Expert consensus of the Spanish Society of Pathology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology on the determination of biomarkers in pancreatic and biliary tract cancer.

Pancreatic cancer and biliary tract cancer have a poor prognosis. In recent years, the development of new diagnostic techniques has enabled the identification of the main genetic alterations involved in the development of these tumours. Multiple studies have assessed the ability to predict response to treatment of certain biomarkers, such as BRCA in pancreatic cancer, IDH1 or FGFR2 in biliary tract cancer and microsatellite instability or NTRK fusions in an agnostic tumour fashion. In this consensus, a group of experts selected by the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) and the Spanish Society of Pathology (SEAP) reviewed the role played by these mutations in the process of carcinogenesis and their clinical implications. Based on their results, a series of recommendations are made to optimize the determination of these biomarkers and thus help standardize the diagnosis and treatment of these tumours.

Expert consensus of the Spanish Society of Pathology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology on the determination of biomarkers in pancreatic and biliary tract cancer.

Pancreatic cancer and biliary tract cancer have a poor prognosis. In recent years, the development of new diagnostic techniques has enabled the identification of the main genetic alterations involved in the development of these tumours. Multiple studies have assessed the ability of certain biomarkers, such as BRCA in pancreatic cancer, IDH1 or FGFR2 in biliary tract cancer and microsatellite instability or NTRK fusions in an agnostic tumour fashion, to predict response to treatment.In this consensus, a group of experts selected by the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) and the Spanish Society of Pathology (SEAP) reviewed the role played by these mutations in the process of carcinogenesis and their clinical implications. As a result, this article proposes a series of recommendations to optimize the determination of these biomarkers to help standardize the diagnosis and treatment of these tumours.

Cholangiocarcinoma landscape in Europe: Diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic insights from the ENSCCA Registry.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a rare and heterogeneous biliary cancer, whose incidence and related mortality is increasing. This study investigates the clinical course of CCA and subtypes (intrahepatic [iCCA], perihilar [pCCA], and distal [dCCA]) in a pan-European cohort. METHODS: The ENSCCA Registry is a multicenter observational study. Patients were included if they had a histologically proven diagnosis of CCA between 2010-2019. Demographic, histomorphological, biochemical, and clinical studies were performed. RESULTS: Overall, 2,234 patients were enrolled (male/female=1.29). iCCA (n = 1,243) was associated with overweight/obesity and chronic liver diseases involving cirrhosis and/or viral hepatitis; pCCA (n = 592) with primary sclerosing cholangitis; and dCCA (n = 399) with choledocholithiasis. At diagnosis, 42.2% of patients had local disease, 29.4% locally advanced disease (LAD), and 28.4% metastatic disease (MD). Serum CEA and CA19-9 showed low diagnostic sensitivity, but their concomitant elevation was associated with increased risk of presenting with LAD (odds ratio 2.16; 95% CI 1.43-3.27) or MD (odds ratio 5.88; 95% CI 3.69-9.25). Patients undergoing resection (50.3%) had the best outcomes, particularly with negative-resection margin (R0) (median overall survival [mOS] = 45.1 months); however, margin involvement (R1) (hazard ratio 1.92; 95% CI 1.53-2.41; mOS = 24.7 months) and lymph node invasion (hazard ratio 2.13; 95% CI 1.55-2.94; mOS = 23.3 months) compromised prognosis. Among patients with unresectable disease (49.6%), the mOS was 10.6 months for those receiving active palliative therapies, mostly chemotherapy (26.2%), and 4.0 months for those receiving best supportive care (20.6%). iCCAs were associated with worse outcomes than p/dCCAs. ECOG performance status, MD and CA19-9 were independent prognostic factors. CONCLUSION: CCA is frequently diagnosed at an advanced stage, a proportion of patients fail to receive cancer-specific therapies, and prognosis remains dismal. Identification of preventable risk factors and implementation of surveillance in high-risk populations are required to decrease cancer-related mortality. LAY SUMMARY: This is, to date, the largest international (pan-European: 26 hospitals and 11 countries) observational study, in which the course of cholangiocarcinoma has been investigated, comparing the 3 subtypes based on the latest International Classification of Diseases 11th Edition (ICD-11) (i.e., intrahepatic [2C12], perihilar [2C18], or distal [2C15] affected bile ducts), which come into effect in 2022. General and tumor-type specific features at diagnosis, risk factors, biomarker accuracy, as well as patient management and outcomes, are presented and compared, outlining the current clinical state of cholangiocarcinoma in Europe.

