Fluropyrimidine single agent or doublet chemotherapy as second line treatment in advanced biliary tract cancer.

Fluoropyrimidine (FP) plus platinum chemotherapy has been recently established as a second-line (L2) preferred option in advanced biliary tract cancer (aBTC) (ABC-06 phase III trial). However, the overall survival (OS) benefit was limited and comparison with FP monotherapy was not available. Our aim was to assess the OS of patients treated with a FP monotherapy compared to a doublet with irinotecan or platinum in L2. We performed a retrospective analysis of two large multicenter prospective cohorts: a French cohort (28 centers) and an Italian cohort (9 centers). All consecutive patients with aBTC receiving FP-based L2 after gemcitabine plus cisplatin/gemcitabine plus oxaliplatin L1 between 2003 and 2016 were included. A subgroup analysis according to performance status (PS) and an exploratory analysis according to platinum sensitivity in L1 were planned. In the French cohort (n = 351), no significant OS difference was observed between the FP monotherapy and doublet groups (median OS: 5.6 vs 6.8 months, P = .65). Stratification on Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS showed similar results in PS 0-1 and 2. Median OS was not different between FP monotherapy, platinum- and irinotecan-based doublets (5.6 vs 7.1 vs 6.7 months, P = .68). Similar findings were observed in the Italian cohort (n = 174) and in the sensitivity analysis in pooled cohorts (n = 525). No L2 regimen seemed superior over others in the platinum resistant/refractory or sensitive subgroups. Our results suggest that FP monotherapy is as active as FP doublets in aBTC in L2, regardless of the patient PS and country, and could be a therapeutic option in this setting.

Additive value of pre-operative and one-month post-operative lymphocyte count for death-risk stratification in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer: a multicentric study.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) incidence is increasing worldwide. Several studies have shown that lymphopenia was correlated with a poor prognosis but the potential interest to measure lymphopenia in the pre and post-operative setting as well as its added value among conventional prognostic factors was never investigated. METHODS: Data from two independent cohorts in whom patients underwent resection for pancreatic carcinoma were retrospectively recorded. We examined the association between perioperative findings, pre and post-operative lymphocyte counts and overall survival (OS) in univariate and multivariate analyses. Performance assessment and internal validation of the final model were evaluated with Harrell's C-index, calibration plot and bootstrap sample procedures. RESULTS: Three hundred ninety patients were included in the analysis between 2000 and 2011. Pre and post-operative lymphocyte counts were independent prognostic factors associated with OS in multivariate analysis (p = 0.0128 and p = 0.0764, respectively). The addition of lymphocyte count variable to the conventional parameters identified in multivariate analysis (metastatic lymph node ratio, veinous emboli and adjuvant chemotherapy) significantly improved the model discrimination capacity (bootstrap mean difference = 0.04; 95 % CI, 0.01-0.06). The use of a threshold and combining the categorical (≥1000; <1000) information in pre and post lymphocyte counts permitted the identification of 4 subgroups of patients with different prognosis (p < 0.0001). Finally, the description of patients in long-term remission showed that only 3 of 65 (4.6 %) patients with post-operative lymphocyte count under 1000/mm3 were alive 4 years after surgery contrary to 54 of 236 (22.8 %) patients with a post-operative lymphocyte count above 1000/mm3. CONCLUSION: Pre and post-operative lymphopenia are independent prognostic factors for OS and they have an additive value regarding conventional prognostic factors for death-risk stratification and to predict long-term survival. Lymphopenia should be included as stratification factors in future clinical trial assessing overall survival in pancreatic cancer patients.

Prognostic value of health-related quality of life in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a random forest methodology.

