Outcomes in the Asian subgroup of the phase III randomised HIMALAYA study of tremelimumab plus durvalumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In the global, phase III HIMALAYA study in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), STRIDE (Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab) improved overall survival (OS) vs. sorafenib; durvalumab was non-inferior to sorafenib. HBV is the predominant HCC aetiology in most of Asia vs. HCV or non-viral aetiologies in Western countries and Japan. This analysis evaluated safety and efficacy outcomes for STRIDE and durvalumab monotherapy vs. sorafenib, in HIMALAYA participants enrolled in Asia, excluding Japan. METHODS: In HIMALAYA, participants were randomised to STRIDE, durvalumab, or sorafenib. The Asian subgroup in this analysis included participants enrolled in Hong Kong, India, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam. OS, objective response rate (ORR; per RECIST, version 1.1), and safety were assessed in the Asian subgroup and in an exploratory subgroup of participants in Hong Kong and Taiwan. RESULTS: The Asian subgroup included 479 participants randomised to STRIDE (n = 156), durvalumab (n = 167), or sorafenib (n = 156). OS was improved for STRIDE vs. sorafenib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.68; 95% CI 0.52-0.89). The OS HR for durvalumab vs. sorafenib was 0.83 (95% CI 0.64-1.06). In Hong Kong and Taiwan (n = 141), OS HRs for STRIDE vs. sorafenib and durvalumab vs. sorafenib were 0.44 (95% CI 0.26-0.77) and 0.64 (95% CI 0.37-1.08), respectively. In the Asian subgroup, ORR (including unconfirmed responses) was numerically higher for STRIDE (28.2%) and durvalumab (18.6%) vs. sorafenib (9.0%), and Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were numerically lower for STRIDE (19.9%) and durvalumab (13.3%) vs. sorafenib (30.5%). CONCLUSIONS: STRIDE improved outcomes vs. sorafenib in the Asian subgroup. These results support the benefits of STRIDE for participants with uHCC globally, including in the Asia-Pacific region. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT03298451. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: The global, phase III HIMALAYA study found that the STRIDE (Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab) regimen improved overall survival (OS), including long-term OS vs. sorafenib, and that durvalumab monotherapy was non-inferior to sorafenib in participants with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). However, there are differences in the aetiology and clinical practices related to HCC in parts of Asia, compared to Western countries and Japan, which could lead to differences in treatment outcomes between these regions. The results of this analysis demonstrate the benefits of STRIDE for participants in the Asia-Pacific region, consistent with the full, global study population. Overall, these findings continue to support the use of STRIDE in a diverse population, reflective of uHCC globally.

Circulating Tumor DNA Clinical Applications in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Current Trends and Future Perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Globally, liver cancers are the second most lethal malignancy after lung cancer (0.83 million deaths in 2020). Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the predominant type of primary liver cancer and is typically associated with liver fibrosis or cirrhosis. HCC diagnosis relies on histologic examination of surgical specimens or conventional tissue biopsy material. However, standard tissue biopsies are invasive and often do not accurately reflect the tumor heterogeneity. On the other hand, the use of liquid biopsies, represented mainly by circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and circulating tumor cells (CTCs), has greatly increased in the past 2 decades. Indeed, liquid biopsies are a noninvasive, repeatable, and sensitive approach to studying tumor biology. CONTENT: This review describes current clinical applications of ctDNA analysis in the management of patients with chronic liver disease, cirrhosis, and HCC. There is a substantial clinical potential of ctDNA, but interventional studies are still lacking for the moment. SUMMARY: Detection of ctDNA in both asymptomatic individuals and high-risk patients (with chronic liver disease or cirrhosis) contributes to the early diagnosis of HCC. ctDNA analysis also offer tremendous information on the tumor burden and on the risk of early recurrence. The implementation of ctDNA analysis, in association with classical tumor markers (e.g., alpha-fetoprotein), may improve (a) HCC screening in high-risk patients, (b) stratification of the recurrence risk after surgery, and (c) prognosis evaluation of patients with HCC.

Effectiveness of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided choledochoduodenostomy vs. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage for jaundice in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: Retrospective, multicenter study (GALLBLADEUS Study).

