Prospective Exploratory Analysis of Angiogenic Biomarkers in Peripheral Blood in Advanced NSCLC Patients Treated With Bevacizumab Plus Chemotherapy: The ANGIOMET Study.

Finding angiogenic prognostic markers in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer is still an unmet medical need. We explored a set of genetic variants in the VEGF-pathway as potential biomarkers to predict clinical outcomes of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer treated with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. We prospectively analyzed the relationship between VEGF-pathway components with both pathological and prognostic variables in response to chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in 168 patients with non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. Circulating levels of VEGF and VEGFR2 and expression of specific endothelial surface markers and single-nucleotide polymorphisms in VEGF-pathway genes were analyzed. The primary clinical endpoint was progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints included overall survival and objective tumor response. VEGFR-1 rs9582036 variants AA/AC were associated with increased progression-free survival (p = 0.012 and p = 0.035, respectively), and with improved overall survival (p = 0.019) with respect to CC allele. Patients with VEGF-A rs3025039 harboring allele TT had also reduced mortality risk (p = 0.049) compared with the CC allele. The VEGF-A rs833061 variant was found to be related with response to treatment, with 61.1% of patients harboring the CC allele achieving partial treatment response. High pre-treatment circulating levels of VEGF-A were associated with shorter progression-free survival (p = 0.036). In conclusion, in this prospective study, genetic variants in VEGFR-1 and VEGF-A and plasma levels of VEGF-A were associated with clinical benefit, progression-free survival, or overall survival in a cohort of advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer patients receiving chemotherapy plus antiangiogenic therapy.

External validity of clinical trials with diverse trastuzumab-based chemotherapy regimens in advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma: data from the AGAMENON-SEOM registry.

BACKGROUND: Trastuzumab combined with cisplatin and fluoropyrimidines, either capecitabine or 5-fluorouracile (XP/FP), is the standard first-line treatment for advanced, HER2-positive, gastric cancer patients based on the ToGA trial. Despite the lack of phase III trials, many clinicians administer trastuzumab with alternative regimens. One meta-analysis suggests that substituting cisplatin for oxaliplatin might lead to greater efficacy and less toxicity. METHODS: 594 patients with HER2-positive gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma were recruited from the AGAMENON-SEOM registry. The objective was to evaluate the external validity of clinical trials with chemotherapy and trastuzumab. RESULTS: The regimens used in at least 5% of the patients were XP (27%), oxaliplatin and capecitabine (CAPOX) (26%), oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil (FOLFOX) (14%), FP (14%), triplet with anthracycline/docetaxel (7%), and carboplatin-FU (5%). Median exposure to trastuzumab was longer with FOLFOX (11.4 months, 95% CI, 9.1-21.0) versus ToGA regimens (7.5, 6.4-8.5), p < 0.001. Patients with HER2-IHC 3+ cancers had higher response rates than those with IHC 2+/FISH+, odds-ratio 1.97 (95% CI, 1.25-3.09). The results achieved with CAPOX-trastuzumab were comparable to those attained with ToGA regimens. FOLFOX-trastuzumab was superior to ToGA schemes in terms of overall survival (OS), with a greater magnitude of effect in IHC 2+/FISH+ tumors (HR 0.47, 0.24-0.92) compared with IHC 3+ (HR 0.69, 0.49-0.96), and in diffuse (HR 0.37, 0.20-0.69) versus intestinal-type tumors (HR 0.76, 0.54-1.06). CONCLUSION: We have updated the external validity of clinical trials with trastuzumab in first-line treatment of gastric cancer. Our data confirm the comparable outcomes of ToGA regimens and CAPOX-trastuzumab in clinical practice and point toward a possible benefit of FOLFOX-trastuzumab, contingent on the subtypes typically less sensitive to trastuzumab, to be confirmed in clinical trials.

Is advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma a distinct entity from intestinal subtype gastric cancer? Data from the AGAMENON-SEOM Registry.

