Systemic inflammatory prognostic scores in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Systemic inflammatory scores may aid prognostication and patient selection for trials. We compared five scores in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHODS: Unresectable/metastatic PDAC patients enrolled in the Comprehensive Molecular Characterisation of Advanced Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma for Better Treatment Selection trial (NCT02750657) were included. Patients had pre-treatment biopsies for whole genome and RNA sequencing. CD8 immunohistochemistry was available in a subset. The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, Prognostic Nutritional Index, Gustave Roussy Immune Score (GRIm-S), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Prognostic Score (MPS) were calculated. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. Associations between inflammatory scores, clinical/genomic characteristics, and OS were analysed. RESULTS: We analysed 263 patients. High-risk NLR, GRIm-S and MPS were poorly prognostic. The GRIm-S had the highest predictive ability: median OS 6.4 vs. 10 months for high risk vs. low-risk (P < 0.001); HR 2.26 (P < 0.001). ECOG ≥ 1, the basal-like subtype, and low-HRDetect were additional poor prognostic factors (P < 0.01). Inflammatory scores did not associate with RNA-based classifiers or homologous recombination repair deficiency genotypes. High-risk MPS (P = 0.04) and GRIm-S (P = 0.02) patients had lower median CD8 + tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes. CONCLUSIONS: Inflammatory scores incorporating NLR have prognostic value in advanced PDAC. Understanding immunophenotypes of poor-risk patients and using these scores in trials will advance the field.

Symptom screening with Targeted Early Palliative care (STEP) versus usual care for patients with advanced cancer: a mixed methods study.

PURPOSE: Although early palliative care is recommended, resource limitations prevent its routine implementation. We report on the preliminary findings of a mixed methods study involving a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of Symptom screening with Targeted Early Palliative care (STEP) and qualitative interviews. METHODS: Adults with advanced solid tumors and an oncologist-estimated prognosis of 6-36 months were randomized to STEP or symptom screening alone. STEP involved symptom screening at each outpatient oncology visit; moderate to severe scores triggered an email to a palliative care nurse, who offered referral to in-person outpatient palliative care. Patient-reported outcomes of quality of life (FACT-G7; primary outcome), depression (PHQ-9), symptom control (ESAS-r-CS), and satisfaction with care (FAMCARE P-16) were measured at baseline and 2, 4, and 6 months. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a subset of participants. RESULTS: From Aug/2019 to Mar/2020 (trial halted due to COVID-19 pandemic), 69 participants were randomized to STEP (n = 33) or usual care (n = 36). At 6 months, 45% of STEP arm patients and 17% of screening alone participants had received palliative care (p = 0.009). Nonsignificant differences for all outcomes favored STEP: difference in change scores for FACT-G7 = 1.67 (95% CI: -1.43, 4.77); ESAS-r-CS = -5.51 (-14.29, 3.27); FAMCARE P-16 = 4.10 (-0.31, 8.51); PHQ-9 = -2.41 (-5.02, 0.20). Sixteen patients completed qualitative interviews, describing symptom screening as helpful to initiate communication; triggered referral as initially jarring but ultimately beneficial; and referral to palliative care as timely. CONCLUSION: Despite lack of power for this halted trial, preliminary results favored STEP and qualitative results demonstrated acceptability. Findings will inform an RCT of combined in-person and virtual STEP.

Randomised, Phase II study of selumetinib, an oral inhibitor of MEK, in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Cisplatin and gemcitabine (CisGem) are standard chemotherapy for advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). The MEK inhibitor selumetinib showed synergy with gemcitabine when administered sequentially in BTC. This randomised Phase 2 trial aimed to assess the efficacy of sequential or continuous selumetinib with CisGem. METHODS: Patients with advanced BTC received CisGem; arm A included selumetinib every day, arm B: selumetinib, days 1-5, 8-19 each cycle. Arm C received CisGem alone. Selumetinib was dosed at 75 mg BID but amended to 50 mg BID due to toxicity. RESULTS: In all, 51 participants were evaluable for response. No significant difference was seen in mean change in tumour size at 10 weeks between arms A and C (-7.8% vs -12.8%, P = 0.54) or arms B and C (-15% vs -12.8%, P = 0.78). There was no difference in median progression-free survival (6.0, 7.0, 6.3 months, P > 0.95) or overall survival (11.7, 11.7, 12.8 months, P = 0.70) for arms A, B and C, respectively. More participants experienced grade 3-4 toxicities in selumetinib-containing arms. More participants in arm A required chemotherapy dose reductions (P = 0.01) with lower chemotherapy dose intensity during the first 10 weeks. CONCLUSION: Adding sequential or continuous selumetinib to CisGem failed to improve efficacy and increased toxicity in patients with advanced BTC.