PURPOSE: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) is currently an important parameter in the choice of treatment strategy for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPA) patients. However, previous research has shown that patients' self-reported health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scales provided additional prognostic information in homogeneous groups of patients with respect to ECOG-PS. The aim of this study was to identify HRQOL scales with independent prognostic value in mPA and to propose prognostic groups for these patients. METHODS: We analysed data from 98 chemotherapy-naive patients with histologically proven mPA recruited from 2007 to 2011 in the FIRGEM phase II study which aimed to compare the effectiveness of two chemotherapy regimen. HRQOL data were assessed with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 questionnaire. A random survival forest methodology was used to impute missing data and to identify major prognostic factors for overall survival. RESULTS: Baseline HRQOL assessment was completed by 60 % of patients (59/98). Twelve prognostic variables were identified. The three most important prognostic variables were fatigue, appetite loss, and role functioning, followed by three laboratory variables. The model's discriminative power assessed by Harrell's C statistic was 0.65. Fatigue score explained almost all the survival variability. CONCLUSION: HRQOL scores have prognostic value for mPA patients with good ECOG-PS. Moreover, the patient's fatigue, appetite loss, and self-perception of daily activities were more reliable prognostic indicators than clinical and laboratory variables. These HRQOL scores, especially the fatigue symptom, should be urgently included for prognostic assessment of mPA patients (with good ECOG-PS).

[Adjuvant treatment for resected colon cancer]. / Traitements adjuvants des cancers du côlon.

Adjuvant treatment has clearly demonstrated its efficacy and safety in resected colon cancer patients, saving thousands of lives every year worldwide. Six months adjuvant chemotherapy combining 5FU and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX or XELOX regimens) is indicated in stage III colon cancer after surgical removal of the primary tumor. The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy seems less evident in stage II colon cancer, but this treatment should be discussed in patients with "high risk" factors for recurrence. Patient's age is also an important factor for adjuvant treatment decision. The challenge in the future will be to establish predictive and prognostic scores able to offer an even more personalized adjuvant therapeutic approach.

Three fluoropyrimidine-based regimens in routine clinical practice after nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer: An AGEO multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: A combination of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (N+G) has recently become a standard first-line treatment in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (MPA), but there are currently no published data concerning second-line treatment after N+G. The aim of this study was to evaluate the survival outcomes and tolerability of three usual fluoropyrimidine-based regimens FOLFOX, FOLFIRI and FOLFIRINOX after N+G failure in MPA patients. METHODS: Patients receiving N+G as first-line regimen were prospectively identified in 11 French centers between January 2014 and January 2017. After disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, patients eligible for second-line therapy were enrolled in the study. The primary endpoint was overall survival following the second-line regimen. Secondary endpoints were objective response, progression-free survival and safety. RESULTS: Out of 137 patients treated with N+G as first-line regimen, 61 (44.5%) received second-line chemotherapy, including FOLFOX (39.4%), FOLFIRI (34.4%) or FOLFIRINOX (26.2%). Baseline characteristics were not different between the 3 groups. In particular, median age was 71.7 years, sex ratio was 1/1, and performance status (PS) was 0 in 11.5% of case. Main grade 3 toxicities were neutropenia (4.9%) and nausea (3.3%), without major differences between the groups. No toxic death was observed. Median second-line progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 2.95 (95% CI: 2.3-5.4) and 5.97 months (95% CI: 4.0-8.0), respectively, with no difference between the 3 groups. Median OS from the start of first-line chemotherapy was 12.7 months (10.4-15.1) and was significantly better in patients receiving FOLFIRI after N+G failure, 18.4 months (95% CI: 11.7-24.1, P<0.05), as compared with FOLFOX or FOLFIRINOX (10.4 and 12.3 months, respectively). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that second-line fluoropyrimidine-based regimens after N+G failure are feasible, have a manageable toxicity profile in selected patients with MPA, and are associated with promising clinical outcomes, in particular when combined with irinotecan. Randomized phase 3 trials are needed to confirm this trend.

Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel until progression or alternating with FOLFIRI.3, as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: The Federation Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive-PRODIGE 37 randomised phase II study (FIRGEMAX).