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) vs. EUS-gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) in cases of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for jaundice resulting from malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study included patients with obstructive jaundice secondary to MDBO who underwent EUS-GBD or EUS-CDS with lumen-apposing metal stents after failed ERCP. The primary end-point was clinical success rate. Secondary end-points were technical success, periprocedural adverse events rate (<24 h), late adverse events rate (>24 h), overall survival, and time to recurrent biliary obstruction. RESULTS: A total of 78 patients were included: 41 underwent EUS-GBD and 37 underwent EUS-CDS. MDBO was mainly the result of pancreatic cancer (n = 63/78, 80.7%). Clinical success rate was similar for both procedures: 87.8% for EUS-GBD and 89.2% for EUS-CDS (P = 0.8). Technical success rate was 100% for EUS-GBD and 94.6% for EUS-CDS (P = 0.132). Periprocedural morbidity (<24 h) rates were similar between both groups: 4/41 (9.8%) for EUS-GBD and 5/37 (13.5%) for EUS-CDS (P = 0.368). There was a significantly higher rate of late morbidity (>24 h) among patients in the EUS-CDS group (8/37 [21.6%]) than in the EUS-GBD group (3/41 [7.3%]) (P = 0.042). The median follow-up duration was 4.7 months. Overall survival and time to recurrent biliary obstruction did not significantly differ between the groups. DISCUSSION: After failed ERCP for MDBO, EUS-GBD and EUS-CDS show comparable clinical success rates and technical success. EUS-GBD appears to be a promising alternative for MDBO, even as a second-line treatment after failed ERCP. Further studies are needed to validate these findings and compare the long-term outcomes of EUS-GBD and EUS-CDS.

Bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI after failure of platinum-etoposide first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced neuroendocrine carcinoma (PRODIGE 41-BEVANEC): a randomised, multicentre, non-comparative, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: There is no standard second-line treatment after platinum-etoposide chemotherapy for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab, and FOLFIRI alone, in this setting. METHODS: We did a randomised, non-comparative, open-label, phase 2 trial (PRODIGE 41-BEVANEC) at 26 hospitals in France. We included patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma or neuroendocrine carcinoma of unknown primary origin, documented progressive disease during or after first-line platinum-etoposide chemotherapy, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1; block size of three), without stratification, to receive FOLFIRI (irinotecan 180 mg/m2, calcium folinate 400 mg/m2 or levofolinate 200 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus then 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h) plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg or FOLFIRI alone, intravenously, every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was overall survival at 6 months after randomisation, evaluated in the modified intention-to-treat population (all enrolled and randomly assigned patients who received at least one cycle of FOLFIRI). This study is now complete and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02820857. FINDINGS: Between Sept 5, 2017, and Feb 8, 2022, 150 patients were assessed for eligibility and 133 were enrolled and randomly assigned: 65 to the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group and 68 to the FOLFIRI group. 126 patients (59 in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group and 67 in the FOLFIRI group) received at least one cycle of FOLFIRI and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population, 83 (66%) of whom were male and 43 (34%) were female, and the median age of the patients was 67 years (IQR 58-73). The primary tumour location was colorectal in 38 (30%) of 126 patients, pancreatic in 34 (27%), gastro-oesophageal in 22 (17%), and unknown in 23 (18%). After a median follow-up of 25·7 months (95% CI 22·0-38·2), 6-month overall survival was 53% (80% CI 43-61) in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group and 60% (51-68) in the FOLFIRI group. Grade 3-4 adverse events that occurred in at least 5% of patients were neutropenia (eight [14%] patients), diarrhoea (six [10%]), and asthenia (five [8%]) in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group, and neutropenia (seven [10%]) in the FOLFIRI group. One treatment-related death (ischaemic stroke) occurred in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of bevacizumab did not seem to increase the benefit of FOLFIRI with regard to overall survival. FOLFIRI could be considered as a standard second-line treatment in patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma. FUNDING: French Ministry of Health and Roche SAS.

Evaluation of the interest to combine a CD4 Th1-inducer cancer vaccine derived from telomerase and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomized non-comparative phase II study (TERTIO - PRODIGE 82).