Final Overall Survival Efficacy Results of Ivosidenib for Patients With Advanced Cholangiocarcinoma With IDH1 Mutation: The Phase 3 Randomized Clinical ClarIDHy Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) variations occur in up to approximately 20% of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. In the ClarIDHy trial, progression-free survival as determined by central review was significantly improved with ivosidenib vs placebo. OBJECTIVE: To report the final overall survival (OS) results from the ClarIDHy trial, which aimed to demonstrate the efficacy of ivosidenib (AG-120)-a first-in-class, oral, small-molecule inhibitor of mutant IDH1-vs placebo for patients with unresectable or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical phase 3 trial was conducted from February 20, 2017, to May 31, 2020, at 49 hospitals across 6 countries among patients aged 18 years or older with cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation whose disease progressed with prior therapy. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive ivosidenib, 500 mg, once daily or matched placebo. Crossover from placebo to ivosidenib was permitted if patients had disease progression as determined by radiographic findings. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was progression-free survival as determined by blinded independent radiology center (reported previously). Overall survival was a key secondary end point. The primary analysis of OS followed the intent-to-treat principle. Other secondary end points included objective response rate, safety and tolerability, and quality of life. RESULTS: Overall, 187 patients (median age, 62 years [range, 33-83 years]) were randomly assigned to receive ivosidenib (n = 126; 82 women [65%]; median age, 61 years [range, 33-80 years]) or placebo (n = 61; 37 women [61%]; median age, 63 years [range, 40-83 years]); 43 patients crossed over from placebo to ivosidenib. The primary end point of progression-free survival was reported elsewhere. Median OS was 10.3 months (95% CI, 7.8-12.4 months) with ivosidenib vs 7.5 months (95% CI, 4.8-11.1 months) with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.56-1.12]; 1-sided P = .09). When adjusted for crossover, median OS with placebo was 5.1 months (95% CI, 3.8-7.6 months; hazard ratio, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.34-0.70]; 1-sided P < .001). The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse event (≥5%) reported in both groups was ascites (11 patients [9%] receiving ivosidenib and 4 patients [7%] receiving placebo). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events considered ivosidenib related were reported in 3 patients (2%). There were no treatment-related deaths. Patients receiving ivosidenib reported no apparent decline in quality of life compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This randomized clinical trial found that ivosidenib was well tolerated and resulted in a favorable OS benefit vs placebo, despite a high rate of crossover. These data, coupled with supportive quality of life data and a tolerable safety profile, demonstrate the clinical benefit of ivosidenib for patients with advanced cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02989857.