BACKGROUND: Advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is generally treated similarly to advanced gastroesophageal junction (GEJ-AC) and gastric (GAC) adenocarcinomas, although GAC clinical trials rarely include EAC. This work sought to compare clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes of advanced EAC with those of GEJ-AC and GAC and examine prognostic factors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Participants comprised patients with advanced EAC, intestinal GEJ-AC, and GAC treated with platin and fluoropyrimidine (plus trastuzumab when HER2 status was positive). Overall and progression-free survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards regression gauged the prognostic value of the AGAMENON model. RESULTS: Between 2008 and 2019, 971 participants from the AGAMENON-SEOM registry were recruited at 35 centers. The sample included 67.3% GAC, 13.3% GEJ-AC, and 19.4% EAC. Pulmonary metastases were most common in EAC and peritoneal metastases in GAC. Median PFS and OS were 7.7 (95% CI 7.3-8.0) and 13.9 months (12.9-14.7). There was no difference in PFS or OS between HER2- and HER2+ tumors from the three locations (p > 0.05). Five covariates were found to be prognostic for the entire sample: ECOG-PS, histological grade, number of metastatic sites, NLR, and HER2+ tumors treated with trastuzumab. In EAC, the same variables were prognostic except for grade. The favorable prognosis for HER2+ cancers treated with trastuzumab was homogenous for all three subgroups (p = 0.351) and, after adjusting for the remaining covariates, no evidence supported primary tumor localization as a prognostic factor (p = 0.331). CONCLUSION: Our study supports the hypothesis that EAC exhibits clinicopathological characteristics, prognostic factors, and treatment outcomes comparable to intestinal GEJ-AC and GAC.

Second-line treatment in advanced gastric cancer: Data from the Spanish AGAMENON registry.

BACKGROUND: Second-line treatments boost overall survival in advanced gastric cancer (AGC). However, there is a paucity of information as to patterns of use and the results achieved in actual clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study population comprised patients with AGC in the AGAMENON registry who had received second-line. The objective was to describe the pattern of second-line therapies administered, progression-free survival following second-line (PFS-2), and post-progression survival since first-line (PPS). RESULTS: 2311 cases with 2066 progression events since first-line (89.3%) were recorded; 245 (10.6%) patients died during first-line treatment and 1326/2066 (64.1%) received a second-line. Median PFS-2 and PPS were 3.1 (95% CI, 2.9-3.3) and 5.8 months (5.5-6.3), respectively. The most widely used strategies were monoCT (56.9%), polyCT (15.0%), ramucirumab+CT (12.6%), platinum-reintroduction (8.3%), trastuzumab+CT (6.1%), and ramucirumab (1.1%). PFS-2/PPS medians gradually increased in monoCT, 2.6/5.1 months; polyCT 3.4/6.3 months; ramucirumab+CT, 4.1/6.5 months; platinum-reintroduction, 4.2/6.7 months, and for the HER2+ subgroup in particular, trastuzumab+CT, 5.2/11.7 months. Correlation between PFS since first-line and OS was moderate in the series as a whole (Kendall's τ = 0.613), lower in those subjects who received second-line (Kendall's τ = 0.539), especially with ramucirumab+CT (Kendall's τ = 0.413). CONCLUSION: This analysis reveals the diversity in second-line treatment for AGC, highlighting the effectiveness of paclitaxel-ramucirumab and, for a selected subgroup of patients, platinum reintroduction; both strategies endorsed by recent clinical guidelines.

Progress and challenges in gastroesophageal cancer.

Gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA) is a challenging disease; most GEA patients do not live for more than a year after a diagnosis of advanced disease. Development of effective targeted therapeutics for GEA patients lags behind other cancers. Progress in molecular biology has provided subclassifications of gastroesophageal cancer which may have prognostic and predictive utility and has identified novel therapeutic targets. Heterogeneity in biomarker expression has been a challenge in new drug development, leading to negative trials of targeted therapeutics in the first and second line setting. In this review, we discuss developments in understanding GEA biology, focus on putative prognostic and predictive biomarkers and examine the results of important recent clinical trials. The role of hetergeneity in GEA outcomes is reviewed and we discuss intra- and interpatient heterogenetiy in the context of emergent data on liquid biopsy and how this might complement tissue diagnosis and determine treatment in the GEA field. Finally, we examine recent results from international trials using immune checkpoint blockade with anti-PD-1, anti-CTLA4, and anti-PD-L1 antibodies, in an effort to dissect the interaction between gastroesophageal tumour and enviroment on the immune response and we reflect on how immune checkpoint blockade may impact of treatment paradigms for GEA in future.

