Genome-wide association study identifies high-impact susceptibility loci for HCC in North America.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Despite the substantial impact of environmental factors, individuals with a family history of liver cancer have an increased risk for HCC. However, genetic factors have not been studied systematically by genome-wide approaches in large numbers of individuals from European descent populations (EDP). APPROACH AND RESULTS: We conducted a 2-stage genome-wide association study (GWAS) on HCC not affected by HBV infections. A total of 1872 HCC cases and 2907 controls were included in the discovery stage, and 1200 HCC cases and 1832 controls in the validation. We analyzed the discovery and validation samples separately and then conducted a meta-analysis. All analyses were conducted in the presence and absence of HCV. The liability-scale heritability was 24.4% for overall HCC. Five regions with significant ORs (95% CI) were identified for nonviral HCC: 3p22.1, MOBP , rs9842969, (0.51, [0.40-0.65]); 5p15.33, TERT , rs2242652, (0.70, (0.62-0.79]); 19q13.11, TM6SF2 , rs58542926, (1.49, [1.29-1.72]); 19p13.11 MAU2 , rs58489806, (1.53, (1.33-1.75]); and 22q13.31, PNPLA3 , rs738409, (1.66, [1.51-1.83]). One region was identified for HCV-induced HCC: 6p21.31, human leukocyte antigen DQ beta 1, rs9275224, (0.79, [0.74-0.84]). A combination of homozygous variants of PNPLA3 and TERT showing a 6.5-fold higher risk for nonviral-related HCC compared to individuals lacking these genotypes. This observation suggests that gene-gene interactions may identify individuals at elevated risk for developing HCC. CONCLUSIONS: Our GWAS highlights novel genetic susceptibility of nonviral HCC among European descent populations from North America with substantial heritability. Selected genetic influences were observed for HCV-positive HCC. Our findings indicate the importance of genetic susceptibility to HCC development.

Stereotactic radiosurgery and radiotherapy for brainstem metastases: An international multicenter analysis.

Brainstem metastases (BSM) present a significant neuro-oncological challenge, resulting in profound neurological deficits and poor survival outcomes. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) offer promising therapeutic avenues for BSM despite their precarious location. This international multicenter study investigates the efficacy and safety of SRS and FSRT in 136 patients with 144 BSM treated at nine institutions from 2005 to 2022. The median radiographic and clinical follow-up periods were 6.8 and 9.4 months, respectively. Predominantly, patients with BSM were managed with SRS (69.4%). The median prescription dose and isodose line for SRS were 18 Gy and 65%, respectively, while for FSRT, the median prescription dose was 21 Gy with a median isodose line of 70%. The 12-, 24-, and 36-month local control (LC) rates were 82.9%, 71.4%, and 61.2%, respectively. Corresponding overall survival rates at these time points were 61.1%, 34.7%, and 19.3%. In the multivariable Cox regression analysis for LC, only the minimum biologically effective dose was significantly associated with LC, favoring higher doses for improved control (in Gy, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.86, p < .01). Regarding overall survival, good performance status (Karnofsky performance status, ≥90%; HR: 0.43, p < .01) and prior whole brain radiotherapy (HR: 2.52, p < .01) emerged as associated factors. In 14 BSM (9.7%), treatment-related adverse events were noted, with a total of five (3.4%) radiation necrosis. SRS and FSRT for BSM exhibit efficacy and safety, making them suitable treatment options for affected patients.

Trends Over Time in Recurrence Patterns and Survival Outcomes after Neoadjuvant Therapy and Surgery for Pancreatic Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine if advances in neoadjuvant therapy affected recurrence patterns and survival outcomes after pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). BACKGROUND: Data are limited on how modern multimodality therapy affects PDAC recurrence and post-recurrence survival. METHODS: Patients who received neoadjuvant therapy followed by curative-intent pancreatectomy for PDAC during 1998-2018 were identified. Treatments, recurrence sites and timing, and survival were compared between patients who completed neoadjuvant therapy and pancreatectomy in 1998-2004, 2005-2011, and 2012-2018. RESULTS: The study included 727 patients (203, 251, and 273 in the 1998-2004, 2005-2011, and 2012-2018 cohorts, respectively). Use of neoadjuvant induction chemotherapy increased over time, and regimens changed over time, with >80% of patients treated in 2012-2018 receiving FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel. Overall, recurrence sites and incidence (67.5%, 66.1%, and 65.9%) remained stable, and 85% of recurrences occurred within 2 years of surgery. However, compared to earlier cohorts, the 2012-2018 cohort had lower conditional risk of recurrence in postoperative year 1 and higher risk in postoperative year 2. Overall survival increased over time (median, 30.6, 33.6, and 48.7 mo, P < 0.005), driven by improved post-recurrence overall survival (median, 7.8, 12.5, and 12.6 mo; 3-year rate, 7%, 10%, and 20%; P < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: We observed changes in neoadjuvant therapy regimens over time and an associated shift in the conditional risk of recurrence from postoperative year 1 to postoperative year 2, although recurrence remained common. Overall survival and post-recurrence survival remarkably improved over time, reflecting improved multimodality regimens for recurrent disease.

