Stereotactic body radiotherapy with or without selective dismutase mimetic in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: an adaptive, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1b/2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has the potential to ablate localised pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Selective dismutase mimetics sensitise tumours while reducing normal tissue toxicity. This trial was designed to establish the efficacy and toxicity afforded by the selective dismutase mimetic avasopasem manganese when combined with ablative SBRT for localised pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: In this adaptive, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1b/2 trial, patients aged 18 years or older with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer who had received at least 3 months of chemotherapy and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled at six academic sites in the USA. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1), with block randomisation (block sizes of 6-12) with a maximum of 24 patients per group, to receive daily avasopasem (90 mg) or placebo intravenously directly before (ie, within 180 min) SBRT (50, 55, or 60 Gy in five fractions, adaptively assigned in real time by Bayesian estimates of 90-day safety and efficacy). Patients and physicians were masked to treatment group allocation, but not to SBRT dose. The primary objective was to find the optimal dose of SBRT with avasopasem or placebo as determined by the late onset EffTox method. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03340974, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Jan 25, 2018, and April 29, 2020, 47 patients were screened, of whom 42 were enrolled (median age was 71 years [IQR 63-75], 23 [55%] were male, 19 [45%] were female, 37 [88%] were White, three [7%] were Black, and one [2%] each were unknown or other races) and randomly assigned to avasopasem (n=24) or placebo (n=18); the placebo group was terminated early after failing to meet prespecified efficacy parameters. At data cutoff (June 28, 2021), the avasopasem group satisfied boundaries for both efficacy and toxicity. Late onset EffTox efficacy response was observed in 16 (89%) of 18 patients at 50 Gy and six (100%) of six patients at 55 Gy in the avasopasem group, and was observed in three (50%) of six patients at 50 Gy and nine (75%) of 12 patients at 55 Gy in the placebo group, and the Bayesian model recommended 50 Gy or 55 Gy in five fractions with avasopasem for further study. Serious adverse events of any cause were reported in three (17%) of 18 patients in the placebo group and six (25%) of 24 in the avasopasem group. In the placebo group, grade 3 adverse events within 90 days of SBRT were abdominal pain, acute cholangitis, pyrexia, increased blood lactic acid, and increased lipase (one [6%] each); no grade 4 events occurred. In the avasopasem group, grade 3-4 adverse events within 90 days of SBRT were acute kidney injury, increased blood alkaline phosphatase, haematoma, colitis, gastric obstruction, lung infection, abdominal abscess, post-surgical atrial fibrillation, and pneumonia leading to respiratory failure (one [4%] each).There were no treatment-related deaths but one late death in the avasopasem group due to sepsis in the setting of duodenal obstruction after off-study treatment was reported as potentially related to SBRT. INTERPRETATION: SBRT that uses 50 or 55 Gy in five fractions can be considered for patients with localised pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. The addition of avasopasem might further enhance disease outcomes. A larger phase 2 trial (GRECO-2, NCT04698915) is underway to validate these results. FUNDING: Galera Therapeutics.

Ampullary Adenocarcinoma, Version 1.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Ampullary cancers refer to tumors originating from the ampulla of Vater (the ampulla, the intraduodenal portion of the bile duct, and the intraduodenal portion of the pancreatic duct), while periampullary cancers may arise from locations encompassing the head of the pancreas, distal bile duct, duodenum, or ampulla of Vater. Ampullary cancers are rare gastrointestinal malignancies, and prognosis varies greatly based on factors such as patient age, TNM classification, differentiation grade, and treatment modality received. Systemic therapy is used in all stages of ampullary cancer, including neoadjuvant therapy, adjuvant therapy, and first-line or subsequent-line therapy for locally advanced, metastatic, and recurrent disease. Radiation therapy may be used in localized ampullary cancer, sometimes in combination with chemotherapy, but there is no high-level evidence to support its utility. Select tumors may be treated surgically. This article describes NCCN recommendations regarding management of ampullary adenocarcinoma.

Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death among men and women in the United States. A major challenge in treatment remains patients' advanced disease at diagnosis. The NCCN Guidelines for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma provides recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up for patients with pancreatic cancer. Although survival rates remain relatively unchanged, newer modalities of treatment, including targeted therapies, provide hope for improving patient outcomes. Sections of the manuscript have been updated to be concordant with the most recent update to the guidelines. This manuscript focuses on the available systemic therapy approaches, specifically the treatment options for locally advanced and metastatic disease.

Role of pelvic chemoradiation therapy in patients with initially metastatic anal canal cancer: A National Cancer Database review.

BACKGROUND: Although the management of localized anal canal squamous cell carcinomas is well established, the role of pelvic chemoradiation (CRT) in the treatment of patients presenting with synchronous metastatic (stage IV) disease is poorly defined. This study used a national cancer database to compare the overall survival (OS) rates of patients with synchronous metastatic disease receiving CRT to the pelvis and patients treated with chemotherapy (CT) alone. METHODS: This study included adult patients with anal canal squamous cell carcinomas presenting with synchronous metastases diagnosed from 2004 to 2012. Multiple imputation and 2:1 propensity score matching were used to create a matched data set for testing. The proportional hazards model was used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) for the effect of the treatment group on OS. With only patients in the matched data set, the OS of the treatment groups was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method by treatment group. RESULTS: This study started with an unmatched data set of 978 patients, and 582 patients were selected for the matched data set: 388 in the CRT group and 194 in the CT-alone group. The HR for the group effect was 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-0.92; P = .006). The median OS was 21.1 months in the CRT group (95% CI, 17.4-24.0 months) and 14.6 months in the CT group (95% CI, 12.2-18.4 months). The corresponding 5-year OS rates were 23% (95% CI, 18%-28%) and 14% (95% CI, 7%-21%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this large series analyzing OS in patients with stage IV anal cancer, CRT was associated with improved OS in comparison with CT alone. Because of the lack of prospective data in this setting, this evidence will help to guide treatment approaches in this group of patients.

Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, Version 1.2019.

The NCCN Guidelines for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma discuss the diagnosis and management of adenocarcinomas of the exocrine pancreas and are intended to assist with clinical decision-making. These NCCN Guidelines Insights discuss important updates to the 2019 version of the guidelines, focusing on postoperative adjuvant treatment of patients with pancreatic cancers.

Comparison of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis.

Aim: To compare the clinical efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) for esophageal cancer. Methods: Randomized controlled trials reporting on the comparison of nCRT and nCT for esophageal cancer were identified. Results: Three eligible randomized controlled trials were identified and included with a total of 375 patients (189 nCRT, 186 nCT). Outcomes showed that compared with nCT group, R0 resection and pathologic complete response (pCR) rates were significantly increased in nCRT group. However, no significant difference was seen in 3- and 5-year progression-free survival or 3- and 5-year overall survival. Conclusion: The addition of radiotherapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy results in higher R0 resection rate and pCR rate, without significantly impacting survival.

The role of external beam radiotherapy in the treatment of hepatocellular cancer.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing in incidence and mortality. Although the prognosis remains poor, long-term survival has improved from 3% in 1970 to an 18% 5-year survival rate today. This is likely because of the introduction of well tolerated, oral antiviral therapies for hepatitis C. Curative options for patients with HCC are often limited by underlying liver dysfunction/cirrhosis and medical comorbidities. Less than one-third of patients are candidates for surgery, which is the current gold standard for cure. Nonsurgical treatments include embolotherapies, percutaneous ablation, and ablative radiation. Technological advances in radiation delivery in the past several decades now allow for safe and effective ablative doses to the liver. Conformal techniques allow for both dose escalation to target volumes and normal tissue sparing. Multiple retrospective and prospective studies have demonstrated that hypofractionated image-guided radiation therapy, used as monotherapy or in combination with other liver-directed therapies, can provide excellent local control that is cost effective. Therefore, as the HCC treatment paradigm continues to evolve, ablative radiation treatment has moved from a palliative treatment to both a "bridge to transplant" and a definitive treatment.