Clinical relevance of histologic subtypes in locally advanced esophageal carcinoma treated with pre-operative chemoradiotherapy: Experience of a monographic oncologic centre.

BACKGROUND: Locally advanced esophageal carcinoma (LAEC) represents less than 30% of all diagnosed esophageal carcinoma worldwide. The standard of care for resectable tumours consists of preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by surgery. Despite the curative intent, the prognosis is still poor mainly due to relapse. A multidisciplinary approach is required in order to optimize the therapeutic strategy and follow-up. Differences in outcomes between the two main histological subtypes, adenocarcinoma (ADC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), have been reported. Nevertheless, the heterogeneity in trials design and data available have hampered the achievement of clear conclusions. The purpose of this study is to report the outcomes from a cohort of patients with LAEC treated with a multidisciplinary approach and to remark the differences observed between the two main histologic subtypes and their clinical implications. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 100 patients diagnosed with LAEC that were treated with preoperative CRT at our institution and integrated centres. Histopathological characteristics and toxicities during treatment were recorded. Patterns of recurrence at the first relapse were analysed. Survival curves were plotted using the Kaplan Meier method and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used. RESULTS: Among the patients who received preoperative CRT, 83% underwent surgery. The median overall survival (mOS) was 31.7 months, 26.9 months for ADC and 45.5 for SCC (p-value = 0.33). In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, ypN+ was the only factor that negatively influenced in OS (OR = 4.1, p-value = 0.022). Patterns of recurrence differed according to histologic subtype. Distant relapse was more frequent in ADC (62%), whereas locoregional relapse was higher in SCC (50%) (p-value = 0.027). Second line therapeutic strategies could be offered to 50% of those patients who relapsed. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in outcomes and recurrence pattern could be observed between the two main histologic subtypes of LAEC. A better molecular characterization, adapted therapeutic regimens and follow up strategies should be adopted in order to improve survival of these patients.

Gemcitabine-erlotinib versus gemcitabine-erlotinib-capecitabine in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer: Efficacy and safety results of a phase IIb randomised study from the Spanish TTD Collaborative Group.

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine and erlotinib have shown a survival benefit in the first-line setting in metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC). The aim of this study was to assess whether combining capecitabine (C) with gemcitabine + erlotinib (GE) was safe and effective versus GE in patients with mPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Previously untreated mPC patients were randomised to receive G (1000 mg/m2, days 1, 8, 15) + E (100 mg/day, days 1-28) + C (1660 mg/m2, days 1-21) or GE, q4 weeks, until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary end-point: progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end-points: overall survival (OS), response rate, relationship of rash with PFS/OS and safety. RESULTS: 120 patients were randomised, median age 63 years, ECOG status 0/1/2 33%/58%/8%; median follow-up 16.5 months. Median PFS in the gemcitabine-erlotinib-capecitabine (GEC) and GE arms was 4.3 and 3.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58-1.31; p = 0.52). Median OS in the GEC and GE arms was 6.8 and 7.7 months, respectively (HR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.72-1.63; p = 0.69). Grade 3/4 neutropenia (GEC 43% versus GE 15%; p = 0.0008) and mucositis (GEC 9% versus GE 0%; p = 0.03) were the only statistically significant differences in grade 3/4 adverse events. PFS and OS were significantly longer in patients with rash (grade ≥1) versus no rash (grade = 0): PFS 5.5 versus 2.0 months (HR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.26-0.6; p < 0.0001) and OS: 9.5 versus 4.0 months (HR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.33-0.77; p = 0.0014). CONCLUSION: PFS with GEC was not significantly different to that with GE in patients with mPC. Skin rash strongly predicted erlotinib efficacy. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01303029.