Clinical and molecular characteristics of patients with brain metastasis secondary to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is poor. Secondary brain metastasis (Br-M) occurs in less than 1% of patients. Clinical characteristics and molecular alterations have not been characterized in this rare patients' subset. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Foundry software platform was used to retrospectively query electronic health records for patients with Br-M secondary to PDAC from 2005 to 2023; clinical, molecular, and overall survival (OS) data were analyzed. RESULTS: Br-M was diagnosed in 44 patients with PDAC. Median follow-up was 78 months; median OS from initial PDAC diagnosis was 47 months. Median duration from PDAC diagnosis to Br-M detection was 24 months; median OS from Br-M diagnosis was 3 months. At Br-M diagnosis, 82% (n = 36) of patients had elevated CA19-9. Lung was the most common preexisting metastatic location (71%) with Br-M, followed by liver (66%). Br-M were most frequently observed in the frontal lobe (34%, n = 15), cerebellar region (23%, n = 10), and leptomeninges (18%, n = 8). KRAS mutations were detected in 94.1% (n = 16) of patients who had molecular data available (n = 17) with KRASG12V being the most frequent subtype 47% (n = 8); KRASG12D in 29% (n = 5); KRASG12R in 18% (n = 3). Patients who underwent Br-M surgical resection (n = 5) had median OS of 8.6 months, while median OS following stereotactic radiosurgery only (n = 11) or whole-brain radiation only (n = 20) was 3.3 and 2.8 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Br-M is a late PDAC complication, resulting in an extremely poor prognosis especially in leptomeningeal disease. KRAS was mutated in 94.1% of the patients and the KRASG12V subtype was prevalent.

Microwave coagulation for liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Liver metastases (i.e. secondary hepatic malignancies) are significantly more common than primary liver cancer. Long-term survival after radical surgical treatment is approximately 50%. For people in whom resection for cure is not feasible, other treatments must be considered. One treatment option is microwave coagulation utilising electromagnetic waves. It involves placing an electrode into a lesion under ultrasound or computed tomography guidance. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of microwave coagulation versus no intervention, other ablation methods, or systemic treatments in people with liver metastases regardless of the location of the primary tumour. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest date of search was 14 April 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised clinical trials assessing beneficial or harmful effects of microwave coagulation and its comparators in people with liver metastases, irrespective of the location of the primary tumour. We included trials no matter the outcomes reported. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Our primary outcomes were: all-cause mortality at the last follow-up and time to mortality; health-related quality of life (HRQoL); and any adverse events or complications. Our secondary outcomes were: cancer mortality; disease-free survival; failure to clear liver metastases; recurrence of liver metastases; time to progression of liver metastases; and tumour response measures. We used risk ratios (RR) and hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) to present the results. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB 1 tool. We used GRADE methodology to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: Three randomised clinical trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The control interventions differed in the three trials; therefore, meta-analyses were not possible. The trials were at high risk of bias. The certainty of evidence of the assessed outcomes in the three comparisons was very low. Data on our prespecified outcomes were either missing or not reported. Microwave coagulation plus conventional transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) versus conventional TACE alone One trial, conducted in China, randomised 50 participants (mean age 60 years, 76% males) with liver metastases from various primary sites. Authors reported that the follow-up period was at least one month. The trial reported adverse events or complications in the experimental group only and for tumour response measures. There were no dropouts in the trial. The trial did not report on any other outcomes. Microwave ablation versus conventional surgery One trial, conducted in Japan, randomised 40 participants (mean age 61 years, 53% males) with multiple liver metastases of colorectal cancer. Ten participants were excluded after randomisation (six from the experimental and four from the control group); thus, the trial analyses included 30 participants. Follow-up was three years. The reported number of deaths from all causes was 9/14 included participants in the microwave group versus 12/16 included participants in the conventional surgery group. The mean overall survival was 27 months in the microwave ablation and 25 months in the conventional surgery group. The three-year overall survival was 14% with microwave ablation and 23% with conventional surgery, resulting in an HR of 0.91 (95% CI 0.39 to 2.15). The reported frequency of adverse events or complications was comparable between the two groups, except for the required blood transfusion, which was more common in the conventional surgery group. There was no intervention-related mortality. Disease-free survival was 11.3 months in the microwave ablationgroup and 13.3 months in the conventional surgery group. The trial did not report on HRQoL. Microwave ablation versus radiofrequency ablation One trial, conducted in Germany, randomised 50 participants (mean age 62.8 years, 46% males) who were followed for 24 months. Two-year mortality showed an RR of 0.62 (95% CI 0.26 to 1.47). The trial reported that, by two years, 76.9% of participants in the microwave ablationgroup and 62.5% of participants in the radiofrequency ablation group survived (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.73). The trial reported no deaths or major complications during the procedures in either group. There were two minor complications only in the radiofrequency ablation group (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.67). The trial reported technical efficacy in 100% of procedures in both groups. Distant recurrence was reported for 10 participants in the microwave ablation group and nine participants in the radiofrequency ablation group (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.08). No participant in the microwave ablation group demonstrated local progression at 12 months, while that occurred in two participants in the radiofrequency ablation group (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.67). The trial did not report on HRQoL. One trial reported partial support by Medicor (MMS Medicor Medical Supplies GmbH, Kerpen, Germany) for statistical analysis. The remaining two trials did not provide information on funding. We identified four ongoing trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of microwave ablation in addition to conventional TACE compared with conventional TACE alone on adverse events or complications. We do not know if microwave ablation compared with conventional surgery may have little to no effect on all-cause mortality. We do not know the effect of microwave ablation compared with radiofrequency ablation on all-cause mortality and adverse events or complications either. Data on all-cause mortality and time to mortality, HRQoL, adverse events or complications, cancer mortality, disease-free survival, failure to clear liver metastases, recurrence of liver metastases, time to progression of liver metastases, and tumour response measures were either insufficient or were lacking. In light of the current inconclusive evidence and the substantial gaps in data, the pursuit of additional good-quality, large randomised clinical trials is not only justified but also essential to elucidate the efficacy and comparative benefits of microwave ablation in relation to various interventions for liver metastases. The current version of the review, in comparison to the previous one, incorporates two new trials in two additional microwave ablation comparisons: 1. in addition to conventional TACE versus conventional TACE alone and 2. versus radiofrequency ablation.