Addition of ramucirumab or merestinib to standard first-line chemotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Biliary tract cancers are aggressive, rare, gastrointestinal malignancies with a poor prognosis; approximately half of patients with these cancers survive for less than 1 year after diagnosis with advanced disease. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab or merestinib in addition to first-line cisplatin-gemcitabine in patients with locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 study at 81 hospitals across 18 countries. We enrolled patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed, non-resectable, recurrent, or metastatic biliary tract adenocarcinoma, who were treatment-naive, aged 18 years or older, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, estimated life expectancy of 3 months or more, and measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (2:1:2:1) to receive either intravenous ramucirumab 8 mg/kg or placebo (on days 1 and 8 in 21-day cycles) or oral merestinib 80 mg or placebo (once daily) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, or patient or investigator request for discontinuation. All participants received intravenous cisplatin 25 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 (on days 1 and 8 in 21-day cycles), for a maximum of eight cycles. Randomisation was done by an interactive web response system using a permuted block method (blocks of six) and was stratified by primary tumour site, geographical region, and presence of metastatic disease. Participants, investigators, and the study funder were masked to treatment assignment within the intravenous and oral groups. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (in the intention-to-treat population). The safety analysis was done in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02711553, and long-term follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between May 25, 2016, and Aug 8, 2017, 450 patients were assessed for eligibility and 309 (69%) were enrolled and randomly assigned to ramucirumab (n=106), merestinib (n=102), or pooled placebo (n=101); 306 received at least one dose of study treatment. The median follow-up time for progression-free survival at data cutoff (Feb 16, 2018) was 10·9 months (IQR 8·1-14·1). Median progression-free survival was 6·5 months (80% CI 5·7-7·1) in the ramucirumab group, 7·0 months (6·2-7·1) in the merestinib group, and 6·6 months (5·6-6·8) in the pooled placebo group (ramucirumab vs placebo hazard ratio 1·12 [80% CI 0·90-1·40], two-sided stratified p=0·48; merestinib vs placebo 0·92 [0·73-1·15], two-sided stratified p=0·64). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (51 [49%] of 104 patients in the ramucirumab group; 48 [47%] of 102 in the merestinib group; and 33 [33%] of 100 in the pooled placebo group), thrombocytopenia (36 [35%]; 19 [19%]; and 17 [17%]), and anaemia (28 [27%]; 16 [16%]; and 19 [19%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 53 (51%) patients in the ramucirumab group, 56 (55%) in the merestinib group, and 48 (48%) in the pooled placebo group. Treatment-related deaths (deemed related by the investigator) occurred in one (1%) of 104 patients in the ramucirumab group (cardiac arrest) and two (2%) of 102 patients in the merestinib group (pulmonary embolism [n=1] and sepsis [n=1]). INTERPRETATION: Adding ramucirumab or merestinib to first-line cisplatin-gemcitabine was well tolerated, with no new safety signals, but neither improved progression-free survival in patients with molecularly unselected, locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer. The role of these targeted inhibitors remains investigational, highlighting the need for further understanding of biliary tract malignancies and the contribution of molecular selection. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Association of the Lung Immune Prognostic Index with Immunotherapy Outcomes in Mismatch Repair Deficient Tumors.

Background: MSI-H/dMMR is considered the first predictive marker of efficacy for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, around 39% of cases are refractory and additional biomarkers are needed. We explored the prognostic value of pretreatment LIPI in MSI-H/dMMR patients treated with ICIs, including identification of fast-progressors. Methods: A multicenter retrospective study of patients with metastatic MSI-H/dMMR tumors treated with ICIs between April 2014 and May 2019 was performed. LIPI was calculated based on dNLR > 3 and LDH > upper limit of normal. LIPI groups were good (zero factors), intermediate (one factor) and poor (two factors). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), including the fast-progressor rate (OS < 3 months). Results: A total of 151 patients were analyzed, mainly female (59%), with median age 64 years, performance status (PS) 0 (42%), and sporadic dMMR status (68%). ICIs were administered as first or second-line for 59%. The most frequent tumor types were gastrointestinal (66%) and gynecologic (22%). LIPI groups were good (47%), intermediate (43%), and poor (10%). The median follow-up was 32 months. One-year OS rates were 81.0%, 67.1%, and 21.4% for good, intermediate, and poor-risk groups (p < 0.0001). After adjustment for tumor site, metastatic sites and PS, LIPI remained independently associated with OS (HR, poor-LIPI: 3.50, 95%CI: 1.46-8.40, p = 0.02. Overall, the fast-progressor rate was 16.0%, and 35.7% with poor-LIPI vs. 7.5% in the good-LIPI group (p = 0.02). Conclusions: LIPI identifies dMMR patients who do not benefit from ICI treatment, particularly fast-progressors. LIPI should be included as a stratification factor for future trials.