BACKGROUND: Several cancer immunotherapies that target the PD-L1/PD-1 pathway show promising clinical activity in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the standard of care in first-line treatment with atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1 therapy) in combination with bevacizumab is associated with a limited objective response rate. Telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) activation meets the criteria of oncogenic addiction in HCC and could be actionable therapeutic target and a relevant tumor antigen. Therefore we hypothesized that combining anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy with an anti-telomerase vaccine might be an attractive therapy in HCC. UCPVax is a therapeutic cancer vaccine composed of two separate peptides derived from telomerase (human TERT). UCPVax has been evaluated in a multicenter phase I/II study in non-small cell lung cancers and has demonstrated to be safe and immunogenic, and is under evaluation in combination with atezolizumab in a phase II clinical trial in tumors where telomerase reactivation contributes to an oncogene addiction (HPV+ cancers). The aim of the TERTIO study is to determine the clinical interest and immunological efficacy of a treatment combining the CD4 helper T-inducer cancer anti-telomerase vaccine (UCPVax) with atezolizumab and bevacizumab in unresectable HCC in a multicenter randomized phase II study. METHODS: Patients with locally advanced, metastatic or unresectable HCC who have not previously received systemic anti-cancer treatment are eligible. The primary end point is the objective response rate at 6 months. Patients will be allocated to a treatment arm with a randomization 2:1. In both arms, patients will receive atezolizumab at fixed dose of 1200 mg IV infusion and bevacizumab at fixed dose of 15 mg/kg IV infusion, every 3 weeks, according to the standard of care. In the experimental arm, these treatments will be combined with the UCPVax vaccine at 0.5 mg subcutaneously. DISCUSSION: Combining anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy with an anti-telomerase vaccine gains serious consideration in HCC, in order to extend the clinical efficacy of anti-PD-1/PD-L1. Indeed, anti-cancer vaccines can induce tumor-specific T cell expansion and activation and therefore restore the cancer-immunity cycle in patients lacking pre-existing anti-tumor responses. Thus, there is a strong rational to combine immune checkpoint blockade therapy and anticancer vaccine (UCPVax) in order to activate antitumor T cell immunity and bypass the immunosuppression in the tumor microenvironment in HCC. This pivotal proof of concept study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of a CD4 Th1-inducer cancer vaccine derived from telomerase (UCPVax) and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in unresectable HCC, as well as confirming their synergic mechanism, and settling the basis for a new combination for future clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05528952.

Nivolumab versus sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (CheckMate 459): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Single-agent nivolumab showed durable responses, manageable safety, and promising survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the phase 1-2 CheckMate 040 study. We aimed to investigate nivolumab monotherapy compared with sorafenib monotherapy in the first-line setting for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at medical centres across 22 countries and territories in Asia, Australasia, Europe, and North America, patients at least 18 years old with histologically confirmed advanced hepatocellular carcinoma not eligible for, or whose disease had progressed after, surgery or locoregional treatment; with no previous systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma, with Child-Pugh class A and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, and regardless of viral hepatitis status were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice response system to receive nivolumab (240 mg intravenously every 2 weeks) or sorafenib (400 mg orally twice daily) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02576509. FINDINGS: Between Jan 11, 2016, and May 24, 2017, 743 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (nivolumab, n=371; sorafenib, n=372). At the primary analysis, the median follow-up for overall survival was 15·2 months (IQR 5·7-28·0) for the nivolumab group and 13·4 months (5·7-25·9) in the sorafenib group. Median overall survival was 16·4 months (95% CI 13·9-18·4) with nivolumab and 14·7 months (11·9-17·2) with sorafenib (hazard ratio 0·85 [95% CI 0·72-1·02]; p=0·075; minimum follow-up 22·8 months); the protocol-defined significance level of p=0·0419 was not reached. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (1 [<1%] of 367 patients in the nivolumab group vs 52 [14%] of patients in the sorafenib group), aspartate aminotransferase increase (22 [6%] vs 13 [4%]), and hypertension (0 vs 26 [7%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in 43 (12%) patients receiving nivolumab and 39 (11%) patients receiving sorafenib. Four deaths in the nivolumab group and one death in the sorafenib group were assessed as treatment related. INTERPRETATION: First-line nivolumab treatment did not significantly improve overall survival compared with sorafenib, but clinical activity and a favourable safety profile were observed in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Thus, nivolumab might be considered a therapeutic option for patients in whom tyrosine kinase inhibitors and antiangiogenic drugs are contraindicated or have substantial risks. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb in collaboration with Ono Pharmaceutical.

Chemotherapy (doublet or triplet) plus targeted therapy by RAS status as conversion therapy in colorectal cancer patients with initially unresectable liver-only metastases. The UNICANCER PRODIGE-14 randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) patients have a better prognosis if metastases are resectable. Initially, unresectable liver-only metastases can be converted to resectable with chemotherapy plus a targeted therapy. We assessed which of chemotherapy doublet (2-CTx) or triplet (3-CTx), combined with targeted therapy by RAS status, would be better in this setting. METHODS: PRODIGE 14 was an open-label, multicenter, randomised Phase 2 trial. CRC patients with initially defined unresectable liver-only metastases received either, 2-CTx (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI) or 3-CTx (FOLFIRINOX), plus bevacizumab/cetuximab by RAS status. The primary endpoint was to increase the R0/R1 liver-resection rate from 50 to 70% with the 3-CTx. RESULTS: Patients (n = 256) were mainly men with an ECOG PS of 0, and a median age of 60 years. In total, 109 patients (42.6%) had RAS-mutated tumours. After a median follow-up of 45.6 months, the R0/R1 liver-resection rate was 56.9% (95% CI: 48-66) with the 3-CTx versus 48.4% (95% CI: 39-57) with the 2-CTx (P = 0.17). Median overall survival was 43.4 months with 3-CTx versus 40 months with 2-CTx. CONCLUSION: We failed to increase from 50 to 70% the R0/R1 liver-resection rate with the use of 3-CTx combined with bevacizumab or cetuximab by RAS status in CRC patients with initially unresectable liver metastases.