Transarterial (chemo)embolisation versus systemic chemotherapy for colorectal cancer liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: The liver is affected by two groups of malignant tumours: primary liver cancers and liver metastases. Liver metastases are significantly more common than primary liver cancer, and five-year survival after radical surgical treatment of liver metastases ranges from 28% to 50%, depending on primary cancer site. However, R0 resection (resection for cure) is not feasible in most people; therefore, other treatments have to be considered in the case of non-resectability. One possible option is based on the concept that the blood supply to hepatic tumours originates predominantly from the hepatic artery. Transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) of the peripheral branches of the hepatic artery can be achieved by administering a chemotherapeutic drug followed by vascular occlusive agents and can lead to selective necrosis of the cancer tissue while leaving normal liver parenchyma virtually unaffected. The entire procedure can be performed without infusion of chemotherapy and is then called bland transarterial embolisation (TAE). These procedures are usually applied over a few sessions. Another possible treatment option is systemic chemotherapy which, in the case of colorectal cancer metastases, is most commonly performed using FOLFOX (folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) and FOLFIRI (folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, and irinotecan) regimens applied in multiple sessions over a long period of time. These therapies disrupt the cell cycle, leading to death of rapidly dividing malignant cells. Current guidelines determine the role of TAE and TACE as non-curative treatment options applicable in people with liver-only or liver-dominant metastatic disease that is unresectable or non-ablatable, and in people who have failed systemic chemotherapy. Regarding the treatment modalities in people with colorectal cancer liver metastases, we found no systematic reviews comparing the efficacy of TAE or TACE versus systemic chemotherapy. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of transarterial embolisation (TAE) or transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) compared with systemic chemotherapy in people with liver-dominant unresectable colorectal cancer liver metastases. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and three additional databases up to 4 April 2024. We also searched two trials registers and the European Medicines Agency database and checked reference lists of retrieved publications. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised clinical trials assessing beneficial and harmful effects of TAE or TACE versus systemic chemotherapy in adults (aged 18 years or older) with colorectal cancer liver metastases. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality; overall survival (time to mortality); and any adverse events or complications. Our secondary outcomes were cancer mortality; health-related quality of life; progression-free survival; proportion of participants dying or surviving with progression of the disease; time to progression of liver metastases; recurrence of liver metastases; and tumour response measures (complete response, partial response, stable disease, and progressive disease). For the purpose of the review and to perform necessary analyses, whenever possible, we converted survival rates to mortality rates, as this was our primary outcome. For the analysis of dichotomous outcomes, we used the risk ratio (RR); for continuous outcomes, we used the mean difference; and for time to event outcomes, we calculated hazard ratios (HRs), all with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used the standardised mean difference with 95% CIs when the trials used different instruments. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. We based our conclusions on outcomes analysed at the longest follow-up. MAIN RESULTS: We included three trials with 118 participants randomised to TACE versus 120 participants to systemic chemotherapy. Four participants were excluded; one due to disease progression prior to treatment and three due to decline in health. The trials reported data on one or more outcomes. Two trials were performed in China and one in Italy. The trials differed in terms of embolisation techniques and chemotherapeutic agents. Follow-up ranged from 12 months to 50 months. TACE may reduce mortality at longest follow-up (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.94; 3 trials, 234 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. TACE may have little to no effect on overall survival (time to mortality) (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.01; 1 trial, 70 participants; very low-certainty evidence), any adverse events or complications (3 trials, 234 participants; very low-certainty evidence), health-related quality of life (2 trials, 154 participants; very low-certainty evidence), progression-free survival (1 trial, 70 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and tumour response measures (presented as the overall response rate) (RR 1.81, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.96; 3 trials, 234 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. No trials reported cancer mortality, proportion of participants dying or surviving with progression of the disease, and recurrence of liver metastases. We found no trials comparing the effects of TAE versus systemic chemotherapy in people with colorectal cancer liver metastases. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence regarding effectiveness of TACE versus systemic chemotherapy in people with colorectal cancer liver metastases is of very low certainty and is based on three trials. Our confidence in the results is limited due to the risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, and imprecision. It is very uncertain whether TACE confers benefits with regard to reduction in mortality, overall survival (time to mortality), reduction in adverse events or complications, improvement in health-related quality of life, improvement in progression-free survival, and tumour response measures (presented as the overall response rate). Data on cancer mortality, proportion of participants dying or surviving with progression of the disease, and recurrence of liver metastases are lacking. We found no trials assessing TAE versus systemic chemotherapy. More randomised clinical trials are needed to strengthen the body of evidence and provide insight into the benefits and harms of TACE or TAE in comparison with systemic chemotherapy in people with liver metastases from colorectal cancer.