Tumor-Stromal Interactions in a Co-Culture Model of Human Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Cells and Fibroblasts and Their Connection with Tumor Spread.

One key feature of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a dense desmoplastic reaction that has been recognized as playing important roles in metastasis and therapeutic resistance. We aim to study tumor-stromal interactions in an in vitro coculture model between human PDAC cells (Capan-1 or PL-45) and fibroblasts (LC5). Confocal immunofluorescence, Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA), and Western blotting were used to evaluate the expressions of activation markers; cytokines arrays were performed to identify secretome profiles associated with migratory and invasive properties of tumor cells; extracellular vesicle production was examined by ELISA and transmission electron microscopy. Coculture conditions increased FGF-7 secretion and α-SMA expression, characterized by fibroblast activation and decreased epithelial marker E-cadherin in tumor cells. Interestingly, tumor cells and fibroblasts migrate together, with tumor cells in forming a center surrounded by fibroblasts, maximizing the contact between cells. We show a different mechanism for tumor spread through a cooperative migration between tumor cells and activated fibroblasts. Furthermore, IL-6 levels change significantly in coculture conditions, and this could affect the invasive and migratory capacities of cells. Targeting the interaction between tumor cells and the tumor microenvironment might represent a novel therapeutic approach to advanced PDAC.

Liver Metastases of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Implications for an Updated Staging System.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) with liver metastases is perceived to have a poor prognosis, but the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) classifies them as early stage in the absence of lymph nodes or extrahepatic spread. APPROACH AND RESULTS: Patients with iCCA from the European Network for the Study of Cholangiocarcinoma (ENS-CCA) and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries with survival/staging (AJCC v.7) data were eligible. Modified staging was used (mAJCC v.7): group A: stages I-III (excluding T2bN0); group B: stage IVa (excluding T2bN1M0); group C: liver metastases (T2bN0/1); and group D: stage IVb (extrahepatic metastases). Survival analysis (Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression) was performed in an ENS-CCA training cohort (TC) and findings internally (ENS-CCA iVC) and externally (SEER) validated. The aim was to assess whether liver metastases (group C) had a shorter survival compared to other early stages (group A) to propose a modified version of AJCC v.8 (mAJCC v.8). A total of 574 and 4,171 patients from the ENS-CCA and SEER registries were included. Following the new classification, 19.86% and 17.31% of patients from the ENS-CCA and SEER registries were reclassified into group C, respectively. In the ENS-CCA TC, multivariable Cox regression was adjusted for obesity (p = 0.026) and performance status (P < 0.001); patients in group C (HR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.18-5.42; P = 0.017) had a higher risk of death (vs. group A). Findings were validated in the ENS-CCA iVC (HR, 2.93; 95% CI, 2.04-4.19; P < 0.001) and in the SEER registry (HR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.68-2.09; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: iCCA with liver metastases has a worse outcome than other early stages of iCCA. Given that AJCC v.8 does not take this into consideration, a modification of AJCC v.8 (mAJCC v.8), including "liver metastases: multiple liver lesions, with or without vascular invasion" as an "M1a stage," is suggested.

