Combining CD40 agonist mitazalimab with mFOLFIRINOX in previously untreated metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (OPTIMIZE-1): a single-arm, multicentre phase 1b/2 study.

BACKGROUND: Current systemic therapies for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma are associated with poor outcomes with a 5-year overall survival rate under 5%. We aimed to assess the safety and antitumour activity of mitazalimab, a human CD40 agonistic IgG1 antibody, with modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX; fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan), in chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: OPTIMIZE-1 was a single-arm, multicentre, phase 1b/2 study which enrolled adults with histologically-confirmed metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and European Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1 in 14 university hospitals in Belgium, France, and Spain. The primary endpoint of phase 1b was to determine the recommended phase 2 dose of intravenous mitazalimab (450 µg/kg or 900 µg/kg) when combined with intravenous mFOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2, fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2). In the first 21-day treatment cycle, mitazalimab was administered on days 1 and 10, and mFOLFIRINOX on day 8. In subsequent 14-day cycles mitazalimab was administered 2 days after mFOLFIRINOX. The phase 2 primary endpoint was objective response rate. Activity and safety analyses were conducted on the full analysis set (all patients who received the combination of mitazalimab at the recommended phase 2 dose and mFOLFIRINOX for at least two treatment cycles) and safety set (all patients who received any study treatment), respectively. Enrolment is complete, and data represents a primary analysis of the ongoing trial. The trial is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04888312). FINDINGS: Between Sept 29, 2021, and March 28, 2023, 88 patients were screened and 70 patients were enrolled (40 [57%] were female and 30 [43%] were male). In phase 1b, 900 µg/kg mitazalimab was determined as the recommended phase 2 dose. Overall, five patients received 450 µg/kg mitazalimab; 65 received 900 µg/kg mitazalimab. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed at 450 µg/kg, and one dose-limiting toxicity was observed at 900 µg/kg. 57 patients were evaluated for activity, and all 70 patients were included in the safety set. At data cutoff on Nov 14, 2023, median follow-up was 12·7 months (95% CI 11·1-15·7). Of the 57 patients, 29 (51%) remained on study and 18 (32%) remained on treatment. The primary endpoint (objective response rate >30%) was met (objective response rates in 23 [40%]; one-sided 90% CI ≥32 of 57 patients). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (18 [26%] of 70 patients), hypokalaemia (11 patients [16%]), and anaemia and thrombocytopenia (eight patients [11%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 29 (41%) of 70 patients, the most common being vomiting (five [7%] of 70 patients), decreased appetite (four [6%]), and diarrhoea and cholangitis (three [4%] of 70 patients for each), none considered related to mitazalimab. No treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: Mitazalimab with mFOLFIRINOX demonstrated manageable safety and encouraging activity, warranting continued development in a phase 3, randomised, controlled trial. The results from OPTIMIZE-1 pave the way for further exploration and confirmation of a novel immunotherapy treatment regimen for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, which is a complex and aggressive cancer with very low survival rates and restricted treatment options. FUNDING: Alligator Bioscience.

OncoSNIPE® Study Protocol, a study of molecular profiles associated with development of resistance in solid cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Nowadays, evaluation of the efficacy and the duration of treatment, in context of monitoring patients with solid tumors, is based on the RECIST methodology. With these criteria, resistance and/or insensitivity are defined as tumor non-response which does not allow a good understanding of the diversity of the underlying mechanisms. The main objective of the OncoSNIPE® collaborative clinical research program is to identify early and late markers of resistance to treatment. METHODS: Multicentric, interventional study with the primary objective to identify early and / or late markers of resistance to treatment, in 600 adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic triple negative or Luminal B breast cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer or pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Patients targeted in this study have all rapid progression of their pathology, making it possible to obtain models for evaluating markers of early and / or late responses over the 2-year period of follow-up, and thus provide the information necessary to understand resistance mechanisms. To explore the phenomena of resistance, during therapeutic response and / or progression of the pathology, we will use a multidisciplinary approach including high-throughput sequencing (Exome-seq and RNAseq), clinical data, medical images and immunological profile by ELISA. Patients will have long-term follow-up with different biological samples, at baseline (blood and biopsy) and at each tumoral evaluation or tumoral progression evaluated by medical imaging. Clinical data will be collected through a dedicated Case Report Form (CRF) and enriched by semantic extraction based on the French ConSoRe (Continuum Soins Recherche) initiative, a dedicated Semantic Clinical Data Warehouse (SCDW) to cancer. The study is sponsored by Oncodesign (Dijon, France) and is currently ongoing. DISCUSSION: The great diversity of intrinsic or acquired molecular mechanisms involved in resistance to treatment constitutes a real therapeutic issue. Improving understanding of mechanisms of resistance of cancer cells to anti-tumor treatments is therefore a major challenge. The OncoSNIPE cohort will lead to a better understanding of the mechanisms of resistance and will allow to explore new mechanisms of actions and to discover new therapeutic targets or strategies making it possible to circumvent the escape in different types of cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrial.gov. Registered 16 September 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04548960?term=oncosnipe&draw=2&rank=1 and ANSM ID RCB 2017-A02018-45.