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

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

Prognosis Associated With CA19-9 Response Dynamics and Normalization During Neoadjuvant Therapy in Resected Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize associations between carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) dynamics during neoadjuvant therapy (NT) and survival for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). BACKGROUND: Although normalization of CA19-9 during NT is associated with improved outcomes following PDAC resection, we hypothesize that CA19-9 dynamics during NT can improve prognostication. METHODS: Characteristics for patients with PDAC undergoing NT (July 2011-October 2018) with ≥3 CA19-9 results (bilirubin<2mg/dL) were collected and grouped by CA19-9 dynamics. Nonproducers (<1 U/ml) were excluded, and normal was ≤35 U/ml. Postresection survival was compared among groups. RESULTS: Of 431 patients, 166 had eligible CA19-9 values. Median baseline CA19-9 was 98 U/ml. Overall 2-year postresection recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were 37% and 63%, respectively. Patients with normalization (53%) had improved 2-year RFS (47% vs. 28%, P = 0.01) and OS (75% vs. 49%, P = 0.01). CA19-9 dynamics during NT were analyzed by shape, direction, and normalization creating response types ("A-B-C-D-E"). Type A was "Always" decreasing to normalization, B "Bidirectional" with eventual normalization, C "Consistently" normal, D any "Decrease" without normalization, and E "Elevating" without normalization. Types A and B responses were associated with the longest postresection 2-year RFS (51% and 56%) and OS (75% and 92%, respectively) whereas Types D and E had the worst outcomes. After adjusting for node-positivity, perineural invasion, and margin-positivity, CA19-9 response types were independently associated with both RFS and OS, and predicted outcomes are better than CA19-9 normalization alone (likelihood ratio test RFS P < 0.001, OS P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This novel A-B-C-D-E classification of CA19-9 dynamics during NT was associated with postresection outcomes more precisely than CA19-9 normalization alone.

