and margins were positive in 17%. The median RFS was 15.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.4-17.9), and the median overall survival (OS) was 24.4 months (95% CI, 18.9-29.7). Multivariate analysis with adjustment for known prognostic factors showed that tumor diameter >3 cm was predictive for inferior RFS (hazard ratio, 4.01; P=.001) and OS (HR, 4.98; P=.02), and the development of dermatitis was associated with improved RFS (HR, 0.27; P=.009). During CRT and post-CRT chemotherapy, the rates of grade 3/4 toxicity were 31%/2% and 35%/8%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Erlotinib can be safely administered with adjuvant IMRT-based CRT and chemotherapy. The efficacy of this regimen appears comparable to that of existing adjuvant regimens. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0848 will ultimately determine whether erlotinib produces a survival benefit in patients with resected pancreatic cancer.

Randomized phase III multi-institutional study of TNFerade biologic with fluorouracil and radiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer: final results.

PURPOSE: TNFerade biologic is a novel means of delivering tumor necrosis factor alpha to tumor cells by gene transfer. We herein report final results of the largest randomized phase III trial performed to date among patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) and the first to test gene transfer against this malignancy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 304 patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to standard of care plus TNFerade (SOC + TNFerade) versus standard of care alone (SOC). SOC consisted of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions with concurrent fluorouracil (200 mg/m(2) per day continuous infusion). TNFerade was injected intratumorally before the first fraction of radiotherapy each week at a dose of 4 × 10(11) particle units by using either a percutaneous transabdominal or an endoscopic ultrasound approach. Four weeks after chemoradiotherapy, patients began gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2) intravenously) with or without erlotinib (100 to 150 mg per day orally) until progression or toxicity. RESULTS: The analysis included 187 patients randomly assigned to SOC + TNFerade and 90 to SOC by using a modified intention-to-treat approach. Median follow-up was 9.1 months (range, 0.1 to 50.5 months). Median survival was 10.0 months for patients in both the SOC + TNFerade and SOC arms (hazard ratio [HR], 0.90; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.22; P = .26). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.8 months for SOC + TNFerade versus 7.0 months for SOC (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.32; P = .51). Among patients treated on the SOC + TNFerade arm, multivariate analysis showed that TNFerade injection by an endoscopic ultrasound-guided transgastric/transduodenal approach rather than a percutaneous transabdominal approach was a risk factor for inferior PFS (HR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.06 to 4.06; P = .032). The patients in the SOC + TNFerade arm experienced more grade 1 to 2 fever and chills than those in the SOC arm (P < .001) but both arms had similar rates of grade 3 to 4 toxicities (all P > .05). CONCLUSION: SOC + TNFerade is safe but not effective for prolonging survival in patients with LAPC.

Phase I dose-escalation study to examine the safety and tolerability of LY2603618, a checkpoint 1 kinase inhibitor, administered 1 day after pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) every 21 days in patients with cancer.

PURPOSE: This phase I study aims at assessing the safety and tolerability of LY2603618, a selective inhibitor of Checkpoint Kinase 1, in combination with pemetrexed and determining the maximum tolerable dose and the pharmacokinetic parameters. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: This was an open-label, multicenter, dose-escalation study in patients with advanced solid tumors. Increasing doses of LY2603618 (40-195 mg/m(2)) were combined with 500 mg/m(2) of pemetrexed. LY2603618 was administered on Days 1 and 9 and pemetrexed on Day 8 in a 28-day cycle. For all subsequent 21-day cycles, pemetrexed was administered on Day 1 and LY2603618 on Day 2. Antitumor activity was evaluated as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.0. RESULTS: A total of 31 patients were enrolled into six cohorts (three at 40 mg/m(2) over 4.5-hour infusion, 1-hour infusion in subsequent cohorts: three each at 40 mg/m(2), 70 mg/m(2), and 195 mg/m(2); 13 at 105 mg/m(2); six at 150 mg/m(2)). Four patients experienced a dose-limiting toxicity: diarrhea (105 mg/m(2)); reversible infusion-related reaction (150 mg/m(2)); thrombocytopenia (195 mg/m(2)); and fatigue (195 mg/m(2)). The maximum tolerated dose was defined as 150 mg/m(2). The pharmacokinetic data demonstrated that the exposure of LY2603618 increased in a dose-dependent manner, displayed a suitable half-life for maintaining required human exposures while minimizing the intra- and inter-cycle accumulation, and was unaffected by the pemetrexed administration. The pharmacokinetic-defined biologically efficacious dose was achieved at doses ≥105 mg/m(2). CONCLUSION: LY2603618 administered approximately 24 h after pemetrexed showed acceptable safety and pharmacokinetic profiles.

Phase I pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study of cetuximab, irinotecan and sorafenib in advanced colorectal cancer.