Genomic Features and Classification of Homologous Recombination Deficient Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), remains poorly defined beyond germline (g) alterations in BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2. METHODS: We interrogated whole genome sequencing (WGS) data on 391 patients, including 49 carriers of pathogenic variants (PVs) in gBRCA and PALB2. HRD classifiers were applied to the dataset and included (1) the genomic instability score (GIS) used by Myriad's MyChoice HRD assay; (2) substitution base signature 3 (SBS3); (3) HRDetect; and (4) structural variant (SV) burden. Clinical outcomes and responses to chemotherapy were correlated with HRD status. RESULTS: Biallelic tumor inactivation of gBRCA or PALB2 was evident in 43 of 49 germline carriers identifying HRD-PDAC. HRDetect (score ≥0.7) predicted gBRCA1/PALB2 deficiency with highest sensitivity (98%) and specificity (100%). HRD genomic tumor classifiers suggested that 7% to 10% of PDACs that do not harbor gBRCA/PALB2 have features of HRD. Of the somatic HRDetecthi cases, 69% were attributed to alterations in BRCA1/2, PALB2, RAD51C/D, and XRCC2, and a tandem duplicator phenotype. TP53 loss was more common in BRCA1- compared with BRCA2-associated HRD-PDAC. HRD status was not prognostic in resected PDAC; however in advanced disease the GIS (P = .02), SBS3 (P = .03), and HRDetect score (P = .005) were predictive of platinum response and superior survival. PVs in gATM (n = 6) or gCHEK2 (n = 2) did not result in HRD-PDAC by any of the classifiers. In 4 patients, BRCA2 reversion mutations associated with platinum resistance. CONCLUSIONS: Germline and parallel somatic profiling of PDAC outperforms germline testing alone in identifying HRD-PDAC. An additional 7% to 10% of patients without gBRCA/PALB2 mutations may benefit from DNA damage response agents.

Is Biannual Surveillance for Pancreatic Cancer Sufficient in Individuals With Genetic Syndromes or Familial Pancreatic Cancer?

BACKGROUND: Individuals with a family history of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PC) or with a germline mutation in a PC susceptibility gene are at increased risk of developing PC. These high-risk individuals (HRIs) may benefit from PC surveillance. METHODS: A PC surveillance program was developed to evaluate the detection of premalignant lesions and early-stage PCs using biannual imaging and to determine whether locally advanced or metastatic PCs develop despite biannual surveillance. From January 2013 to April 2020, asymptomatic HRIs were enrolled and followed with alternating MRI and endoscopic ultrasound every 6 months. RESULTS: Of 75 HRIs, 43 (57.3%) had a germline mutation in a PC susceptibility gene and 32 (42.7%) had a familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) pedigree. Branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (BD-IPMNs) were identified in 26 individuals (34.7%), but only 2 developed progressive lesions. One patient with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome (PJS) developed locally advanced PC arising from a BD-IPMN. Whole-genome sequencing of this patient's PC and of a second patient with PJS-associated PC from the same kindred revealed biallelic inactivation of STK11 in a KRAS-independent manner. A review of 3,853 patients from 2 PC registries identified an additional patient with PJS-associated PC. All 3 patients with PJS developed advanced PC consistent with the malignant transformation of an underlying BD-IPMN in <6 months. The other surveillance patient with a progressive lesion had FPC and underwent resection of a mixed-type IPMN that harbored polyclonal KRAS mutations. CONCLUSIONS: PC surveillance identifies a high prevalence of BD-IPMNs in HRIs. Patients with PJS with BD-IPMNs may be at risk for accelerated malignant transformation.