Alectinib versus Crizotinib in Untreated ALK-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Alectinib, a highly selective inhibitor of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), has shown systemic and central nervous system (CNS) efficacy in the treatment of ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We investigated alectinib as compared with crizotinib in patients with previously untreated, advanced ALK-positive NSCLC, including those with asymptomatic CNS disease. METHODS: In a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 303 patients with previously untreated, advanced ALK-positive NSCLC to receive either alectinib (600 mg twice daily) or crizotinib (250 mg twice daily). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Secondary end points were independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival, time to CNS progression, objective response rate, and overall survival. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 17.6 months (crizotinib) and 18.6 months (alectinib), an event of disease progression or death occurred in 62 of 152 patients (41%) in the alectinib group and 102 of 151 patients (68%) in the crizotinib group. The rate of investigator-assessed progression-free survival was significantly higher with alectinib than with crizotinib (12-month event-free survival rate, 68.4% [95% confidence interval (CI), 61.0 to 75.9] with alectinib vs. 48.7% [95% CI, 40.4 to 56.9] with crizotinib; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.34 to 0.65]; P<0.001); the median progression-free survival with alectinib was not reached. The results for independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival were consistent with those for the primary end point. A total of 18 patients (12%) in the alectinib group had an event of CNS progression, as compared with 68 patients (45%) in the crizotinib group (cause-specific hazard ratio, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.28; P<0.001). A response occurred in 126 patients in the alectinib group (response rate, 82.9%; 95% CI, 76.0 to 88.5) and in 114 patients in the crizotinib group (response rate, 75.5%; 95% CI, 67.8 to 82.1) (P=0.09). Grade 3 to 5 adverse events were less frequent with alectinib (41% vs. 50% with crizotinib). CONCLUSIONS: As compared with crizotinib, alectinib showed superior efficacy and lower toxicity in primary treatment of ALK-positive NSCLC. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche; ALEX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02075840 .).

Chemotherapy for Well-Differentiated Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumours with a Ki-67 Index ≥10%: Is There a More Effective Antitumour Regimen? A Retrospective Multicentre Study of the French Group of Endocrine Tumours (GTE).

BACKGROUND: The best chemotherapy regimen for well- differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (pNETs) with a Ki-67 index ≥10% is still debated. We evaluated the antitumour efficacy of various first-line chemotherapy regimens (streptozocin based, platinum based, or dacarbazine/temozolomide based) in this situation. METHODS: In this retrospective multicentre study of the French Group of Endocrine Tumours (GTE), we recruited consecutive patients with advanced well-differentiated pNETs and a Ki-67 index ≥10% receiving chemotherapy between 2000 and 2012. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) according to RECIST. RESULTS: Seventy-four patients (42 men, median age 55.5 years) were enrolled from 10 centres. Fifty-one patients (69%) had grade 2 NET and 61 (82%) were stage IV. Median overall survival was 36.3 months. Forty-four patients (59%) received streptozocin-based, 18 (24%) platinum-based, and 12 (16%) dacarbazine/temozolomide-based chemotherapy regimens. These 3 groups were similar regarding age, functioning tumours, grade, the number of metastatic sites, and surgery for primary tumours, but not regarding surgery for metastases and time since diagnosis. Grade 3 NET (HR 2.15, 95% CI: 1.18-3.92, p = 0.012) and age above 55 years (HR 1.84, 95% CI: 1.06-3.18, p = 0.030) were associated with shorter median PFS in the multivariate analyses. Compared to streptozocin-based chemotherapy, no difference was found in terms of PFS for the platinum-based or for the dacarbazine/temozolomide-based chemotherapy regimen: median PFS was 7.2, 7.5, and 7.2 months, respectively (p = 0.51). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with intermediate or highly proliferative well-differentiated pNETs may benefit from 1 of the 3 chemotherapy regimens. Increased age and grade 3 were associated with shorter median PFS. Randomised studies searching for response predictors and the best efficacy-tolerance ratio are required to personalise the strategy.

Mutational analysis of anal cancers demonstrates frequent PIK3CA mutations associated with poor outcome after salvage abdominoperineal resection.