A prospective, randomized, phase II study to assess the schemas of retreatment with Lutathera® in patients with new progression of an intestinal, well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor (ReLUTH).

BACKGROUND: Although neuroendocrine tumors (NET) are classed as rare, they have a high prevalence and their incidence is increasing. Effective treatment with lutetium 17-[177Lu]Lu-oxodotreotide (Lutathera®) is possible in patients with well-differentiated NET, improving progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and quality of life (QoL). However, progression does occur. Retreatment with additional Lutathera® cycles is an option to extend PFS and OS. Two retreatment cycles are usually proposed. We aim to compare four versus two Lutathera® retreatment cycles in patients with new progression of a well-differentiated intestinal NET. METHODS: This will be a multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label, phase II study in France (ReLUTH). The aim is to evaluate the efficacy of retreatment with Lutathera® in patients with progressive intestinal NET (determined by somatostatin-receptor positive imaging) after previous treatment with two cycles of Lutathera®. Before randomization, all patients will have already received two Lutathera® retreatment cycles (7.4 GBq infusion each, 8 weeks apart). A total of 146 patients will be randomized (1:1) to two additional cycles of Lutathera® (7.4 GBq infusion each, separated by 8 weeks) or to no treatment (active surveillance). PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: efficacy of two additional Lutathera® retreatment cycles compared to active surveillance over 6 months. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: disease control rate at 6 months from randomization (defined as Complete Response, Partial Response, and Stable Disease in the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours) with an evaluation every 2 months. A secondary objective will be the safety, as well as the PFS, OS, and QoL. It is expected that the efficacy of retreatment will increase after two additional Lutathera® cycles, with no increased safety concerns. DISCUSSION: Our prospective, randomized controlled study may lead to new recommendations for the use of Lutathera® in patients with intestinal progressive NET, and should confirm that four cycles will be more effective than two, with limited adverse impact on safety. Four Lutathera® treatment cycles have the potential to prolong life and improve quality of life in patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04954820.

Detection of soluble biomarkers of pancreatic cancer in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration samples.

BACKGROUND: Biomarkers are urgently needed for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is the cornerstone for diagnosing PDAC. We developed a method for discovery of PDAC biomarkers using the discarded EUS-FNA liquid. METHODS: This retrospective study included 58 patients with suspected pancreatic lesions who underwent EUS-FNA. Protein extracts from EUS-FNA liquid were analyzed by mass spectrometry. Proteomic and clinical data were modeled by supervised statistical learning to identify protein markers and clinical variables that distinguish PDAC. RESULTS: Statistical modeling revealed a protein signature for PDAC screening that achieved high sensitivity and specificity (0.92, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.98, and 0.85, 95 %CI 0.67-0.93, respectively). We also developed a protein signature score (PSS) to guide PDAC diagnosis. In combination with patient age, the PSS achieved 100 % certainty in correctly identifying PDAC patients > 54 years. In addition, 3 /4 inconclusive EUS-FNA biopsies were correctly identified using PSS. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-FNA-derived fluid is a rich source of PDAC proteins with biomarker potential. The PSS requires further validation and verification of the feasibility of measuring these proteins in patient sera.

Progression of AFP SCORE is a Preoperative Predictive Factor of Microvascular Invasion in Selected Patients Meeting Liver Transplantation Criteria for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Microvascular invasion (MVI) is one of the main prognostic factors of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after liver transplantation (LT), but its occurrence is unpredictable before surgery. The alpha fetoprotein (AFP) model (composite score including size, number, AFP), currently used in France, defines the selection criteria for LT. This study's aim was to evaluate the preoperative predictive value of AFP SCORE progression on MVI and overall survival during the waiting period for LT. Data regarding LT recipients for HCC from 2007 to 2015 were retrospectively collected from a single institutional database. Among 159 collected cases, 34 patients progressed according to AFP SCORE from diagnosis until LT. MVI was shown to be an independent histopathological prognostic factor according to Cox regression and competing risk analysis in our cohort. AFP SCORE progression was the only preoperative predictive factor of MVI (OR = 10.79 [2.35-49.4]; p 0.002). The 5-year overall survival in the progression and no progression groups was 63.9% vs. 86.3%, respectively (p = 0.001). Cumulative incidence of HCC recurrence was significantly different between the progression and no progression groups (Sub-HR = 4.89 [CI 2-11.98]). In selected patients, the progression of AFP SCORE during the waiting period can be a useful preoperative tool to predict MVI.