Impact of Definitive Chemoradiation on Quality-of-Life Changes for Patients With Anal Cancer: Long-term Results of a Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Maintaining and improving quality of life (QOL) are important goals of anal cancer management. This disease is generally curable, with many long-term survivors. OBJECTIVE: Long-term QOL after chemoradiation for patients with anal cancer was evaluated. DESIGN: This was a prospective cohort study. SETTINGS: This study used data from a prospective study of patients with anal cancer who were treated with chemoradiation between 2008 and 2013. PATIENTS: Patients with anal cancer who were treated with image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy were included. INTERVENTIONS: English-speaking patients completed European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer cancer-specific (C30) and site-specific (CR29) QOL questionnaires at baseline, at end of radiation, at 3 and 6 months, and then annually. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Long-term QOL was evaluated clinically (a change in score of ≥10 points was considered clinically significant) and statistically (using repeated-measurement analysis) by comparing the subscale scores at 1, 2, and 3 years with baseline scores. Subanalysis compared patients who received a radiation dose of 45 to 54 Gy versus 63 Gy. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients were included (median follow-up of 56.5 months). The symptom and functional scales showed a clinically significant decline at the end of treatment with improvement by 3 months after treatment. There was a long-term statistically significant decline in dyspnea, body image, bowel embarrassment, fecal incontinence, and hair loss, and there was long-term statistically and clinically significant worsening of impotence. Higher radiation dose (63 Gy) was not associated with significantly worse QOL. LIMITATIONS: Limitations included single-institution, single-arm study design, and lack of dose reconstruction (ie, analyses were based on prescribed, rather than delivered, dose). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with anal cancer treated with chemoradiation reported recovery of overall QOL to baseline levels. Specific symptoms remained bothersome, emphasizing the need to address and manage the chemoradiation-induced symptoms, during treatment and in the long term. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B905. IMPACTO DE LA QUIMIORRADIACIN DEFINITIVA EN CAMBIOS EN LA CALIDAD DE VIDA DE LOS PACIENTES CON CNCER ANAL RESULTADOS A LARGO PLAZO DE UN ESTUDIO PROSPECTIVE: ANTECEDENTES:Mantener y mejorar la calidad de vida son objetivos importantes del tratamiento del cáncer anal, ya que esta enfermedad generalmente es curable, con muchos sobrevivientes a largo plazo.OBJETIVO:Se evaluó la calidad de vida a largo plazo después de la quimiorradiación en pacientes con cáncer anal.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio de cohorte prospectivo.ENTORNO CLINICO:Utilizamos datos de un estudio prospectivo en pacientes con cáncer anal tratados con quimiorradiación entre 2008-2013.PACIENTES:Los pacientes con cáncer anal fueron tratados con radioterapia de intensidad modulada guiada por imágenes.INTERVENCIONES:Los pacientes de habla inglesa completaron los cuestionarios de calidad de vida específicos de cáncer (C30) y específicos del sitio (CR29) de la Organización Europea para la Investigación y el Tratamiento del Cáncer al inicio, al final de la radiación, 3 y 6 meses, y luego anualmente.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADOS:Se evaluó a largo plazo la calidad de vida clínicamente (un cambio en la puntuación de ≥10 puntos se consideraron clínicamente significativo) y estadísticamente (usando análisis de medición repetida) comparando las subescalas de puntuación al 1, 2, y 3 años. Con puntuaciones de referencia. El subanálisis comparó pacientes que recibieron 45-54 Gy versus 63 Gy.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron un total de 96 pacientes (mediana de seguimiento: 56,5 meses). La mayoría de las escalas funcionales y de síntomas mostraron una disminución clínicamente significativa al final del tratamiento con una mejoría a los 3 meses posteriores al tratamiento. Hubo una disminución estadísticamente significativa a largo plazo en disnea, imagen corporal, vergüenza intestinal, incontinencia fecal y pérdida de cabello; y hubo un empeoramiento a largo plazo estadística y clínicamente significativo en impotencia. La dosis de radiación más alta (63 Gy) no se asoció con una calidad de vida significativamente peor.LIMITACIONES:Institución única, diseño de estudio de un solo brazo y falta de recomposición de la dosis (es decir, los análisis se basan en la dosis prescrita, en lugar de la administrada).CONCLUSIÓNES:Los pacientes con cáncer anal tratados con quimiorradiación reportaron una recuperación de la QOL en general a los niveles de base. Síntomas específicos siguieron siendo molestos, lo que enfatiza la necesidad de resolver y tartar los síntomas inducidos por la quimiorradiación no solo durante el tratamiento, sino a largo plazo. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B905. (Traducción- Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon).

Phase II clinical trial of cabozantinib for the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after liver transplantation.

Recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) develops in 15-20% of liver transplant recipients, and it tends to be more aggressive due to underlying immunosuppression. The multikinase inhibitor cabozantinib has been shown to be effective for the treatment of advanced HCC. However, there is no study evaluating this medication in patients with recurrent HCC. Adult patients with measurable biopsy-proven recurrent HCC are eligible for enrollment provided they are not amenable to curative treatments and no prior treatment with cabozantinib. In this study, 60 mg once daily cabozantinib will be administered orally. Participants will receive study treatment as long as they continue to experience clinical benefit or until there is unacceptable toxicity. Tumor measurements will be repeated every 8 weeks to evaluate response. The primary end point of this study will be the disease control rate at 4 months after treatment. The secondary end points will be overall survival, progression-free survival and safety profile of cabozantinib. Furthermore, potential biomarkers will be evaluated to identify their role in tumor progression. The total duration of this trial is expected to be 3 years. We anticipate that this trial will show the effectiveness and safety of cabozantinib in the treatment of post-liver transplant recurrent HCC. Cabozantinib is expected to be an effective treatment due to its activity against many protein kinases, including MET and AXL which are not inhibited by sorafenib.

Liver cancer is the sixth most diagnosed cancer worldwide with few available curative treatments. Liver transplantation (LT) is considered as one of the treatments for liver cancer especially in earlier stages of cancer. However, after LT, cancer develops again in 15­20% of the patients who undergo transplant for liver cancer. Compared with liver cancer in the nontransplant population, recurrent cancer grows faster and spreads in the body very quickly. Therefore, unfortunately, to date there are limited treatment options for these patients without significant effect on their survival. In this study, we aim to evaluate the effect of a new medication called cabozantinib on patients who develop recurrent liver cancer after their LT. Cabozantinib has been already tested in patients with liver cancer and was shown to be effective and safe in nontransplant patients. However, this is the first study to evaluate the effect of cabozantinib in liver transplant recipients with recurrent liver cancer. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04204850 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Chemoradiotherapy Using Carboplatin plus Paclitaxel versus Cisplatin plus Fluorouracil for Esophageal or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Trimodality therapy (TMT) with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) using concurrent carboplatin plus paclitaxel (CP) followed by surgery is the standard of care for locoregional esophageal or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers. Alternatively, nCRT with cisplatin plus fluorouracil (CF) can be used. Definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) with CP or CF can be used if surgery is not planned. In the absence of comparative trials, we aimed to evaluate outcomes of CP and CF in the settings of TMT and dCRT. METHODS: A single-site, retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre to identify all patients who received CRT for locoregional esophageal or GEJ cancer. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox regression model. The inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) method was used for sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2015, 93 patients with esophageal (49%) and GEJ (51%) cancers underwent nCRT (n = 67; 72%) or dCRT (n = 26; 28%). Median age was 62.3 years and 74% were male. Median follow-up was 23.9 months. Comparing CP to CF in the setting of TMT, the OS and DFS rates were similar. In the setting of dCRT, CP was associated with significantly inferior 3-year OS (36 vs. 63%; p = 0.001; HR 3.1; 95% CI: 1.2-7.7) and DFS (0 vs. 41%; p = 0.004; HR 3.6; 95% CI: 1.4-8.9) on multivariable and IPTW sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: TMT with CF and CP produced comparable outcomes. However, for dCRT, CF may be a superior regimen.

Phase II Trial of Symptom Screening With Targeted Early Palliative Care for Patients With Advanced Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Routine early palliative care (EPC) improves quality of life (QoL) for patients with advanced cancer, but it may not be necessary for all patients. We assessed the feasibility of Symptom screening with Targeted Early Palliative care (STEP) in a phase II trial. METHODS: Patients with advanced cancer were recruited from medical oncology clinics. Symptoms were screened at each visit using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised (ESAS-r); moderate to severe scores (screen-positive) triggered an email to a palliative care nurse, who called the patient and offered EPC. Patient-reported outcomes of QoL, depression, symptom control, and satisfaction with care were measured at baseline and at 2, 4, and 6 months. The primary aim was to determine feasibility, according to predefined criteria. Secondary aims were to assess whether STEP identified patients with worse patient-reported outcomes and whether screen-positive patients who accepted and received EPC had better outcomes over time than those who did not receive EPC. RESULTS: In total, 116 patients were enrolled, of which 89 (77%) completed screening for ≥70% of visits. Of the 70 screen-positive patients, 39 (56%) received EPC during the 6-month study and 4 (6%) received EPC after the study end. Measure completion was 76% at 2 months, 68% at 4 months, and 63% at 6 months. Among screen-negative patients, QoL, depression, and symptom control were substantially better than for screen-positive patients at baseline (all P<.0001) and remained stable over time. Among screen-positive patients, mood and symptom control improved over time for those who accepted and received EPC and worsened for those who did not receive EPC (P<.01 for trend over time), with no difference in QoL or satisfaction with care. CONCLUSIONS: STEP is feasible in ambulatory patients with advanced cancer and distinguishes between patients who remain stable without EPC and those who benefit from targeted EPC. Acceptance of the triggered EPC visit should be encouraged. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT04044040.