BACKGROUND: A better understanding of the molecular profile of anal squamous cell carcinomas (ASCCs) is necessary to consider new therapeutic approaches, and the identification of prognostic and predictive factors for response to treatment. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed tumours from ASCC patients for mutational analysis of KRAS, NRAS, HRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA, MET, TP53 and FBXW7 genes by HRM and Sanger sequencing analysis. RESULTS: Specimens from 148 patients were analysed: 96 treatment-naive tumours and 52 recurrences after initial radiotherapy (RT) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Mutations of KRAS, PIK3CA, FBXW7 and TP53 genes were present in 3 (2.0%), 30 (20.3%), 9 (6.1%) and 7 tumours (4.7%), respectively. The distribution of the mutations was similar between treatment-naive tumours and recurrences, except for TP53 mutations being more frequent in recurrences (P=0.0005). In patients treated with abdominoperineal resection (APR) after relapse (n=38, median follow-up of 18.2 years), overall survival (OS) was significantly correlated with HPV16 status (P=0.048), gender (P=0.045) and PIK3CA mutation (P=0.037). The PIK3CA status retained its prognostic significance in Cox multivariate regression analysis (P=0.025). CONCLUSIONS: Our study identified PIK3CA mutation as an independent prognostic factor in patients who underwent APR for ASCC recurrence, suggesting a potential benefit from adjuvant treatment and the evaluation of targeted therapies with PI3K/Akt/mTor inhibitors in PIK3CA-mutated patients.

Biweekly docetaxel, fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (TEF) as first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer and adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction: safety and efficacy in a multicenter cohort.

BACKGROUND: Docetaxel-cisplatin-5-FU chemotherapy is superior to 5-FU-cisplatin in terms of response rate and survival in advanced gastric cancer (AGC), but is more toxic. Oxaliplatin is better tolerated than cisplatin, which it can effectively replace in this setting. We hypothesize that incorporating docetaxel into a simplified FOLFOX regimen should be a tolerable and effective option in first-line treatment of AGC. METHODS: Data were collected at six French centers from patients with metastatic or local AGC who received docetaxel, fluorouracil, leucovorin, or oxaliplatin (TEF) as first-line treatment. TEF was administered as follows: docetaxel (50 mg/m(2)), oxaliplatin (85 mg/m(2)), and leucovorin (40 mg/m(2)) on day 1, and 5-FU continuous infusion for 48 h (2400 mg/m(2)) every 2 weeks. RESULTS: Forty-one patients were enrolled. Performance status was grade 0 and 1 in respectively 27 and 58 % of patients; 17 patients had adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction; 37 patients had metastatic disease, 22 had a poorly differentiated or diffuse type. Objective response rate was 66 %, with a complete response in two patients (5 %). Median progression-free survival and overall survival were respectively 6.3 and 12.1 months. Tolerability was acceptable with no treatment-related deaths. The most frequent grade 3-4 toxicities were neutropenia (30 %) and neuropathy (12.5 %). Curative intent surgery after response to TEF was performed in seven patients (17 %). CONCLUSION: TEF is an effective first-line treatment with an acceptable toxicity profile for patients with AGC. It may allow curative resection in initially unresectable patients. TEF should now be evaluated in prospective randomized trials.

Improving the local excision strategy for rectal cancer after chemoradiotherapy: Surgical and oncological results.

INTRODUCTION: Local excision (LE) for good responders after chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for rectal cancer is oncologically safe. Although the GRECCAR 2 trial did not demonstrate any advantages in morbidity, it provided useful information for optimising patient selection. This study assessed the impact of these results on our practice by focusing on the evolution of our selection criteria and management modalities for these patients over 10 years. METHODS: Data were collected using our retrospective database of 110 patients who underwent LE after CRT for low and middle rectal cancer between 2010 and 2022 before (Group 1) and after (Group 2) consideration of the GRECCAR 2 trial results. RESULTS: The pretherapeutic selection criteria remained stable after the GRECCAR 2 trial, although in Group 2, completion total mesorectal excision (TME) for ypT2 tumours with favourable tumour regression grade was abandoned, improving the organ preservation rate at 1 year from 63.3 % to 91.8 % (p < 0.01). The operative time and length of stay after LE were reduced by half in Group 2 (p < 0.01). The intention-to-treat rate for severe morbidity was also halved, but was not significant (8.2 % vs. 16.3 %, p = 0.24). Among patients with a 3-year follow-up data, disease-free survival was comparable between Group 1 (89.8 %) and Group 2 (85.4 %) (p = 0.51) with one locoregional recurrence in each group (2.0 % vs. 2.1 %, p = 1). CONCLUSION: LE is a safe and effective strategy when performed in a "high-volume" centre. Improved methods for assessing tumour response and the selection criteria for completion TME enhanced surgical outcomes without compromising oncological outcomes.