Effects of a Pragmatic Home-based Exercise Program Concurrent With Neoadjuvant Therapy on Physical Function of Patients With Pancreatic Cancer: The PancFit Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of a preoperative, home-based exercise program on fitness and physical function in patients with pancreatic cancer. BACKGROUND: We previously established a well-tolerated preoperative exercise program after finding a high frequency of sarcopenia and frailty in patients with pancreatic cancer. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled trial (NCT03187951), patients with pancreatic cancer were randomized to Arm A: enhanced usual care or Arm B: prescribed aerobic and resistance exercise during neoadjuvant therapy. Patients received nutrition counseling and activity trackers. The primary endpoint was a 6-minute walk distance (6MWD; ≥14 meters improvement was clinically meaningful). Secondary endpoints included additional physical function tests, health-related quality of life, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-one patients were randomized. Objectively measured weekly activity (153.2±135.6 and 159.8±122.8 min in Arm A and B, respectively, P =0.62) and self-reported weekly moderate-to-strenuous physical activity (107.4±160.4 and 129.6±161.6 min in Arm A and Arm B, respectively, P =0.49) were similar, but weekly strength training sessions increased more in Arm B (by 1.8±1.8 vs 0.1±2.4 sessions, P <0.001). 6MWD improved in both Arm A (mean change 18.6±56.8 m, P =0.01) and Arm B (27.3±68.1 m, P =0.002). Quality of life and clinical outcomes did not significantly differ between arms. Pooling patients in both study groups, exercise, and physical activity was favorably associated with physical performance and clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial of prescribed exercise versus enhanced usual care during neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer, a high volume of physical activity and increased exercise capacity were observed in both arms, highlighting the importance of activity among patients preparing for surgery.

Taxane-Based Chemotherapy Is Effective in Metastatic Appendiceal Adenocarcinoma.

Appendiceal cancer is a rare, orphan disease with no therapies currently approved by the FDA for its treatment. Given the limited data regarding drug efficacy, these tumors have historically been treated with chemotherapy designed for colon cancer. However, an overwhelming body of molecular data has demonstrated that appendiceal adenocarcinoma is a distinct entity with key molecular differences from colon cancer, notably rare APC mutation. Recognizing that APC loss-of-function is thought to contribute to taxane resistance and that taxanes are effective in the treatment of other gastrointestinal tumors, including gastric, esophageal, and small bowel adenocarcinoma, we completed a single-center retrospective study to assess efficacy. In a cohort of 13 patients with metastatic appendiceal adenocarcinoma, treated with taxane chemotherapy the median overall survival was 8.8 months. Of 10 evaluable patients, we observed 3 responses, 4 patients with stable disease, and 3 with progression (30% response rate, 70% disease control rate). The results of this study showing activity of taxane-based chemotherapy in appendiceal adenocarcinoma support further clinical investigation of taxane therapy in this orphan disease.

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

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

QUAPAS: An Adaptation of the QUADAS-2 Tool to Assess Prognostic Accuracy Studies.

Whereas diagnostic tests help detect the cause of signs and symptoms, prognostic tests assist in evaluating the probable course of the disease and future outcome. Studies to evaluate prognostic tests are longitudinal, which introduces sources of bias different from those for diagnostic accuracy studies. At present, systematic reviews of prognostic tests often use the QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2) tool to assess risk of bias and applicability of included studies because no equivalent instrument exists for prognostic accuracy studies.QUAPAS (Quality Assessment of Prognostic Accuracy Studies) is an adaptation of QUADAS-2 for prognostic accuracy studies. Questions likely to identify bias were evaluated in parallel and collated from QUIPS (Quality in Prognosis Studies) and PROBAST (Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool) and paired to the corresponding question (or domain) in QUADAS-2. A steering group conducted and reviewed 3 rounds of modifications before arriving at the final set of domains and signaling questions.QUAPAS follows the same steps as QUADAS-2: Specify the review question, tailor the tool, draw a flow diagram, judge risk of bias, and identify applicability concerns. Risk of bias is judged across the following 5 domains: participants, index test, outcome, flow and timing, and analysis. Signaling questions assist the final judgment for each domain. Applicability concerns are assessed for the first 4 domains.The authors used QUAPAS in parallel with QUADAS-2 and QUIPS in a systematic review of prognostic accuracy studies. QUAPAS improved the assessment of the flow and timing domain and flagged a study at risk of bias in the new analysis domain. Judgment of risk of bias in the analysis domain was challenging because of sparse reporting of statistical methods.