Selective treatment pressure in colon cancer drives the molecular profile of resistant circulating tumor cell clones.

The characterization of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) holds promises for precision medicine because these cells are an important clinical indicator of treatment efficacy. We established the first and still only nine permanent colon CTC lines from peripheral blood samples of a patient with metastatic colon cancer collected at different time points during treatment and cancer progression. The study objectives were (i) to compare the gene expression profiles of these CTC lines, and (ii) to determine the main features acquired during treatment. The number of upregulated genes was higher in the CTC lines obtained after treatment, indicating that they acquired properties to escape treatment pressure. Among these upregulated genes, some are involved in the mTOR and PI3K/AKT signaling pathways. Moreover, cytidine deaminase expression was significantly increased in the CTC lines obtained after failure of the first- and second-line 5-fluorouracile-based treatments, suggesting that these CTCs can eliminate this specific drug and resist to therapy. Several enzymes involved in xenobiotic metabolism also were upregulated after treatment, suggesting the activation of detoxification mechanisms in response to chemotherapy. Finally, the significant higher expression of aldolase B in four of the six CTC lines obtained after treatment withdrawal and cancer progression indicated that these clones originated from liver metastases. In conclusion, these CTC lines generated at different time points during treatment of metastatic colon cancer in a single patient are characterized by the deregulation of different genes that promote (i) drug resistance, (ii) xenobiotic and energy metabolism, and (iii) stem cell properties and plasticity.

Phase II study evaluating the association of gemcitabine, trastuzumab and erlotinib as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (GATE 1).

In a previous phase II study (THERAPY), cetuximab and trastuzumab combination, as second-line after progression with gemcitabine, showed disease stabilization in 27% of 33 patients with pancreatic carcinoma. In the present phase II multicenter study, we assessed the efficacy and tolerance of gemcitabine, trastuzumab plus erlotinib as first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer. The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR, RECIST v.1); secondary endpoints were progression-free (PFS), overall (OS) survival and toxicity (NCI-CTCAE v3.0). Ancillary study addressed the predictive value of both EGFR/HER2 expression and KRAS mutational status. Sixty-three patients from four centers were included (62 evaluable for toxicity, 59 for efficacy), median age was 62 years (35-77), 59.7% men. The median treatment duration was 16.1 weeks (2.1-61). Eleven patients (19%) reported a partial tumor response, and 33 (56%) disease stabilization. DCR was 74.6% (95%CI: 61.8-85.0; 44/59 patients). After a median follow-up of 23.3 months (0.6-23.6), median PFS was 3.5 months (95%CI: 2.4-3.8) and median OS 7.9 months (95%CI: 5.1-10.2). PFS was significantly longer in patients with grade ≥ 2 cutaneous toxicities vs patients with grade 0-1 toxicities (HR = 0.55, 95%CI: 0.33-0.92, P = .020). Expression of EGFR and HER2 was correlated with PFS and OS in multivariate analysis; HER2 expression was correlated with the tumor response. Main severe toxicities were neutropenia (32%), cutaneous rash (37%) and thrombosis/embolisms (35.5%). This triplet combination is effective in terms of disease control, PFS and OS, and acceptable for safety. A larger study to investigate this combination compared to the standard regimen should be discussed.

Phase 1b/2 trial of tepotinib in sorafenib pretreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with MET overexpression.

BACKGROUND: This Phase 1b/2 study evaluated tepotinib, a highly selective MET inhibitor, in US/European patients with sorafenib pretreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) with MET overexpression. METHODS: Eligible adults had aHCC, progression after ≥4 weeks of sorafenib, and, for Phase 2 only, MET overexpression. Tepotinib was administered once daily at 300 or 500 mg in Phase 1b ('3 + 3' design), and at the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) in Phase 2. Primary endpoints were dose-liming toxicities (DLTs; Phase 1b) and 12-week investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS; Phase 2). RESULTS: In Phase 1b (n = 17), no DLTs occurred and the RP2D was confirmed as 500 mg. In Phase 2 (n = 49), the primary endpoint was met: 12-week PFS was 63.3% (90% CI: 50.5-74.7), which was significantly greater than the predefined null hypothesis of ≤15% (one-sided binomial exact test: P < 0.0001). Median time to progression was 4 months. In Phase 2, 28.6% of patients had treatment-related Grade ≥3 adverse events, including peripheral oedema and lipase increase (both 6.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Tepotinib was generally well tolerated and the RP2D (500 mg) showed promising efficacy and, therefore, a positive benefit-risk balance in sorafenib pretreated aHCC with MET overexpression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02115373.