Prediction of Adjuvant Gemcitabine Sensitivity in Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Using the GemPred RNA Signature: An Ancillary Study of the PRODIGE-24/CCTG PA6 Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: GemPred, a transcriptomic signature predictive of the efficacy of adjuvant gemcitabine (GEM), was developed from cell lines and organoids and validated retrospectively. The phase III PRODIGE-24/CCTG PA6 trial has demonstrated the superiority of modified folinic acid, fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFIRINOX) over GEM as adjuvant therapy in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma at the expense of higher toxicity. We evaluated the potential predictive value of GemPred in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Routine formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded surgical specimens of 350 patients were retrieved for RNA sequencing and GemPred prediction (167 in the GEM arm and 183 in the mFOLFIRINOX [mFFX] arm). Survival analyses were stratified by resection margins, lymph node status, and cancer antigen 19-9 level. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients' tumors (25.5%) were GemPred+ and were thus predicted to be gemcitabine-sensitive. In the GEM arm, GemPred+ patients (n = 50, 30%) had a significantly longer disease-free survival (DFS) than GemPred- patients (n = 117, 70%; median 27.3 v 10.2 months, hazard ratio [HR], 0.43 [95% CI, 0.29 to 0.65]; P < .001) and cancer-specific survival (CSS; median 68.4 v 28.6 months, HR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.27 to 0.66]; P < .001). GemPred had no prognostic value in the mFFX arm. DFS and CSS were similar in GemPred+ patients who received adjuvant GEM and mFFX (median 27.3 v 24.0 months, and 68.4 v 51.4 months, respectively). The statistical interaction between GEM and GemPred+ status was significant for DFS (P = .008) and CSS (P = .004). GemPred+ patients had significantly more adverse events of grade ≥3 in the mFFX arm (76%) compared with those in the GEM arm (40%; P = .001). CONCLUSION: This ancillary study of a phase III randomized trial demonstrates that among the quarter of patients with a GemPred-positive transcriptomic signature, survival was comparable with that of mFOLFIRINOX, whereas those receiving adjuvant gemcitabine had fewer adverse events.

Small bowel adenocarcinoma phenotyping, a clinicobiological prognostic study.

BACKGROUND: Small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) is a rare tumour with a poor prognosis. Molecular biology data on SBA carcinogenesis are lacking. METHODS: Expression of HER2, ß-catenin, p53 and mismatch repair (MMR) protein was assessed by immunohistochemistry. KRAS, V600E BRAF mutations and microsatellite instability were investigated. RESULTS: We obtained samples from 63 SBA patients (tumour stages: I-II: 30%; III: 35%; IV: 32%; locally advanced: 3%). HER2 overexpression (3+) was observed in 2 out of 62 patients, overexpression of p53 in 26 out of 62, abnormal expression of ß-catenin in 12 out of 61, KRAS mutation in 21 out of 49, BRAF V600E mutation in 1 out of 40 patients, MMR deficiency (dMMR) in 14 out of 61 and was consistent with Lynch syndrome in 9 out of 14 patients. All of the dMMR tumours were in the duodenum or jejunum and only one was stage IV. Median overall survival (OS) was 36.6 months (95% CI, 26.9-72.2). For all patients, in univariate analysis, stages I-II (P<0.001), WHO PS 0-1 (P=0.01) and dMMR phenotype (P=0.02) were significantly associated with longer OS. In multivariate analysis, disease stage (P=0.01) and WHO PS 0-1 (P=0.001) independently predicted longer OS. For stage IV patients, median OS was 20.5 months (95% CI: 14.6; 36.6 months). In multivariate analysis, WHO PS 0-1 (P=0.0001) and mutated KRAS status (P=0.02) independently predicted longer OS. CONCLUSION: This large study suggests that molecular alterations in SBA are closer to those in colorectal cancer (CRC) than those in gastric cancer, with low levels of HER 2 overexpression and high frequencies of KRAS mutations. The seemingly higher frequency of dMMR than in CRC may be explained by the higher frequency of Lynch syndrome in SBA patients. A dMMR phenotype was significantly associated with a non-metastatic tumour (P=0.02). A trend for a good prognosis and a duodenum or jejunum primary site was associated with dMMR.

Assessment of biological effect of nab-paclitaxel combined with gemcitabine, using contrast enhanced ultrasonography and elastography, in advanced pancreatic ductal carcinoma: A single-center pilot study.