Duration of Protection After Vaccination Against Yellow Fever: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The duration of protection after a single dose of yellow fever vaccine is a matter of debate. To summarize the current knowledge, we performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Studies on the duration of protection after 1 and ≥2 vaccine doses were reviewed. Data were stratified by time since vaccination. In our meta-analysis, we used random-effects models. We identified 36 studies from 20 countries, comprising more than 17 000 participants aged 6 months to 85 years. Among healthy adults and children, pooled seroprotection rates after single vaccination dose were close to 100% by 3 months and remained high in adults for 5 to 10 years. In children vaccinated before age 2 years, the seroprotection rate was 52% within 5 years after primary vaccination. For immunodeficient persons, data indicate relevant waning. The extent of waning of seroprotection after yellow fever vaccination depends on age and immune status at primary vaccination.

Antibiotic Exposure Does Not Impact Immune Checkpoint Blockade Response in MSI-H/dMMR Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Single-Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has improved outcomes for patients with microsatellite instability high (MSI-H)/deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) tumors. However, not all MSI-H/dMMR patients will exhibit the same ICB efficacy. Previous studies suggest that concomitant antibiotic use while receiving ICB may result in poorer outcomes. We aimed to evaluate this association in patients with MSI-H/dMMR metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-site, retrospective review of 57 patients with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC that received ICB was completed. Data collected included patient demographics, ICB information, and antibiotic use. Antibiotic exposure was considered from 90 days prior to ICB through 6 weeks after initiation. Primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: The majority of patients received pembrolizumab (27 [47%]) or nivolumab (17 [30%]) monotherapy as their ICB agent. Of the 57 patients, 19 (33.3%) had antibiotic exposure from 90 days prior to ICB initiation through 6 weeks after initiation with most (13 [68%]) having antibiotic use in the 30 days preceding ICB initiation. Similar ORRs were seen in both groups (P-value > .99). No difference was observed in OS (P-value .29) or PFS (P-value .36) between groups. CONCLUSION: Our data show no association of lower response rates or survival in those MSI-H/dMMR patients with mCRC who receive antibiotics around the initiation of ICB. This information needs to be confirmed in a larger prospective cohort.

HepatoScore-14: Measures of Biological Heterogeneity Significantly Improve Prediction of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Risk.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Therapeutic, clinical trial entry and stratification decisions for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are made based on prognostic assessments, using clinical staging systems based on small numbers of empirically selected variables that insufficiently account for differences in biological characteristics of individual patients' disease. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We propose an approach for constructing risk scores from circulating biomarkers that produce a global biological characterization of individual patient's disease. Plasma samples were collected prospectively from 767 patients with HCC and 200 controls, and 317 proteins were quantified in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-certified biomarker testing laboratory. We constructed a circulating biomarker aberration score for each patient, a score between 0 and 1 that measures the degree of aberration of his or her biomarker panel relative to normal, which we call HepatoScore. We used log-rank tests to assess its ability to substratify patients within existing staging systems/prognostic factors. To enhance clinical application, we constructed a single-sample score, HepatoScore-14, which requires only a subset of 14 representative proteins encompassing the global biological effects. Patients with HCC were split into three distinct groups (low, medium, and high HepatoScore) with vastly different prognoses (medial overall survival 38.2/18.3/7.1 months; P < 0.0001). Furthermore, HepatoScore accurately substratified patients within levels of existing prognostic factors and staging systems (P < 0.0001 for nearly all), providing substantial and sometimes dramatic refinement of expected patient outcomes with strong therapeutic implications. These results were recapitulated by HepatoScore-14, rigorously validated in repeated training/test splits, concordant across Myriad RBM (Austin, TX) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kits, and established as an independent prognostic factor. CONCLUSIONS: HepatoScore-14 augments existing HCC staging systems, dramatically refining patient prognostic assessments and therapeutic decision making and enrollment in clinical trials. The underlying strategy provides a global biological characterization of disease, and can be applied broadly to other disease settings and biological media.

PIONEER-Panc: a platform trial for phase II randomized investigations of new and emerging therapies for localized pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Personalized and effective treatments for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) continue to remain elusive. Novel clinical trial designs that enable continual and rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics are needed. Here, we describe a platform clinical trial to address this unmet need. METHODS: This is a phase II study using a Bayesian platform design to evaluate multiple experimental arms against a control arm in patients with PDAC. We first separate patients into three clinical stage groups of localized PDAC (resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced disease), and further divide each stage group based on treatment history (treatment naïve or previously treated). The clinical stage and treatment history therefore define 6 different cohorts, and each cohort has one control arm but may have one or more experimental arms running simultaneously. Within each cohort, adaptive randomization rules are applied and patients will be randomized to either an experimental arm or the control arm accordingly. The experimental arm(s) of each cohort are only compared to the applicable cohort specific control arm. Experimental arms may be added independently to one or more cohorts during the study. Multiple correlative studies for tissue, blood, and imaging are also incorporated. DISCUSSION: To date, PDAC has been treated as a single disease, despite knowledge that there is substantial heterogeneity in disease presentation and biology. It is recognized that the current approach of single arm phase II trials and traditional phase III randomized studies are not well-suited for more personalized treatment strategies in PDAC. The PIONEER Panc platform clinical trial is designed to overcome these challenges and help advance our treatment strategies for this deadly disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of MD Anderson Cancer Center, IRB-approved protocol 2020-0075. The PIONEER trial is registered at the US National Institutes of Health (ClinicalTrials.gov) NCT04481204 .