Ivosidenib in IDH1-mutant, chemotherapy-refractory cholangiocarcinoma (ClarIDHy): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutations occur in approximately 13% of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, a relatively uncommon cancer with a poor clinical outcome. The aim of this international phase 3 study was to assess the efficacy and safety of ivosidenib (AG-120)-a small-molecule targeted inhibitor of mutated IDH1-in patients with previously treated IDH1-mutant cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study included patients from 49 hospitals in six countries aged at least 18 years with histologically confirmed, advanced, IDH1-mutant cholangiocarcinoma who had progressed on previous therapy, and had up to two previous treatment regimens for advanced disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, and a measurable lesion as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) with a block size of 6 and stratified by number of previous systemic treatment regimens for advanced disease to oral ivosidenib 500 mg or matched placebo once daily in continuous 28-day cycles, by means of an interactive web-based response system. Placebo to ivosidenib crossover was permitted on radiological progression per investigator assessment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by independent central review. The intention-to-treat population was used for the primary efficacy analyses. Safety was assessed in all patients who had received at least one dose of ivosidenib or placebo. Enrolment is complete; this study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02989857. FINDINGS: Between Feb 20, 2017, and Jan 31, 2019, 230 patients were assessed for eligibility, and as of the Jan 31, 2019 data cutoff date, 185 patients were randomly assigned to ivosidenib (n=124) or placebo (n=61). Median follow-up for progression-free survival was 6·9 months (IQR 2·8-10·9). Progression-free survival was significantly improved with ivosidenib compared with placebo (median 2·7 months [95% CI 1·6-4·2] vs 1·4 months [1·4-1·6]; hazard ratio 0·37; 95% CI 0·25-0·54; one-sided p<0·0001). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse event in both treatment groups was ascites (four [7%] of 59 patients receiving placebo and nine [7%] of 121 patients receiving ivosidenib). Serious adverse events were reported in 36 (30%) of 121 patients receiving ivosidenib and 13 (22%) of 59 patients receiving placebo. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Progression-free survival was significantly improved with ivosidenib compared with placebo, and ivosidenib was well tolerated. This study shows the clinical benefit of targeting IDH1 mutations in advanced, IDH1-mutant cholangiocarcinoma. FUNDING: Agios Pharmaceuticals.

Medical treatment for cholangiocarcinoma.

Most of the patients with cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) present with advanced (inoperable or metastatic) disease, and relapse rates are high in those undergoing potentially curative resection. Previous treatment nihilism of patients with advanced disease has been replaced by active clinical research with the advent of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and a much greater effort at understanding molecular mechanisms underpinning CCA. Three RCTs have recently been reported evaluating adjuvant chemotherapy following curative resection; only one of these has the potential to change practice. The BILCAP study failed to meet its primary endpoint by intention-to-treat analysis; however, a survival benefit was seen in a preplanned sensitivity analysis (predominantly adjusting for lymph nodes status). This, along with the numerical difference in median overall survival has led to the uptake of adjuvant capecitabine by many clinicians. In patients with advanced disease, the only level 1 data available supports the use of cisplatin and gemcitabine for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced disease; there is no established second-line chemotherapy. Previous forays into targeted therapy have proven unfruitful (namely targeting the epithelial growth factor receptor and vascular endothelial growth factor pathways). An increasing number of genomic subtypes are being defined; for some of these on-target therapeutic options are under active investigation. The most developed are studies targeting IDH-1 (isocitrate dehydrogenase) mutations and FGFR-2 (fibroblast growth factor receptor) fusions, with promising early results. Several other pathways are under evaluation, along with early studies targeting the immune environment; these are too premature to change practice to date. These emerging treatments are discussed.

Prognostic factors for survival with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine in metastatic pancreatic cancer in real-life practice: the ANICE-PaC study.