EUS associated with contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (CH-EUS) and EUS elastography (EUS-E) are used in clinical practice to assess pancreatic tumor at the diagnosis. In case of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) with liver metastasis, nab-paclitaxel combined with gemcitabine is a first-line treatment option. We aimed to assess the modification of PDAC microenvironment induced by the combination of nab-paclitaxel with gemcitabine, by endoscopic ultrasonography techinics. This single center phase III study conducted between February 2015 and June 2016 included patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma with mesurable liver metastasis and no prior cancer treatment fit for two cycles of nab-paclitaxel combined with gemcitabine. We aimed to perform EUS with CH-EUS and EUS-E of the pancreatic tumor, CT scan and contrast enhanced ultrasonogram (CE-US) of a reference liver metastasis, before and after the two cylces of chemotherapy. Primary end point was modification of vascularizaion of primary tumor and a reference liver metastasis. Secondary end points were modification of stromal content, safety profile of drug combination and tumor response rate. Sixteen patients were analyzed, but only 13 received two cycled of chemotherapy (CT) (toxicity [n = 1] or death [n = 2]). There was no statistical modification induced by CT concering vascularity of primary tumor (time to maximum intensity P = 0.24, value of maximum intensity P = 0.71, hypoechogenic aspect generated by injection of contrast enhancing agent), vascularity of a reference liver metastasis (time to maximum intensity P = 0.99, value of maximum intensity P = 0.71) and tumor elasticity (P = 0.22). Eleven patients had tumor response assessement, 6/11 (54%) had measurable disease response 4/11 (36%) with partial responses and 2/11 (18%) with stable disease. All other patients showed disease progression. No serious side effects occurred, 6/11 patients had a dose adjustment. We did not show significant modification of vascularity and elasticity but these results should be taken with caution because of important limitations.

Peak Risk of Recurrence Occurs during the First Two Years after a Pancreatectomy in Patients Receiving Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX.

No codified/systematic surveillance program exists for borderline/locally advanced pancreatic ductal carcinoma treated with neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and a secondary resection. This study aimed to determine the trend of recurrence in patients who were managed using such a treatment strategy. From 2010, 101 patients received FOLFIRINOX and underwent a pancreatectomy, in a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Seventy-one patients (70%, R group) were diagnosed with recurrence after a median follow-up of 11 months postsurgery. In the multivariable analysis, patients in the R-group had a higher rate of weight loss (p = 0.018), higher carbohydrate antigen (CA 19-9) serum levels at diagnosis (p = 0.012), T3/T4 stage (p = 0.017), and positive lymph nodes (p < 0.01) compared to patients who did not experience recurrence. The risk of recurrence in patients with T1/T2 N0 R0 was the lowest (19%), and all recurrences occurred during the first two postoperative years. The peak risk of recurrence for the entire population was observed during the first two postoperative years. The probability of survival decreased until the second year and rebounded to 100% permanently, after the ninth postoperative year. Close monitoring is needed at reduced intervals during the first 2 years following a pancreatectomy and should be extended to later than 5 years for those with unfavorable pathological results.

Management and outcomes of brain metastases from pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a pooled analysis and literature review.

Background: Brain metastases (BM) are rare in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and little data exists concerning these patients and their outcomes. Aim: We aimed to analyze the management, practices, and outcomes of patients presenting BM from PDAC both in our institution and in all cases reported in the literature. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, monocentric analysis using a data mining tool (ConSoRe) to identify all patients diagnosed with PDAC and BM in our comprehensive cancer center (Paoli-Calmettes Institute), from July 1997 to June 2022 (cohort 1). Simultaneously, we reviewed and pooled the case reports and case series of patients with PDAC and BM in the literature (cohort 2). The clinical characteristics of patients in each cohort were described and survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: In cohort 1, 19 patients (0.3%) with PDAC and BM were identified with a median age of 69 years (range: 39-81). Most patients had metastatic disease (74%), including 21% with BM, at diagnosis. Lung metastases were present in 58% of patients. 68% of patients had neurological symptoms and 68% were treated by focal treatment (surgery: 21%, radiotherapy: 42%, Gamma Knife radiosurgery: 5%). In cohort 2, among the 61 PDAC patients with BM described in the literature, 59% had metastatic disease, including 13% with BM at diagnosis. Lung metastases were present in 36% of patient and BM treatments included: surgery (36%), radiotherapy (36%), radiosurgery (3%), or no local treatment (25%). After the pancreatic cancer diagnosis, the median time to develop BM was 7.8 months (range: 0.0-73.9) in cohort 1 and 17.0 months (range: 0.0-64.0) in cohort 2. Median overall survival (OS) in patients of cohort 1 and cohort 2 was 2.9 months (95% CI [1.7,4.0]) and 12.5 months (95% CI [7.5,17.5]), respectively. Conclusion: BM are very uncommon in PDAC and seem to occur more often in younger patients with lung metastases and more indolent disease. BM are associated with poor prognosis and neurosurgery offers the best outcomes and should be considered when feasible.