Landmark survival analysis and impact of anatomic site of origin in prospective clinical trials of biliary tract cancer.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Whether all patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (aBTC) should be included in prospective trials, irrespective of the anatomic site of origin, is debated. Herein, we aimed to assess the survival impact of anatomic site of origin in prospective clinical trials of aBTC using landmark survival analysis. METHODS: Patients enrolled into prospective first-line aBTC clinical trials (Jan 97-Dec 15) were included. Overall survival (OS) was analysed using Cox proportional hazard regression; landmark survival (LS) and 95% CIs were calculated. RESULTS: Overall, 1,333 patients were included: median age 63 years (range 23-85); 46% male; 84% ECOG-PS0/1; 25% with locally advanced disease, 72% with metastatic, 3% not reported (NR). Patients were treated with mono-chemotherapy (23%), cisplatin/gemcitabine (36%), other combinations (39%), or NR (2%). Median OS was 10.2 months (95% CI 9.6-10.9). All sites (treatment-adjusted) had decreased risk of death vs. gallbladder cancer (GBC) (p <0.001). This reduced risk vs. GBC was maintained in those receiving cisplatin/gemcitabine for extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (p<0.001) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHC, p<0.001), but not in cholangiocarcinoma-not specified (CCA-NS, p = 0.82) or ampullary carcinoma (p = 0.96). One-year OS rates amongst patients who survived beyond 1, 2, 3 and 4 years post-trial registration were 37%, 45%, 61%, and 63%, respectively. For patients who survived 1 year, those receiving combination therapy vs. mono (p = 0.008) (acknowledging potential selection bias) and those with IHC and CCA-NS vs. GBC had better LS (both p <0.05). Metastatic disease was associated with shorter LS than locally advanced disease (p = 0.002). ECOG-PS and gender were not associated with LS (p >0.05, p = 0.08 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: GBC is associated with worse OS than other BTC sites and should be considered as a stratification factor in clinical trials. LS rates enable adjusted prognostication for aBTC survivors. LAY SUMMARY: Patients with gallbladder cancer have worse overall survival compared to those with biliary tract cancers of different primary origin. Thus, gallbladder cancer should be considered as a stratification factor in future clinical trials. Landmark survival rates enable adjusted prognosis prediction for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer who survive for some time.

NUC-1031/cisplatin versus gemcitabine/cisplatin in untreated locally advanced/metastatic biliary tract cancer (NuTide:121).

Gemcitabine/cisplatin is standard of care for first-line treatment of patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (aBTC); new treatments are needed. NUC-1031 is designed to overcome key cancer resistance mechanisms associated with gemcitabine. The tolerability/efficacy signal of NUC-1031/cisplatin in the Phase Ib ABC-08 study suggested that this combination may represent a more efficacious therapy than gemcitabine/cisplatin for patients with aBTC, leading to initiation of the global NuTide:121 study which will include 828 patients ≥18 years with untreated histologically/cytologically-confirmed aBTC (including cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder or ampullary cancer); randomized (1:1) to NUC-1031 (725 mg/m2)/cisplatin (25 mg/m2) or gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2)/cisplatin (25 mg/m2), on days 1/8, Q21-days. Primary objectives are overall survival and objective response rate. Secondary objectives: progression-free survival, safety, pharmacokinetics, patient-reported quality of life and correlative studies. (Investigational new drug (IND) number: 139058, European Clinical Trials database: EudraCT Number 2019-001025-28, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04163900).

A phase 2 trial of sunitinib in patients with progressive paraganglioma or pheochromocytoma: the SNIPP trial.

BACKGROUND: Pheochromocytoma (PCC) and paraganglioma (PGL) are uncommon neoplasms with high morbidity in advanced stages. Effective systemic treatments are limited. METHODS: A multisite phase 2 trial evaluated sunitinib in patients with progressive PCC/PGL. Patients received 50 mg orally for 4-6 weeks. RESULTS: Between May 2009 and May 2016, 25 patients were enroled. The median age was 50 years and 56% were male. Three patients (12%) received prior chemotherapy and 16 (64%) prior surgery. The DCR was 83% (95% CI: 61-95%) and median PFS 13.4 (95% CI: 5.3-24.6) months. Of 23 evaluable patients, 3 (13%) with germline mutations (SDHA, SDHB, RET) achieved a PR. The patient with mutated RET and MEN2A remains on treatment after 64 cycles. The median time on treatment was 12.4 (1-88.0) months. Grade 3 or 4 toxicities were as expected and manageable; fatigue (16%) and thrombocytopenia (16%) were most common. One patient with grade 3 hypertension and 2 with grade 3 cardiac events discontinued treatment. CONCLUSION: Although the primary endpoint of disease control was met, the overall response rate of sunitinib was low in unselected patients with progressive PCC/PGL. Patients with germline variants in RET or in the subunits of SDH may derive greatest benefit.