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy is effective in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPA), but new approaches are still needed to improve patients' survival and quality of life. We have previously published good efficacy and tolerability results on a sequential treatment strategy of gemcitabine followed by an intensified FOLFIRI (5FU+irinotecan) regimen. In the present study, we evaluated the same sequence but replaced gemcitabine by the new gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel standard first-line combination. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We randomised chemotherapy-naive patients with proven mPA, bilirubin levels ≤1.5 upper limit of normal values and performance status 0-2 to alternately receive gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel for 2 months then FOLFIRI.3 for 2 months in arm A, or gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel alone until progression in arm B. The primary objective was to increase the 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate from 40% (H0) to 60% (H1); using the binomial exact method, 124 patients were required. Analyses were carried out in preplanned modified intention-to-treat (mITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations. RESULTS: Between November 2015 and November 2016, 127 patients were enrolled. Main grade III-IV toxicities (% in arm A/B) were: diarrhoea (12.5/1.7), neutropenia (46.9/31, including febrile neutropenia: 1.6/0), skin toxicity (6.3/13.8), and peripheral neuropathy (6.3/8.6). No toxic deaths occurred. The objective response rate was 40.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 28.1-53.6) in arm A and 26.7% (95% CI: 16.1-39.7) in arm B. The primary end-point (6-month PFS rate) was 45.2% [one-sided 95% CI: 34.3-56.4] in arm A and 23.3% in arm B [one-sided 95% CI: 14.3-32.3] in the mITT population. In the PP population, median PFS and OS were 7.6 months and 6 months and 14.5 months and 12.2 months in arm A and B, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The FIRGEMAX strategy with gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel alternating with FOLFIRI.3 every 2 months, appears feasible and effective, with manageable toxicities, in patients able to reach >2mo of treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: EudraCT: 2014-004449-28: NCT: 0282701.

Folfirinox versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer: a comparative propensity score study.

BACKGROUND: Folfirinox (FFX) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GN) are both standard first-line treatments in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC). However, data comparing these two chemotherapeutic regimens and their sequential use remain scarce. METHODS: Data from two independent cohorts enrolling patients treated with FFX (n = 107) or GN (n = 109) were retrospectively pooled. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the secondary endpoint. A propensity score based on age, gender, performance status (PS), and presence of liver metastases was used to make groups comparable. RESULTS: In the whole study population, OS was significantly higher in FFX (14 months; 95% CI: 10-21) than in GN groups (9 months; 95% CI: 8-12) before (p = 0.008) and after (p = 0.021) adjusting for age, number of metastatic sites, liver metastases, peritoneal carcinomatosis and CA19.9 level at baseline. PFS tends to be higher in FFX (6 months) than GN groups (5 months; p = 0.053). After matching (n = 49/group), patients were comparable for all baseline characteristics including PS. In the matched population, there was a trend toward greater OS in patients treated with FFX (HR = 0.67; p = 0.097). However, survival in each group was not solely a result of the first-line regimen. The proportion of patients who were fit for GN after FFX failure (FFX-GN sequence) was higher (46.9%) than the reverse sequence (20.4%; p = 0.01), which suggests a higher feasibility for the FFX-GN sequence. Corresponding median OS were 19 months versus 9.5 months, respectively (p = 0.094). CONCLUSION: This study shows greater OS with FFX than with GN in patients with mPC. GN after FFX failure appears more feasible than the reverse sequence.