Organ sparing to cure stage IV rectal cancer: A case report and review of literature.

BACKGROUND: Rectal sparing is an option for some rectal cancers with complete or good response after chemoradiotherapy (CRT); however, it has never been evaluated in patients with metastases. We assessed long-term outcomes of a rectal-sparing approach in a liver-first strategy for patients with rectal cancer with resectable liver metastases. CASE SUMMARY: We examined patients who underwent an organ-sparing approach for rectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases using a liver-first strategy during 2010-2015 (n = 8). Patients received primary chemotherapy and pelvic CRT. Liver surgery was performed during the interval between CRT completion and rectal tumor re-evaluation. Clinical and oncological characteristics and long-term outcomes were assessed.All patients underwent liver metastatic resection with curative intent. The R0 rate was 100%. Six and two patients underwent local excision and a watch-and-wait (WW) approach, respectively. All patients had T3N1 tumors at diagnosis and had good clinical response after CRT. The median survival time was 60 (range, 14-127) mo. Three patients were disease free for 5, 8, and 10 years after the procedure. Five patients developed metastatic recurrence in the liver (n = 5) and/or lungs (n = 2). Only one patient developed local recurrence concurrent with metastatic recurrence 24 mo after the WW approach. Two patients died during follow-up. CONCLUSION: The results suggest good local control in patients undergoing organ-sparing strategies for rectal cancer with synchronous liver metastasis. Prospective trials are required to validate these data and identify good candidates for these strategies.

Outcome of nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors after initial surveillance or surgical resection: a single-center observational study.

Background: Current guidelines consider observation a reasonable strategy for G1 or G2 nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (nf pNETs) ≤2 cm. We aimed to characterize their natural behavior and confront the data with the outcomes of patients undergoing upfront surgery. Methods: Data from patients with histologically confirmed nf pNETs ≤2 cm, managed at a single tertiary referral center between 2002 and 2020, were retrospectively reviewed. Results: Thirty-nine patients (mean age 62.1 years, 56% male) with 43 lesions (mean size 12.7±3.9 mm; 32 grade 1 [G1] and 7 grade 2 lesions [G2]) were managed by careful surveillance. Progression was observed in 15 lesions (35%; mean follow up 47 months). Six patients (18%) underwent secondary surgery because of an increase in tumor size or dilation of the main pancreatic duct; 3 of them had lymph node metastasis in the resected specimen. Surgery was followed by pancreatic fistula in 2/6 patients, 1 of whom died. Fourteen patients (mean age 59 years, 64.3% female, mean size of lesions 11.4±3.1 mm) underwent pancreatic surgery immediately after diagnosis. The surgery-associated complication rate was 57.1% (8/14). Of the 14 patients, 13 remained recurrence free (mean follow up 67 months). Recurrent metastatic disease was observed 3 years after pancreaticoduodenectomy (R0, 15 mm G2 lesion, 0 N+/8 N) in 1 patient. Conclusions: The behavior of small nf pNETs is difficult to predict, as there is evidence for malignant behavior in a subgroup of patients, even after surgical treatment. Optimal management remains challenging, as pancreatic surgery is associated with significant morbidity.

The impact of brachytherapy boost for anal canal cancers in the era of de-escalation treatments.

PURPOSE: To analyze clinical outcomes of high-dose-rate (HDR) interstitial brachytherapy boost (ISBT) after external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for the treatment of anal canal cancers (ACC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 78 patients with ACC were treated at our institution by ISBT. Local Control (LC), disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), colostomy-free survival (CFS) and toxicity rates were analyzed. RESULTS: With a median followup (FU) of 59.8 months (95% CI [55.8-64.2]), six (7.7%) local recurrences with 2 patients (2.6%) having persistent disease at 3 months were observed. The 5-year rate of LC for the entire population was 92% [83-96%]. The 5-year DFS rate was 86% [76-93%]. The 5-year OS was 96% [88-99%]. In the univariate analysis, chemotherapy was significantly associated with morbidity grade ≥2. Late digestive toxicity grade ≥3 was reported in 8.9% patients, 1 patient underwent colostomy due to toxicity. The 5-year CFS rate was 88% [79-94%]. CONCLUSIONS: HDR interstitial brachytherapy boost provide excellent rates of tumor control and colostomy-free survival with a favorable profile of GI toxicity. Continence in anal cancer survivors is a challenge and the boost technique must be discussed in a multidisciplinary approach as part of de-escalation treatments.