Serum alpha-fetoprotein and clinical outcomes in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with ramucirumab.

BACKGROUND: Post hoc analyses assessed the prognostic and predictive value of baseline alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), as well as clinical outcomes by AFP response or progression, during treatment in two placebo-controlled trials (REACH, REACH-2). METHODS: Serum AFP was measured at baseline and every three cycles. The prognostic and predictive value of baseline AFP was assessed by Cox regression models and Subpopulation Treatment Effect Pattern Plot method. Associations between AFP (≥ 20% increase) and radiographic progression and efficacy were assessed. RESULTS: Baseline AFP was confirmed as a continuous (REACH, REACH-2; p < 0.0001) and dichotomous (≥400 vs. <400 ng/ml; REACH, p < 0.01) prognostic factor, and was predictive for ramucirumab survival benefit in REACH (p = 0.0042 continuous; p < 0.0001 dichotomous). Time to AFP (hazard ratio [HR] 0.513; p < 0.0001) and radiographic (HR 0.549; p < 0.0001) progression favoured ramucirumab. Association between AFP and radiographic progression was shown for up to 6 (odds ratio [OR] 5.1; p < 0.0001) and 6-12 weeks (OR 1.8; p = 0.0065). AFP response was higher with ramucirumab vs. placebo (p < 0.0001). Survival was longer in patients with an AFP response than patients without (13.6 vs. 5.6 months, HR 0.451; 95% confidence interval, 0.354-0.574; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: AFP is an important prognostic factor and a predictive biomarker for ramucirumab survival benefit. AFP ≥ 400 ng/ml is an appropriate selection criterion for ramucirumab. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, REACH (NCT01140347) and REACH-2 (NCT02435433).

FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine as Adjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer, combination chemotherapy with fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) leads to longer overall survival than gemcitabine therapy. We compared the efficacy and safety of a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen with gemcitabine as adjuvant therapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We randomly assigned 493 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to receive a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen (oxaliplatin [85 mg per square meter of body-surface area], irinotecan [180 mg per square meter, reduced to 150 mg per square meter after a protocol-specified safety analysis], leucovorin [400 mg per square meter], and fluorouracil [2400 mg per square meter] every 2 weeks) or gemcitabine (1000 mg per square meter on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks) for 24 weeks. The primary end point was disease-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival and safety. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 33.6 months, the median disease-free survival was 21.6 months in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 12.8 months in the gemcitabine group (stratified hazard ratio for cancer-related event, second cancer, or death, 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46 to 0.73; P<0.001). The disease-free survival rate at 3 years was 39.7% in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 21.4% in the gemcitabine group. The median overall survival was 54.4 months in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 35.0 months in the gemcitabine group (stratified hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.86; P=0.003). The overall survival rate at 3 years was 63.4% in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 48.6% in the gemcitabine group. Adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 75.9% of the patients in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and in 52.9% of those in the gemcitabine group. One patient in the gemcitabine group died from toxic effects (interstitial pneumonitis). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant therapy with a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen led to significantly longer survival than gemcitabine among patients with resected pancreatic cancer, at the expense of a higher incidence of toxic effects. (Funded by R&D Unicancer and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01526135 ; EudraCT number, 2011-002026-52 .).

Ramucirumab in elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and elevated alpha-fetoprotein after sorafenib in REACH and REACH-2.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Limited data on treatment of elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) increase the unmet need. REACH and REACH-2 were global phase III studies of ramucirumab in patients with HCC after prior sorafenib, where patients with alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥400 ng/mL showed an overall ssurvival (OS) benefit for ramucirumab. These post-hoc analyses examined efficacy and safety of ramucirumab in patients with HCC and baseline AFP ≥ 400 ng/mL by three prespecified age subgroups (<65, ≥65 to <75 and ≥75 years). METHODS: Individual patient data were pooled from REACH (baseline AFP ≥400 ng/mL) and REACH-2. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression methods (stratified by study) assessed OS, progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP) and patient-reported outcomes (Functional Hepatobiliary System Index-8 [FHSI-8] score). RESULTS: A total of 542 patients (<65 years: n = 302; ≥65 to <75 years: n = 160; ≥75 years: n = 80) showed similar baseline characteristics between ramucirumab and placebo. Older subgroups had higher hepatitis C and steatohepatitis incidences, and lower AFP levels, than the <65 years subgroup. Ramucirumab prolonged OS in patients <65 years (hazard ratio [HR], 0.753; 95% CI 0.581-0.975), ≥65 to <75 years (0.602; 0.419-0.866) and ≥75 years (0.709; 0.420-1.199), PFS and TTP irrespective of age. Ramucirumab showed similar overall safety profiles across subgroups, with a consistent median relative dose intensity ≥97.8%. A trend towards a delay in symptom deterioration in FHSI-8 with ramucirumab was observed in all subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: In this post-hoc analysis, ramucirumab showed a survival benefit across age subgroups with a tolerable safety profile, supporting its use in advanced HCC with elevated AFP, irrespective of age, including ≥75 years.