Radiographic and Serologic Response to First-Line Chemotherapy in Unresected Localized Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the clinical relevance of putative radiographic and serologic metrics of chemotherapy response in patients with localized pancreatic cancer (LPC) who do not undergo pancreatectomy. Studies evaluating the response of LPC to systemic chemotherapy have focused on histopathologic analyses of resected specimens, but such specimens are not available for patients who do not undergo resection. We previously showed that changes in tumor volume and CA 19-9 levels provide a clinical readout of histopathologic response to preoperative therapy. METHODS: Our institutional database was searched for patients with LPC who were treated with first-line chemotherapy between January 2010 and December 2017 and did not undergo pancreatectomy. Radiographic response was measured using RECIST 1.1 and tumor volume. The volume of the primary tumor was compared between pretreatment and posttreatment images. The percentage change in tumor volume (%Δvol) was calculated as a percentage of the pretreatment volume. Serologic response was measured by comparing pretreatment and posttreatment CA 19-9 levels. We established 3 response groups by combining these metrics: (1) best responders with a decline in %Δvol in the top quartile and in CA 19-9, (2) nonresponders with an increase in %Δvol and in CA 19-9, and (3) other patients. RESULTS: This study included 329 patients. Individually, %Δvol and change in CA 19-9 were associated with overall survival (OS) (P≤.1), but RECIST 1.1 was not. In all, 73 patients (22%) were best responders, 42 (13%) were nonresponders, and there were 214 (65%) others. Best responders lived significantly longer than nonresponders and others (median OS, 24 vs 12 vs 17 months, respectively; P<.01). A multivariable model adjusting for type of chemotherapy regimen, number of chemotherapy doses, and receipt of radiotherapy showed that best responders had longer OS than did the other cohorts (hazard ratio [HR], 0.35; 95% CI, 0.21-0.58 for best responders, and HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.37-0.83 for others). CONCLUSIONS: Changes in tumor volume and serum levels of CA 19-9-but not RECIST 1.1-represent reliable metrics of response to systemic chemotherapy. They can be used to counsel patients and families on survival expectations even if pancreatectomy is not performed.

A scattered landscape: assessment of the evidence base for 71 patient decision aids developed in a hospital setting.

BACKGROUND: Recent publications reveal shortcomings in evidence review and summarization methods for patient decision aids. In the large-scale "Share to Care (S2C)" Shared Decision Making (SDM) project at the University Hospital Kiel, Germany, one of 4 SDM interventions was to develop up to 80 decision aids for patients. Best available evidence on the treatments' impact on patient-relevant outcomes was systematically appraised to feed this information into the decision aids. Aims of this paper were to (1) describe how PtDAs are developed and how S2C evidence reviews for each PtDA are conducted, (2) appraise the quality of the best available evidence identified and (3) identify challenges associated with identified evidence. METHODS: The quality of the identified evidence was assessed based on GRADE quality criteria and categorized into high-, moderate-, low-, very low-quality evidence. Evidence appraisal was conducted across all outcomes assessed in an evidence review and for specific groups of outcomes, namely mortality, morbidity, quality of life, and treatment harms. Challenges in evidence interpretation and summarization resulting from the characteristics of decision aids and the type and quality of evidence are identified and discussed. RESULTS: Evidence reviews assessed on average 25 systematic reviews/guidelines/studies and took about 3 months to be completed. Despite rigorous review processes, nearly 70% of outcome-specific information derived for decision aids was based on low-quality and mostly on non-directly comparative evidence. Evidence on quality of life and harms was often not provided or not in sufficient form/detail. Challenges in evidence interpretation for use in decision aids resulted from, e.g., a lack of directly comparative evidence or the existence of very heterogeneous evidence for the diverse treatments being compared. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence reviews in this project were carefully conducted and summarized. However, the evidence identified for our decision aids was indeed a "scattered landscape" and often poor quality. Facing a high prevalence of low-quality, non-directly comparative evidence for treatment alternatives doesn't mean it is not necessary to choose an evidence-based approach to inform patients. While there is an urgent need for high quality comparative trials, best available evidence nevertheless has to be appraised and transparently communicated to patients.