Two BRM promoter polymorphisms predict poor survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Polymorphisms in the promoter of the BRM gene, a critical subunit of the chromatin remodeling SWI/SNF complex, have previously been implicated in risk and prognosis in Caucasian-predominant lung, head and neck, esophageal, and pancreatic cancers, and in hepatocellular cancers in Asians. We investigated the role of these polymorphisms in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) risk and prognosis. HCC cases were recruited in a comprehensive cancer center while the matched controls were recruited from family practice units from the same catchment area. For risk analyses, unconditional logistic regression analyses were performed in HCC patients and matched healthy controls. Overall survival analyses were performed using Cox proportional hazard models, Kaplan-Meier curves, and log-rank tests. In 266 HCC cases and 536 controls, no association between either BRM promoter polymorphism (BRM-741 or BRM-1321) and risk of HCC was identified (P > 0.10 for all comparisons). There was significant worsening of overall survival as the number of variant alleles increased: BRM-741 per variant allele adjusted hazards ratio (aHR) 5.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.89-11.54 and BRM-1321 per variant allele aHR 4.09, 95%CI 2.22-7.51. The effects of these two polymorphisms were at least additive, where individuals who were double homozygotes for the variant alleles had a 45-fold increase in risk of death when compared to those who were double wild-type for the two polymorphisms. Two BRM promoter polymorphisms were strongly associated with HCC prognosis but were not associated with increased HCC susceptibility. The association was strongest in double homozygotes for the allele variants.

Neoadjuvant hyperfractionated chemoradiation and liver transplantation for unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma in Canada.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation and liver transplantation may be offered for unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA). This study aimed to determine the dropout rate and survival of patients who entered a national tri-modality protocol. METHOD: Patients enrolled Jan 2009-Aug 2015 were included. Enrolment criteria: ≤65 years, brush biopsy-proven unresectable pCCA <3.5 cm diameter. Conformal radiotherapy was given concurrently with Capecitabine. Following surgical staging, patients received maintenance Cisplatin and Gemcitabine until transplant or progression. Time to event analyses were performed from start of neoadjuvant therapy. RESULTS: Of 43 patients screened, 18 started treatment; median age 53.9 (26.7-62.8) years, tumour diameter 2.7 (2.0-3.4) cm. 11/18 dropped out due to metastatic disease identified during chemoradiation (n = 2), surgical staging (n = 6), or maintenance chemotherapy (n = 3). Six patients underwent transplantation. Median follow up was 17.6 (4.9-57.7) months and overall survival 16.4 months. One and two year survival was 70.6% and 35.3%, respectively. One and 2 year post transplant survival was 83.3% and 55.6%. Median progression free survival was 11.5 months. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation and liver transplantation for unresectable early stage pCCA is feasible, although with high rates of dropout and disease progression. Further research is required to determine factors to help select patients for treatment.

Comparison of Practice Guidelines, BRCAPRO, and Genetic Counselor Estimates to Identify Germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutations in Pancreatic Cancer.

Germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) mutation carriers with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) may benefit from precision therapies and their relatives should undergo tailored cancer prevention. In this study, we compared strategies to identify BRCA carriers with PDAC. Incident cases of PDAC were prospectively recruited for BRCA sequencing. Probands were evaluated using the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC) guidelines. The probability of each proband carrying a mutation was estimated by surveying genetic counselors and using BRCAPRO. BRCA mutations were detected in 22/484 (4.5%) probands. 152/484 (31.2%) and 16/484 (3.3%) probands met the NCCN and MOHLTC guidelines, respectively. The NCCN guidelines had higher sensitivity than the MOHLTC guidelines (0.864 versus 0.227, P < 0.001) but lower specificity (0.712 versus 0.976, P < 0.001). One hundred and nineteen genetic counselors completed the survey. Discrimination was similar between genetic counselors and BRCAPRO (area-under-the-curve: 0.755 and 0.775, respectively, P = 0.702). Genetic counselors generally overestimated (P = 0.008), whereas BRCAPRO severely underestimated (P < 0.001), the probability that each proband carried a mutation. Our results indicate that the NCCN guidelines and genetic counselors accurately identify BRCA mutations in PDAC, while the MOHLTC guidelines and BRCAPRO should be updated to account for the association between BRCA and PDAC.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy vs. TACE or RFA as a bridge to transplant in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. An intention-to-treat analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is limited information on the use of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) as a bridge to liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma and no study comparing its efficacy to transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA). We aimed to ascertain the safety and efficacy of SBRT on an intention-to-treat basis compared with TACE and RFA as a bridge to liver transplantation in a large cohort of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: Outcomes between groups were compared from the time of listing and from the time of transplant. Between July 2004 and December 2014, 379 patients were treated with either SBRT (n=36, SBRT group), TACE (n=99, TACE group) or RFA (n=244, RFA group). RESULTS: The drop-out rate was similar between groups (16.7% SBRT group vs. 20.2% TACE group and 16.8% RFA group, p=0.7); 30 patients were transplanted in the SBRT group, 79 in the TACE group and 203 in the RFA group. Postoperative complications were similar between groups. Patients in the RFA group had more tumor necrosis in the explant. The 1-, 3- and 5-year actuarial patient survival from the time of listing was 83%, 61% and 61% in the SBRT group vs. 86%, 61% and 56% in the TACE group, and 86%, 72% and 61% in the RFA group, p=0.4. The 1-, 3- and 5-year survival from the time of transplant was 83%, 75% and 75% in the SBRT group vs. 96%, 75% and 69% in the TACE group, and 95%, 81% and 73% in the RFA group, p=0.7. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, SBRT can be safely utilized as a bridge to LT in patients with HCC, as an alternative to conventional bridging therapies. LAY SUMMARY: Patients with liver cancer included in the waiting list for liver transplantation are at risk of tumor progression and death. Stereotactic body radiotherapy may be a good alternative to conventional therapies to reduce this risk.

Systemic therapy in younger and elderly patients with advanced biliary cancer: sub-analysis of ABC-02 and twelve other prospective trials.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes in younger (<40 years) and elderly (≥70 years) patients with advanced biliary cancer (ABC) receiving palliative chemotherapy are unclear. This study assessed outcomes in those receiving monotherapy or combination therapy in thirteen prospective systemic-therapy trials. METHODS: Multivariable analysis explored the impact of therapy on progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in two separate age cohort groups: <70 years and ≥70 years, and <40 years and ≥40 years. RESULTS: Overall, 1163 patients were recruited (Jan 1997-Dec 2013). Median age of entire cohort: 63 years (range 23-85); 36 (3%) were <40, 260 (22%); ≥70. Combination therapy was platinum-based in nine studies. Among patients <40 and ≥70 years, 23 (64%) and 182 (70%) received combination therapy, respectively. Median follow-up was 42 months (95%-CI 37-51). Median PFS for patients <40 and ≥40 years was 3.5 and 5.9 months (P = 0.12), and OS was 10.8 and 9.7 months, respectively (P = 0.55). Median PFS for those <70 and ≥70 years was 6.0 and 5.0 months (P = 0.53), and OS was 10.2 and 8.8 months, respectively (P = 0.08). For the entire cohort, PFS and OS were significantly better in those receiving combination therapy: Hazard Ratio [HR]-0.66, 95%-CI 0.58-0.76, P < 0.0001 and HR-0.72, 95%-CI 0.63-0.82, P < 0.0001, respectively; and in patients ≥70 years: HR-0.54 (95%-CI 0.38-0.77, P = 0.001) and HR-0.60 (95%-CI 0.43-0.85, P = 0.004), respectively. There was no evidence of interaction between age and treatment for PFS (P = 0.58, P = 0.66) or OS (P = 0.18, P = 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: In ABC, younger patients are rare, and survival in elderly patients in receipt of systemic therapy for advanced disease, whether monotherapy or combination therapy, is similar to that of non-elderly patients, therefore age alone should not influence decisions regarding treatment.