Maintenance Therapy With Cetuximab After FOLFIRI Plus Cetuximab for RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The optimal maintenance strategy after induction chemotherapy with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody for patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains to be debated. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of maintenance therapy with single-agent cetuximab after FOLFIRI (leucovorin [folinic acid], fluorouracil, and irinotecan) plus cetuximab induction therapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: The TIME (Treatment After Irinotecan-Based Frontline Therapy: Maintenance With Erbitux]) (PRODIGE 28 [Partenariat de Recherche en Oncologie Digestive]-UCGI 27 [UniCancer GastroIntestinal Group]) phase 2 noncomparative, multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted from January 15, 2014, to November 23, 2018, among 139 patients with unresectable RAS wild-type mCRC. The cutoff date for analysis was July 21, 2022. Interventions: After first-line induction therapy with 8 cycles of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab, patients without disease progression were randomized (1:1) to biweekly maintenance with cetuximab or observation. On disease progression, the same induction regimen was recommended for 16 weeks followed by further maintenance with cetuximab or observation until disease progression under the full induction regimen. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the 6-month progression-free rate from randomization. Analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis. An exploratory biomolecular analysis, using next-generation sequencing, investigated the putative prognostic value of the tumor mutation profile. Results: Of 214 patients enrolled (141 men [65.9%]; median age, 67 years [range, 23-85 years]), 139 were randomized to receive cetuximab (n = 67; 45 men [67.2%]; median age, 64 years [range, 34-85 years]) or to be observed (n = 72; 50 men [69.4%]; median age, 68 years [23-85 years]). The 6-month progression-free rate was 38.8% ([26 of 67] 95% CI, 27.1%-51.5%) in the cetuximab group and 5.6% ([4 of 72] 95% CI, 1.5%-13.6%) in the observation group. At a median follow-up of 40.5 months (95% CI, 33.6-47.5 months), median progression-free survival (PFS) from randomization was 5.3 months (95% CI, 3.7-7.4 months) in the cetuximab group and 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.8-2.7 months) in the observation group. Median overall survival (OS) was 24.8 months (95% CI, 18.7-30.4 months) in the cetuximab group and 19.7 months (95% CI, 13.3-24.4 months) in the observation group. In an exploratory multivariate analysis, any tumor-activating mutation in the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway genes was associated with shorter PFS from randomization regardless of treatment group (hazard ratio, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.01-2.62]; P = .04). The most frequent grade 3 or 4 treatment-related toxic effect in the cetuximab group during maintenance therapy was rash (8 of 67 [11.9%]). Conclusion and Relevance: The randomized clinical trial did not meet its primary end point but suggests clinically meaningful PFS and OS benefits associated with cetuximab maintenance therapy. However, maintenance cetuximab or treatment breaks after first-line combination FOLFIRI-cetuximab therapy seems inappropriate for patients with MAPK-mutated independently of the side of primary tumor. A more complete assessment of MAPK pathway mutations warrants further investigation to the refine treatment strategy for patients with RAS wild-type mCRC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02404935.

Evaluation of predictive models in daily practice for the identification of patients with Lynch syndrome.

The optimal strategy for identifying patients with Lynch syndrome among patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer (CRC) is still debated. Several predictive models (e.g., MMRpredict, PREMM1,2 and MMRpro) combining personal and familial data have recently been developed to quantify the risk that a given patient with CRC carries a Lynch syndrome-causing mutation. Their clinical applicability to patients with CRC from the general population requires evaluation. We studied a consecutive series of 214 patients with newly diagnosed CRC characterized for tumor microsatellite instability (MSI), somatic BRAF mutation, MLH1 promoter methylation and mismatch repair (MMR) gene germline mutation status. The performances of the models for identifying MMR mutation carriers (8/214, 3.7%) were evaluated and compared to the revised Bethesda guidelines and a molecular strategy based on MSI testing in all patients followed by the exclusion of MSI-positive sporadic cases from mutational testing by screening for BRAF mutation and MLH1 promoter methylation. The sensitivities of the three models, at the lowest thresholds proposed, were identical (75%), with similar numbers of probands eligible for further MSI testing (almost half the patients). In our dataset, the prediction models gave no better discrimination than the revised Bethesda guidelines. Both approaches failed to identify two of the eight mutation carriers (the same two patients, aged 67 and 81 years, both with no family history). Thus, like the revised Bethesda guidelines, predictive models did not identify all patients with Lynch syndrome in our series of consecutive CRC. Our results support systematic screening for MMR deficiency in all new CRC cases.

Impact of fiducial markers placement on the delineation of target volumes in radiation therapy for oesophageal cancer: FIDUCOR study.