Ramucirumab after sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and increased α-fetoprotein concentrations (REACH-2): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and increased α-fetoprotein concentrations have poor prognosis. We aimed to establish the efficacy of ramucirumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and α-fetoprotein concentrations of 400 ng/mL or higher. METHODS: REACH-2 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done at 92 hospitals, clinics, and medical centres in 20 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had histologically or cytologically confirmed hepatocellular carcinoma, or diagnosed cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C disease, Child-Pugh class A liver disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance statuses of 0 or 1, α-fetoprotein concentrations of 400 ng/mL or greater, and had previously received first-line sorafenib. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1) via an interactive web response system with a computer-generated random sequence to 8 mg/kg intravenous ramucirumab every 2 weeks or placebo. All patients received best supportive care. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival, proportion of patients achieving an objective response, time to radiographic progression, safety, time to deterioration in scores on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Hepatobiliary Symptom Index 8 (FHSI-8), and time to deterioration in ECOG performance status. We also pooled individual patient data from REACH-2 with data from REACH (NCT01140347) for patients with α-fetoprotein concentrations of 400 ng/mL or greater. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat, whereas safety analyses were done in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02435433. FINDINGS: Between July 26, 2015, and Aug 30, 2017, 292 patients were randomly assigned, 197 to the ramucirumab group and 95 to the placebo group. At a median follow-up of 7·6 months (IQR 4·0-12·5), median overall survival (8·5 months [95% CI 7·0-10·6] vs 7·3 months [5·4-9·1]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·710 [95% CI 0·531-0·949]; p=0·0199) and progression-free survival (2·8 months [2·8-4·1] vs 1·6 months [1·5-2·7]; 0·452 [0·339-0·603]; p<0·0001) were significantly improved in the ramucirumab group compared with the placebo group. The proportion of patients with an objective response did not differ significantly between groups (nine [5%] of 197 vs one [1%] of 95; p=0·1697). Median time to deterioration in FHSI-8 total scores (3·7 months [95% CI 2·8-4·4] vs 2·8 months [1·6-2·9]; HR 0·799 [95% CI 0·545-1·171]; p=0·238) and ECOG performance statuses (HR 1·082 [95% CI 0·639-1·832]; p=0·77) did not differ between groups. Grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events that occurred in at least 5% of patients in either group were hypertension (25 [13%] in the ramucirumab group vs five [5%] in the placebo group), hyponatraemia (11 [6%] vs 0) and increased aspartate aminotransferase (six [3%] vs five [5%]). Serious adverse events of any grade and cause occurred in 68 (35%) patients in the ramucirumab group and 28 (29%) patients in the placebo group. Three patients in the ramucirumab group died from treatment-emergent adverse events that were judged to be related to study treatment (one had acute kidney injury, one had hepatorenal syndrome, and one had renal failure). INTERPRETATION: REACH-2 met its primary endpoint, showing improved overall survival for ramucirumab compared with placebo in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and α-fetoprotein concentrations of at least 400 ng/mL who had previously received sorafenib. Ramucirumab was well tolerated, with a manageable safety profile. To our knowledge, REACH-2 is the first positive phase 3 trial done in a biomarker-selected patient population with hepatocellular carcinoma. FUNDING: Eli Lilly.