The Selective Use of Radiation Therapy in Rectal Cancer Patients.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Colorectal cancer has a high global incidence, and standard treatment employs a multimodality approach. In addition to cure, minimizing treatment-related toxicity and improving the therapeutic ratio is a common goal. The following article addresses the potential of omitting radiotherapy in select rectal cancer patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Omission of radiotherapy in rectal cancer is analyzed in the context of historical findings, as well as more recent data describing risk stratification of stage II-III disease, surgical optimization, imaging limitations, improvement in systemic chemotherapeutic agents, and contemporary studies evaluating selective omission of radiotherapy. A subset of rectal cancer patients exists that may be considered low to intermediate risk for locoregional recurrence. With appropriate staging, surgical technique, and possibly improved systemic therapy, it may be feasible to selectively omit radiotherapy in these patients. Current imaging limitations as well as evidence of increased locoregional recurrence following radiotherapy omission lend us to continue supporting the standard treatment of approach of neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy followed by surgical resection until additional improvements and prospective evidence can support otherwise.

Total neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer: An emerging option.

The treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) has benefited from improved surgical techniques and from the implementation of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), which have markedly decreased the rates of local recurrence. However, distant metastatic disease remains the most significant cause of death for these patients. Although adjuvant chemotherapy (ChT) after neoadjuvant CRT and definitive surgery is commonly recommended, the value of adjuvant systemic therapy remains less clear. Trials evaluating adjuvant ChT for rectal cancer have been handicapped by poor compliance rates and inconsistent survival results. Shifting systemic therapy delivery to the neoadjuvant setting has the promise to improve compliance rates, reduce toxicity, and decrease distant relapse rates. Recently, multiple prospective trials have reported on the use of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) for patients with LARC, incorporating both ChT and CRT in the neoadjuvant setting. Here, the authors review the promising results from those trials. Because the studies have largely focused on pathologic outcomes (primarily pathologic complete response rates), ongoing phase 2 and 3 trials are now underway assessing the long-term disease-related outcomes with TNT. In addition to improving survival, TNT has the potential to increase the pool of patients with LARC who are eligible for organ preservation, which is also being evaluated. Cancer 2017;123:1497-1506. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiation remains strongly favored over short-course radiotherapy by radiation oncologists in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Short-course radiotherapy (SC-RT) and long-course chemoradiotherapy (LC-CRT) are accepted neoadjuvant treatments of rectal cancer. In the current study, the authors surveyed US radiation oncologists to assess practice patterns and attitudes regarding SC-RT and LC-CRT for patients with rectal cancer. METHODS: The authors distributed a survey to 1701 radiation oncologists regarding treatment of neoadjuvant rectal cancer. Respondents were asked questions regarding the number of patients with rectal cancer treated, preference for SC-RT versus LC-CRT, and factors influencing regimen choice. RESULTS: Of 1659 contactable physicians, 182 responses (11%) were received. Approximately 83% treated at least 5 patients with rectal cancer annually. The majority of responding radiation oncologists (96%) preferred neoadjuvant LC-CRT for the treatment of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and 44% never used SC-RT. Among radiation oncologists using SC-RT, respondents indicated they would not recommend this regimen for patients with low (74%) or bulky tumors (70%) and/or concern for a positive circumferential surgical resection margin (69%). The most frequent reasons for not offering SC-RT were insufficient downstaging for sphincter preservation (53%) and a desire for longer follow-up (45%). Many radiation oncologists indicated they would prescribe SC-RT for patients not receiving chemotherapy (62%) or patients with a geographic barrier to receiving LC-CRT (82%). Patient comorbidities appeared to influence regimen preferences for 79% of respondents. Approximately 20% of respondents indicated that altered oncology care reimbursement using capitated payment by diagnosis would impact their consideration of SC-RT. CONCLUSIONS: US radiation oncologists rarely use neoadjuvant SC-RT despite 3 randomized controlled trials demonstrating no significant differences in outcome compared with LC-CRT. Further research is necessary to determine whether longer follow-up coupled with the benefits of lower cost, increased patient convenience, and lower acute toxicity will increase the adoption of SC-RT by radiation oncologists in the United States. Cancer 2017;123:1434-1441. © 2016 American Cancer Society.