CD40 agonistic monoclonal antibody APX005M (sotigalimab) and chemotherapy, with or without nivolumab, for the treatment of metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: an open-label, multicentre, phase 1b study.

BACKGROUND: Standard chemotherapy remains inadequate in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Combining an agonistic CD40 monoclonal antibody with chemotherapy induces T-cell-dependent tumour regression in mice and improves survival. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the safety of combining APX005M (sotigalimab) with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel, with and without nivolumab, in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma to establish the recommended phase 2 dose. METHODS: This non-randomised, open-label, multicentre, four-cohort, phase 1b study was done at seven academic hospitals in the USA. Eligible patients were adults aged 18 years and older with untreated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-1, and measurable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. All patients were treated with 1000 mg/m2 intravenous gemcitabine and 125 mg/m2 intravenous nab-paclitaxel. Patients received 0·1 mg/kg intravenous APX005M in cohorts B1 and C1 and 0·3 mg/kg in cohorts B2 and C2. In cohorts C1 and C2, patients also received 240 mg intravenous nivolumab. Primary endpoints comprised incidence of adverse events in all patients who received at least one dose of any study drug, incidence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) in all patients who had a DLT or received at least two doses of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel and one dose of APX005M during cycle 1, and establishing the recommended phase 2 dose of intravenous APX005M. Objective response rate in the DLT-evaluable population was a key secondary endpoint. This trial (PRINCE, PICI0002) is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03214250 and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Aug 22, 2017, and July 10, 2018, of 42 patients screened, 30 patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of any study drug; 24 were DLT-evaluable with median follow-up 17·8 months (IQR 16·0-19·4; cohort B1 22·0 months [21·4-22·7], cohort B2 18·2 months [17·0-18·9], cohort C1 17·9 months [14·3-19·7], cohort C2 15·9 months [12·7-16·1]). Two DLTs, both febrile neutropenia, were observed, occurring in one patient each for cohorts B2 (grade 3) and C1 (grade 4). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were lymphocyte count decreased (20 [67%]; five in B1, seven in B2, four in C1, four in C2), anaemia (11 [37%]; two in B1, four in B2, four in C1, one in C2), and neutrophil count decreased (nine [30%]; three in B1, three in B2, one in C1, two in C2). 14 (47%) of 30 patients (four each in B1, B2, C1; two in C2) had a treatment-related serious adverse event. The most common serious adverse event was pyrexia (six [20%] of 30; one in B2, three in C1, two in C2). There were two chemotherapy-related deaths due to adverse events: one sepsis in B1 and one septic shock in C1. The recommended phase 2 dose of APX005M was 0·3 mg/kg. Responses were observed in 14 (58%) of 24 DLT-evaluable patients (four each in B1, C1, C2; two in B2). INTERPRETATION: APX005M and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel, with or without nivolumab, is tolerable in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma and shows clinical activity. If confirmed in later phase trials, this treatment regimen could replace chemotherapy-only standard of care in this population. FUNDING: Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Cancer Research Institute, and Bristol Myers Squibb.

Radiographic and Serologic Predictors of Pathologic Major Response to Preoperative Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify potential radiologic and serologic markers of pancreatic tumor response to therapy, using pathologic major response (pMR) as the objective endpoint. BACKGROUND: We previously demonstrated that a pMR to preoperative therapy, defined as detection of <5% viable cancer cells in the surgical specimen on histopathological analysis, is an important prognostic factor for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHODS: Pretreatment and posttreatment computed tomography scans of consecutive patients who received preoperative chemotherapy and/or (chemo)radiation before pancreatectomy for PDAC between January 2010 and December 2018 were rereviewed. Response per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1, other radiographic changes in tumor size and anatomic extent, and posttreatment CA 19-9 levels were compared between patients who did and did not have a pMR on final histopathologic analysis of their surgical specimens. RESULTS: A total of 290 patients with localized PDAC underwent pancreatectomy between 2010 and 2018 after receiving preoperative chemotherapy (n = 36; 12%), (chemo)radiation (n = 87; 30%), or both (n = 167; 58%). Among them, 28 (10%) experienced pMR, including 9 (3.1%) who experienced pathologic complete response. On multivariable logistic regression, low posttreatment CA 19-9 level, RECIST partial response, and reduction in tumor volume were confirmed to be independently associated with pMR (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: We identified serologic and radiographic indicators of pMR that could help inform the delivery of preoperative therapy to patients with PDAC.