Sorafenib alone vs. sorafenib plus GEMOX as 1st-line treatment for advanced HCC: the phase II randomised PRODIGE 10 trial.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib remains one major first-line therapeutic options for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC), with modest efficacy. We investigated the addition of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) to sorafenib in aHCC patients. METHODS: Our multicentre phase II trial randomised aHCC first-line patients to sorafenib (400 mg BID) or sorafenib-GEMOX every 2 weeks (1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine; 100 mg/m2 oxaliplatin). Primary endpoint was the 4-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were randomised (sorafenib-GEMOX: n = 48; sorafenib: n = 46). Median age was 64 years, PS 0 (69%) or 1 (31%), 63% patients had cirrhosis, 29% portal vein thrombosis and 70% extra-hepatic disease. Median duration of sorafenib treatment was 4 months (1-51); median number of GEMOX cycles was 7 (1-16). The 4-month PFS rates were 64% and 61% in the sorafenib-GEMOX and sorafenib arms, respectively; median PFS and OS were 6.2 (95% CI: 3.8-6.8) and 13.5 (7.5-16.2) months, and 4.6 (3.9-6.2) months and 14.8 (12.2-22.2), respectively. The ORR/DCR were 9%/70% and 15%/77% in the sorafenib-GEMOX and sorafenib alone arms, respectively. Main toxicities were (sorafenib-GEMOX/sorafenib) neutropenia (23%/0), thrombocytopenia (33%/0), diarrhoea (18%/9), peripheral neuropathy (5%/0) and hand-foot syndrome (5%/18). CONCLUSIONS: Addition of GEMOX had an inpact on ORR and was well-tolerated as frontline systemic therapy. The benefit on PFS seems moderate; no subsequent study was planned.

Idarubicin-loaded Beads for Chemoembolization of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: The IDASPHERE II Single-Arm Phase II Trial.

Background A prior in vitro study showed that idarubicin was the most cytotoxic agent for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cell lines. Idarubicin-loaded beads for transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) were previously evaluated for the appropriate dose in a phase I dose-escalation study. Purpose To evaluate objective response rate (ORR), safety, and survival after TACE by using idarubicin-loaded beads for unresectable HCC. Materials and Methods This prospective single-arm phase II study was conducted between January 2015 and January 2017. Participants with unresectable HCC were included in the trial and underwent TACE with idarubicin-eluting beads. The primary end point was 6-month ORR assessed with independent central review by using modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Secondary end points were best ORR during the first 6 months, overall survival, progression-free survival, time to progression, and safety. A two-stage Fleming statistical design was used. Results Forty-six study participants (mean age, 71.2 years ± 10.2; six women and 40 men) were included; 44 participants underwent at least one TACE session. The 6-month ORR was 52% (23 of 44). The best ORR achieved was 68% (30 of 44). Fourteen of 44 (32%) participants underwent a curative treatment after TACE. Median progression-free survival, time to progression, and overall survival were 6.6 months, 9.5 months, and 18.6 months, respectively. TACE was discontinued for toxicity in four of 44 (9%) participants. The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were elevated aspartate aminotransferase (14 of 44, 32%), elevated γ-glutamyl transpeptidase (eight of 44, 18%), hyperbilirubinemia (seven of 44, 16%), elevated alanine aminotransferase (seven of 44, 16%), and pain (seven of 44, 16%). Conclusion Idarubicin-eluting beads showed a good safety profile and promising objective response rate and time to progression when used as part of a transarterial chemoembolization regimen for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. © RSNA, 2019 See also the editorial by Padia in this issue.

Microvascular invasion is a major prognostic factor after pancreatico-duodenectomy for adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Microvascular invasion (MVI) has been proved to be poor prognostic factor in many cancers. To date, only one study published highlights the relationship between this factor and the natural history of pancreatic cancer. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of MVI, on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS), after pancreatico-duodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. Secondarily, we aim to demonstrate that MVI is the most important factor to predict OS after surgery compared with resection margin (RM) and lymph node (LN) status. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2015 and December 2017, 158 PD were performed in two hepato-bilio-pancreatic (HBP) centers. Among these, only 79 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria of the study. Clinical-pathological data and outcomes were retrospectively analyzed from a prospectively maintained database. RESULTS: Of the 79 patients in the cohort, MVI was identified in 35 (44.3%). In univariate analysis, MVI (P = .012 and P < .0001), RM (P = .023 and P = .021), and LN status (P < .0001 and P = .0001) were significantly associated with DFS and OS. A less than 1 mm margin clearance did not influence relapse (P = .72) or long-term survival (P = .48). LN ratio > 0.226 had a negative impact on OS (P = .044). In multivariate analysis, MVI and RM persisted as independent prognostic factors of DFS (P = .0075 and P = .0098, respectively) and OS (P < .0001 and P = .0194, respectively). Using the likelihood ratio test, MVI was identified as the best fit to predict OS after PD for ductal adenocarcinomas compared with the margin status model (R0 vs R1) (P = .0014). CONCLUSION: The MVI represents another major prognostic factor determining long-term outcomes.