Purpose: This prospective monocentric phase II study (FIDUCOR-study, NCT02526134) aimed to assess the impact of fiducial markers (FMs) implantation on conformal chemo-radiation therapy (CRT) planning in oesophageal carcinoma (EC) patients. Methods/materials: Fifteen EC patients were enrolled in the study. Each patient underwent two simulation CT-scans before (CT1) and after (CT2) FMs implantation, in the same position. FMs (3 mm length gold markers, preloaded in a 22G needle) were implanted after sedation, under endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and X-Ray guidance, and were placed at the tumor's extremities, and in the visible lymph nodes. Target delineation and treatment plan were both performed first on CT1 with the assistance of diagnosis CT, gastroscopy and EUS details, and second on CT2 using FMs and CT-data. The value of FMs implantation was assessed by the difference of growth-tumor-volume (GTV) and clinical-target-volume (CTV) between CT1-based and CT2-based delineation. A significant difference was defined as a ≥5 mm-difference on axial(x) or coronal(y) slices, a ≥10mm-difference on sagittal slices, or a ≥20%-difference in GTV. The impact on dose distribution in organs at risk (OAR) (lung, heart, liver) was also studied. Results: Between 09/2014 and 12/2015, 15 patients could achieve fiducial procedures, without any complication. One FM migration occurred. We observed a significant modification of the GTV-dimension in 100% of the cases (15/15, 95%CI: [78.2;100.0]), mainly due to a difference in sagittal dimension with a mean variation of 11.2 mm and a difference> 10 mm for 8/15 patients (53.3%). One patient had a significant isocenter displacement as high as 20 mm. The oesophagus tumor was not seen on the CT-scan in one patient due to its small size. One patient had a distant lymph node metastasis not visible on CT-scan. We observed no significant impact on OAR distribution. Conclusion: In our study, FMs-implantation under EUS had a positive impact on accurate volume definition in EC-patients (modification of GTV in 15/15 patients). Close cooperation between gastroenterologist and radiation oncologist has the potential to improve local treatment of oesophageal carcinoma.

Five-Year Outcomes of FOLFIRINOX vs Gemcitabine as Adjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Early results at 3 years from the PRODIGE 24/Canadian Cancer Trials Group PA6 randomized clinical trial showed survival benefits with adjuvant treatment with modified FOLFIRINOX vs gemcitabine in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; mature data are now available. Objective: To report 5-year outcomes and explore prognostic factors for overall survival. Design, Setting, and Participants: This open-label, phase 3 randomized clinical trial was conducted at 77 hospitals in France and Canada and included patients aged 18 to 79 years with histologically confirmed pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who had undergone complete macroscopic (R0/R1) resection within 3 to 12 weeks before randomization. Patients were included from April 16, 2012, through October 3, 2016. The cutoff date for this analysis was June 28, 2021. Interventions: A total of 493 patients were randomized (1:1) to receive treatment with modified FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin, 85 mg/m2 of body surface area; irinotecan, 150-180 mg/m2; leucovorin, 400 mg/m2; and fluorouracil, 2400 mg/m2, every 2 weeks) or gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2, days 1, 8, and 15, every 4 weeks) as adjuvant therapy for 24 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end point was disease-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, metastasis-free survival, and cancer-specific survival. Prognostic factors for overall survival were determined. Results: Of the 493 patients, 216 (43.8%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 62.0 (8.9) years. At a median of 69.7 months' follow-up, 367 disease-free survival events were observed. In patients receiving chemotherapy with modified FOLFIRINOX vs gemcitabine, median disease-free survival was 21.4 months (95% CI, 17.5-26.7) vs 12.8 months (95% CI, 11.6-15.2) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.66; 95% CI, 0.54-0.82; P < .001) and 5-year disease-free survival was 26.1% vs 19.0%; median overall survival was 53.5 months (95% CI, 43.5-58.4) vs 35.5 months (95% CI, 30.1-40.3) (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.54-0.85; P = .001), and 5-year overall survival was 43.2% vs 31.4%; median metastasis-free survival was 29.4 months (95% CI, 21.4-40.1) vs 17.7 months (95% CI, 14.0-21.2) (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.52-0.80; P < .001); and median cancer-specific survival was 54.7 months (95% CI, 45.8-68.4) vs 36.3 months (95% CI, 30.5-43.9) (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.51-0.82; P < .001). Multivariable analysis identified modified FOLFIRINOX, age, tumor grade, tumor staging, and larger-volume center as significant favorable prognostic factors for overall survival. Shorter relapse delay was an adverse prognostic factor. Conclusions and Relevance: The final 5-year results from the PRODIGE 24/Canadian Cancer Trials Group PA6 randomized clinical trial indicate that adjuvant treatment with modified FOLFIRINOX yields significantly longer survival than gemcitabine in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Trial Registration: EudraCT: 2011-002026-52; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01526135.