BACKGROUND: Treatment with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine increases survival in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. However, the assessment of treatment efficacy and safety in non-selected patients in a real-life setting may provide useful information to support decision-making processes in routine practice. METHODS: Retrospective, multicenter study including patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer, who started first-line treatment with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine between December 2013 and June 2015 according to routine clinical practice. In addition to describing the treatment pattern, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed for the total sample and the exploratory subgroups based on the treatment and patients' clinical characteristics. RESULTS: All 210 eligible patients had a median age of 65.0 years (range 37-81). Metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma was recurrent in 46 (21.9%) patients and de novo in 164 (78.1%); 38 (18%) patients had a biliary stent. At baseline, 33 (18.1%) patients had an ECOG performance status ≥2. Patients received a median of four cycles of treatment (range 1-21), with a median duration of 3.5 months; 137 (65.2%) patients had a dose reduction of nab-paclitaxel and/or gemcitabine during treatment, and 33 (17.2%) discontinued treatment due to toxicity. Relative dose intensity (RDI) for nab-paclitaxel, gemcitabine, and the combined treatment was 66.7%. Median OS was 7.2 months (95% CI 6.0-8.5), and median PFS was 5.0 months (95% CI 4.3-5.9); 50 patients achieved either a partial or complete response (ORR 24.6%). OS was influenced by baseline ECOG PS, NLR and CA 19.9, but not by age ≥ 70 years and/or the presence of hepatobiliary stent or RDI < 85%. All included variables, computed as dichotomous, showed a significant contribution to the Cox regression model to build a nomogram for predicting survival in these patients: baseline ECOG 0-1 vs. 2-3 (p = 0.030), baseline NLR > 3 vs. ≤ 3 (p = 0.043), and baseline CA 19.9 > 37 U/mL vs. ≤37 U/mL (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Nab-Paclitaxel plus gemcitabine remain effective in a real-life setting, despite the high burden of dose reductions and poorer performance of these patients. A nomogram to predict survival using baseline ECOG performance status, NLR and CA 19.9 is proposed.

Multiplatform plasma fingerprinting in cancer cachexia: a pilot observational and translational study.

BACKGROUND: Cachexia is a metabolic syndrome that affects up to 50-80% of cancer patients. The pathophysiology is characterized by a variable combination of reduced food intake and abnormal metabolism, including systemic inflammation and negative protein and energy balance. Despite its high clinical significance, defined diagnostic criteria and established therapeutic strategies are lacking. The 'omics' technologies provide a global view of biological systems. We hypothesize that blood-based metabolomics might identify findings in cachectic patients that could provide clues to gain knowledge on its pathophysiology, and eventually postulate new therapeutic strategies. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional observational study in two cohorts of cancer patients, with and without cachexia. Patients were consecutively recruited from routine clinical practice of a General Oncology Department at '12 de Octubre' University Hospital. Selected clinical and biochemical features were collected. Blood metabolite fingerprinting was performed using three analytical platforms, gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (GC-MS), capillary electrophoresis coupled to mass spectrometry (CE-MS), and liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (LC-MS). Besides, we performed pathway-based metabolite analyses to obtain more information on biological functions. RESULTS: A total of 15 subjects were included in this study, 8 cachectic and 7 non-cachectic patients. Metabolomic analyses were able to correctly classify their samples in 80% (GC-MS), 97% (CE-MS), 96% [LC-MS (positive mode)], and 89% [LC-MS (negative mode)] of the cases. The most prominent metabolic alteration in plasma of cachectic patients was the decrease of amino acids and derivatives [especially arginine, tryptophan, indolelactic acid, and threonine, with 0.4-fold change (FC) compared with non-cachectic patients], along with the reduction of glycerophospholipids [mainly lysophosphatidylcholines(O-16:0) and lysophosphatidylcholines(20:3) sn-1, FC = 0.1] and sphingolipids [SM(d30:0), FC = 0.5]. The metabolite with the highest increase was cortisol (FC = 1.6). Such alterations suggest a role of the following metabolic pathways in the pathophysiology of cancer cachexia: arginine and proline metabolism; alanine, aspartate, and glutamate metabolism; phenylalanine metabolism; lysine degradation; aminoacyl-tRNA biosynthesis; fatty acid elongation in mitochondria; tricarboxylic acids cycle; among others. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that plasma amino acids and lipids profiling has great potential to find the mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis of cachexia. Metabolic profiling of plasma from cancer patients show differences between cachexia and non-cachexia in amino acids and lipids that might be related to mechanisms involved in its pathophysiology. A better understanding of these mechanisms might identify novel therapeutic approaches to palliate this unmet medical condition.