Prediction of survival with second-line therapy in biliary tract cancer: Actualisation of the AGEO CT2BIL cohort and European multicentre validations.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of second-line chemotherapy (L2) over standard first-line (L1) gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GEMCIS) or oxaliplatin (GEMOX) chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer (aBTC) is unclear. Our aim was to identify and validate prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) with L2 in aBTC to guide clinical decisions in this setting. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of four prospective patient cohorts: a development cohort (28 French centres) and three validation cohorts from Italy, UK and France. All consecutive patients with aBTC receiving L2 after GEMCIS/GEMOX L1 between 2003 and 2016 were included. The association of clinicobiological data with OS was investigated in univariate and multivariate Cox analyses. A simple score was derived from the multivariate model. RESULTS: The development cohort included 405 patients treated with L1 GEMOX (91%) or GEMCIS. Of them, 55.3% were men, and median age was 64.8 years. Prior surgical resection was observed in 26.7%, and 94.8% had metastatic disease. Performance status (PS) was 0, 1 and 2 in 17.8%, 52.4% and 29.7%, respectively. Among 22 clinical parameters, eight were associated with OS in univariate analysis. In multivariate analysis, four were independent prognostic factors (p < 0.05): PS, reason for L1 discontinuation, prior resection of primary tumour and peritoneal carcinomatosis. The model had the Harrell's concordance index of 0.655, a good calibration and was validated in the three external cohorts (N = 392). CONCLUSION: We validated previously reported predictive factors of OS with L2 and identified peritoneal carcinomatosis as a new pejorative factor in nearly 800 patients. Our model and score may be useful in daily practice and for future clinical trial design.

5-FU or mitomycin C hepatic arterial infusion after failure of arterial oxaliplatin in patients with colorectal cancer unresectable liver metastases.

INTRODUCTION: Hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) chemotherapy with oxaliplatin is an accepted option in the management of colorectal cancer (CRC) with dominant liver metastases (LM). However, despite prolonged control, some patients experience disease progression. On the other hand, oxaliplatin leads to dose-limiting toxicity. In these cases, the use of a second-line HAI with an alternative drug has never been reported to date. We evaluated treatment outcomes in patients receiving second-line HAI with 5-FU or mitomycin C, after first-line HAI of oxaliplatin in heavily pretreated patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between March 2010 and June 2016, this observational study included 24 patients with unresectable CRC LM and treated with HAI of 5-FU (17 patients) or mitomycin C (7 patients), after HAI of oxaliplatin. RESULTS: Mean age was 61.7 years. Forty-two percent of patients (10/24) had extra-hepatic metastases and 75% (18/24) at least 8 liver metastases. Including HAI of oxaliplatin, all patients had previously received at least 2 lines of chemotherapy±targeted agents (100%) and 96% (23/24) received concomitant systemic therapies together with HAI of 5-FU or mitomycin C. The overall objective response rate and disease control rate were, respectively, 42% (10/24) and 71% (17/24). Median progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were, respectively, 5.6 and 25.8 months; hepatic progression-free survival was 8.5months. Thirteen percent (3/24) of the patients received further curative intent treatment after HAI 5-FU and mitomycin C. No toxic death occurred and the toxicity profile was acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: HAI of 5-FU or mitomycin C is an alternative option in patients with predominant CRC LM, when they experience disease progression or do not tolerate HAI of oxaliplatin.

VEGF-A modulates expression of inhibitory checkpoints on CD8+ T cells in tumors.

Immune escape is a prerequisite for tumor development. To avoid the immune system, tumors develop different mechanisms, including T cell exhaustion, which is characterized by expression of immune inhibitory receptors, such as PD-1, CTLA-4, Tim-3, and a progressive loss of function. The recent development of therapies targeting PD-1 and CTLA-4 have raised great interest since they induced long-lasting objective responses in patients suffering from advanced metastatic tumors. However, the regulation of PD-1 expression, and thereby of exhaustion, is unclear. VEGF-A, a proangiogenic molecule produced by the tumors, plays a key role in the development of an immunosuppressive microenvironment. We report in the present work that VEGF-A produced in the tumor microenvironment enhances expression of PD-1 and other inhibitory checkpoints involved in CD8(+) T cell exhaustion, which could be reverted by anti-angiogenic agents targeting VEGF-A-VEGFR. In view of these results, association of anti-angiogenic molecules with immunomodulators of inhibitory checkpoints may be of particular interest in VEGF-A-producing tumors.