Circulating biomarkers and outcome from a randomised phase II trial of sunitinib vs everolimus for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: RECORD-3 assessed non-inferiority of progression-free survival (PFS) with everolimus vs sunitinib in previously untreated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Baseline plasma sample collection and randomised design enabled correlation of circulating biomarkers with efficacy. METHODS: Samples were analysed for 121 cancer-related biomarkers. Analyses of biomarkers categorised patients as high or low (vs median) to assess association with first-line PFS (PFS1L) for each treatment arm. A composite biomarker score (CBS) incorporated biomarkers potentially predictive of PFS1L with everolimus. RESULTS: Plasma samples from 442 of the 471 randomised patients were analysed. Biomarkers were associated with PFS1L for everolimus alone (29), sunitinib alone (9) or both (12). Everolimus-specific biomarkers (CSF1, ICAM1, IL-18BP, KIM1, TNFRII) with hazard ratio ⩾ 1.8 were integrated into a CBS (range 0-5). For CBS low (0-3, n = 291) vs high (4-5, n = 151), PFS1L differed significantly for everolimus but not for sunitinib. There was no significant difference in PFS1L between everolimus and sunitinib in the high CBS patient cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline levels of multiple soluble biomarkers correlated with benefit from everolimus and/or sunitinib, independent of clinical risk factors. A similar PFS1L was observed for both treatments among patients with high CBS score.

FOLFIRINOX for advanced pancreatic cancer: the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre experience.

BACKGROUND: FOLFIRINOX has been shown to significantly increase both overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in metastatic pancreas cancer. There is limited data regarding the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer. We present a retrospective study of patients with both locally advanced and metastatic pancreas cancer using FOLFIRINOX as first-line therapy in our centre. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of patients treated with FOLFIRINOX for pancreatic cancer at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, between December 2011 and July 2014. The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FOLFIRINOX when used with dose modifications. RESULTS: One hundred two patients were identified; 66 metastatic and 36 locally advanced. Sixty-eight per cent of patients initiated treatment with a dose reduction. The median (95% CI) OS in the metastatic group was 13.1 (6.3-16.1) months with full dose and 12.9 (10.3-30.1) months with modified dose. The median (95% CI) OS in the locally advanced group was 11.1 (6.1-not reached) months with full dose and 23 (not reached-not reached) months with modified dose. The median (95% CI) PFS in the metastatic group was 6.2 (4.9-15.2) months with full dose and 8.7 (5.7-12.9) months with modified dose. The median (95% CI) PFS in the locally advanced group was 11.1 (3.1-not reached) months with full dose and 10.4 (6.8-not reached) months with modified dose. Grade 3/4 haematologic adverse events were observed in 43% of patients. Grade 3/4 non-haematologic adverse events were observed in 28% of patients. Patient well-being significantly improved from baseline to cycle 4 (P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy was achievable with dose-modified FOLFIRINOX in daily setting. The safety of FOLFIRINOX remains a concern with a high rate of grades 3 and 4 neutropaenia despite dose reduction.

The International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium model as a prognostic tool in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma previously treated with first-line targeted therapy: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Previous prognostic models for second-line systemic therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma have not been studied in the setting of targeted therapy. We sought to validate the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) model in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving next-line targeted therapy after progression on first-line targeted therapy. METHODS: In this population-based study, we analysed patients who received second-line targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma at 19 centres in Canada, USA, Greece, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Denmark. The primary endpoint was overall survival since the initiation of second-line therapy. We compared the prognostic performance of the IMDC model with the three-factor MSKCC model used for previously treated patients for overall survival since the start of second-line targeted therapy. FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2005, and Nov 30, 2012, we included 1021 patients treated with second-line targeted therapy. Median overall survival since the start of second-line targeted therapy was 12·5 months (95% CI 11·3-14·3). Five of six predefined factors in the IMDC model (anaemia, thrombocytosis, neutrophilia, Karnofsky performance status [KPS] <80, and <1 year from diagnosis to first-line targeted therapy) were independent predictors of poor overall survival on multivariable analysis. The concordance index using all six prognostic factors (ie, also including hypercalcaemia) was 0·70 (95% CI 0·67-0·72) with the IMDC model and was 0·66 (95% CI 0·64-0·68) with the three-factor MSKCC model. When patients were divided into three risk categories using IMDC criteria, median overall survival was 35·3 months (95% CI 28·3-47·8) in the favourable risk group (n=76), 16·6 months (14·9-17·9) in the intermediate risk group (n=529), and 5·4 months (4·7-6·8) in the poor risk group (n=261). INTERPRETATION: The IMDC prognostic model can be applied to patients previously treated with targeted therapy, in addition to previously validated populations in first-line targeted therapy. The IMDC prognostic model in the second-line targeted therapy setting has an improved prognostic performance and is applicable to a more contemporary patient cohort than that of the three-factor MSKCC model. FUNDING: DF/HCC Kidney Cancer SPORE P50 CA101942-01, Kidney Cancer Research Network of Canada, Canadian Institute for Health Research, Trust Family, Loker Pinard, Michael Brigham, and Gerald DeWulf.