Background This phase Ib study was designed to determine the maximum tolerated doses (MTD) and dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) of irinotecan and cetuximab with sorafenib. Secondary objectives included characterizing the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics and evaluating preliminary antitumor activity in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). Methods Patients with metastatic, pretreated CRC were treated at five dose levels. Results Eighteen patients were recruited with median age 56.5 years. In the first five patients treated, 2 irinotecan related DLTs were observed. With reduced dose intensity irinotecan, there were no further DLTs. The most common toxicities were diarrhea, nausea/vomiting, fatigue, anorexia and rash. DLTs included neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Two patients had partial responses (one with a KRAS mutation) and 8 had stable disease (8-36 weeks). The median progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 2.5 and 4.7 months respectively. Pharmacokinetic analyses suggest sorafenib and metabolite exposure correlate with OS and DLTs. Conclusions The recommended phase II dose (RP2D) is irinotecan 100 mg/m(2) i.v. days 1, 8; cetuximab 400 mg/m(2) i.v. days 1 and 250 mg/m(2) i.v. weekly; and sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily in advanced, pretreated CRC. The combination resulted in a modest response rate.

A multicenter analysis of GTX chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Studies treating adenocarcinoma of the pancreas with gemcitabine alone or in combination with a doublet have demonstrated modest improvements in survival. Recent reports have suggested that using the triple-drug regimen FOLFIRINOX can substantially extend survival in patients with metastatic disease. We were interested in determining the clinical benefit of another three-drug regimen of gemcitabine, docetaxel and capecitabine (GTX) in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The cases of 154 patients, who received treatment with GTX chemotherapy with histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, were retrospectively reviewed. All demographic and clinical data were captured including prior therapy, adverse events, treatment response and survival. RESULTS: One hundred and seventeen metastatic and 37 locally advanced cases of adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were reviewed. Partial responses were noted in 11% of cases, and stable disease was observed in 62% of patients. Responses significantly correlated with toxicity (neutropenia, ALT elevation and hospitalizations). Grade 3 or greater hematologic and non-hematologic toxicities were noted in 41% and 9% of cases, respectively. Overall median survival was 11.6 months. Chemotherapy naïve patients with metastatic and locally advanced disease achieved a median survival of 11.3 and 25.0 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We observe a substantial survival benefit with GTX chemotherapy in our cohort of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. These findings warrant further investigation of this combination in this patient population.

Interventions for preventing neuropathy caused by cisplatin and related compounds.

BACKGROUND: Cisplatin and several related antineoplastic agents used to treat many types of solid tumors are neurotoxic, and most patients completing a full course of cisplatin chemotherapy develop a clinically detectable sensory neuropathy. Effective neuroprotective therapies have been sought. OBJECTIVES: To examine the efficacy of purported chemoprotective agents to prevent or limit the neurotoxicity of cisplatin and related agents. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (25 August 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 3, 2010 in The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (January 1966 to August 2010), EMBASE (January 1980 to August 2010), LILACS (January 1982 to August 2010), CINAHL (January 1982 to August 2010) for randomized trials designed to evaluate neuroprotective agents used to prevent or limit neurotoxicity of cisplatin and related agents among human patients. SELECTION CRITERIA: Quasi-randomized or randomized controlled trials whose participants received cisplatin (or related compounds) chemotherapy with or without a potential chemoprotectant (acetylcysteine, amifostine, ACTH, BNP7787, calcium and magnesium, diethyldithiocarbamate, glutathione, Org 2766, oxcarbazepine, or vitamin E) and were evaluated zero to six months after completing chemotherapy using quantitative sensory testing (primary) or other measures including nerve conduction studies or neurological impairment rating using validated scales (secondary). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We identified 16 randomized trials involving five possible chemoprotective agents in the initial 2006 review. Each study was reviewed by two authors who extracted the data and reached consensus. The 2010 update identified 11 additional randomized trials consisting of nine possible chemoprotective agents, including three treatments (acetylcysteine, calcium and magnesium, and oxcarbazepine) not among those described in the 2006 review. The included trials in the updated review involved eight unrelated treatments and included many disparate measures of neuropathy, resulting in insufficient data for any one measure to combine the results in most instances. MAIN RESULTS: One of four eligible amifostine trials (541 total participants in all four trials) used quantitative sensory testing and demonstrated a favorable outcome in terms of amifostine neuroprotection, but the vibration perception threshold result was based on data from only 14 participants receiving amifostine who completed the post-treatment evaluation and should be regarded with caution. Of the six eligible glutathione trials (354 participants), one used quantitative sensory testing but reported only qualitative analyses. Four eligible Org 2766 trials (311 participants) employed quantitative sensory testing reported disparate results; meta-analyses of three trials using comparable measures showed no significant vibration perception threshold neuroprotection. The remaining trial reported only descriptive analyses. The single eligible trials involving acetylcysteine (14 participants), diethyldithiocarbamate (195 participants), calcium and magnesium (33 participants), and oxcarbazepine (32 participants) and the two eligible trials involving vitamin E (57 participants) did not perform quantitative sensory testing. In all, data from 1,537 participants were included. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: At present, the data are insufficient to conclude that any of the purported chemoprotective agents (acetylcysteine, amifostine, calcium and magnesium, diethyldithiocarbamate, glutathione, Org 2766, oxycarbazepine, or Vitamin E) prevent or limit the neurotoxicity of platin drugs among human patients.