A multi-center, single-arm, phase Ib study of pembrolizumab (MK-3475) in combination with chemotherapy for patients with advanced colorectal cancer: HCRN GI14-186.

Modified FOLFOX6 is an established therapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We conducted a single-arm phase Ib study to address the hypothesis that addition of pembrolizumab to this regimen could safely and effectively improve patient outcomes (NCT02375672). The relationship between immune biomarkers and clinical response were assessed in an exploratory manner. Patients with mCRC received concurrent pembrolizumab and modified FOLFOX6. The study included safety run-in for the first six patients. The primary objective was median progression-free survival (mPFS), with secondary objectives including median overall survival, safety, and exploratory assessment of immune changes. To assess immunological impact, peripheral blood was collected at baseline and during treatment. The levels of soluble factors were measured via bioplex, while a panel of checkpoint molecules and phenotypically defined cell populations were assessed with flow cytometry and correlated with RECIST and mPFS. Due to incidences of grade 3 and grade 4 neutropenia in the safety lead-in, the dose of mFOLFOX6 was reduced in the expansion cohort. Median PFS was 8.8 months and median OS was not reached at data cutoff. Best responses of stable disease, partial response, and complete response were observed in 43.3%, 50.0%, and 6.7% of patients, respectively. Several soluble and cellular immune biomarkers were associated with improved RECIST and mPFS. Immunosuppressive myeloid and T cell subsets that were analyzed were not associated with response. Primary endpoint was not superior to historic control. Biomarkers that were associated with improved response may be informative for future regimens combining chemotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

A phase 1b dose escalation study of Wnt pathway inhibitor vantictumab in combination with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine in patients with previously untreated metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Vantictumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that inhibits Wnt pathway signaling through binding FZD1, 2, 5, 7, and 8 receptors. This phase Ib study evaluated vantictumab in combination with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine in patients with untreated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Patients received vantictumab at escalating doses in combination with standard dosing of nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine according to a 3 + 3 design. A total of 31 patients were treated in 5 dosing cohorts. Fragility fractures attributed to vantictumab occurred in 2 patients in Cohort 2 (7 mg/kg every 2 weeks), and this maximum administered dose (MAD) on study was considered unsafe. The dosing schedule was revised to every 4 weeks for Cohorts 3 through 5, with additional bone safety parameters added. Sequential dosing of vantictumab followed by nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine was also explored. No fragility fractures attributed to vantictumab occurred in these cohorts; pathologic fracture not attributed to vantictumab was documented in 2 patients. The study was ultimately terminated due to concerns around bone-related safety, and thus the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination was not determined. The MAD of vantictumab according to the revised dosing schedule was 5 mg/kg (n = 16).

A Phase Ib/II Study of the JAK1 Inhibitor, Itacitinib, plus nab-Paclitaxel and Gemcitabine in Advanced Solid Tumors.

LESSONS LEARNED: Itacitinib in combination with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine demonstrated an acceptable safety profile with clinical activity in patients with advanced solid tumors including pancreatic cancer.The results support future studies of itacitinib as a component of combination regimens with other immunologic and targeted small molecule anticancer agents. BACKGROUND: Cytokine-mediated signaling via JAK/STAT is central to tumor growth, survival, and systemic inflammation, which is associated with cancer cachexia, particularly in pancreatic cancer. Because of their centrality in the pathogenesis of cancer cachexia and progression, JAK isozymes have emerged as promising therapeutic targets. Preclinical studies have demonstrated antiproliferative effects of JAK/STAT pathway inhibition in both in vitro and in vivo models of cancer, including pancreatic cancer. METHODS: This phase Ib/II dose-optimization study assessed itacitinib, a selective JAK1 inhibitor, combined with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine in adults with treatment-naïve advanced/metastatic disease (Part 1) or pancreatic adenocarcinoma (Parts 2/2A; NCT01858883). Starting doses (Part 1) were itacitinib 400 mg, nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2, and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2. Additional dose levels incorporated were granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, de-escalations of itacitinib to 300 mg once daily (QD), nab-paclitaxel to 100 mg/m2, and gemcitabine to 750 mg/m2. RESULTS: Among 55 patients in Part 1, 6 developed seven hematologic dose-limiting toxicities (Cycle 1). Itacitinib 300 mg plus nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 was tolerated and expanded in Part 2. Treatment discontinuation and grade 3/4 neutropenia rates prompted itacitinib de-escalation to 200 mg QD in Part 2A. The most common grade 3/4 toxicities were fatigue and neutropenia. Partial responses occurred across all itacitinib doses and several tumor types (overall response rate, 24%). CONCLUSION: Itacitinib plus chemotherapy demonstrated acceptable safety and clinical activity in patients with advanced solid tumors including pancreatic cancers. This study was terminated early (sponsor's decision) based on negative phase III results for a JAK1/2 inhibitor in previously treated advanced pancreatic cancer.

Overall survival of patients with recurrent pancreatic cancer treated with systemic therapy: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Only a few patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) recurring after curative resection and peri-operative (neoadjuvant and adjuvant) therapy are included in clinical trials of metastatic PDAC. As such, there is a paucity of data to guide treatment after relapse, and patients are treated similarly to those with de novo metastatic PDAC (mPDAC). We evaluated the patterns of chemotherapy use and over-all survival (OS) in patients with recurrent PDAC (rPDAC) following curative therapy. METHODS: In this retrospective study, the Indiana University pancreatic cancer database was used to identify patients with PDAC who underwent curative resection and subsequently developed recurrence. Demographics, tumor and treatment characteristics were collected. Patients were broadly divided into those who received chemotherapy for rPDAC and those who did not. Patients in the former category were further subdivided into those who received single agent therapy, any standard combination therapy (5-fluorouracil/irinotecan/oxaliplatin combination or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel) and those who received non-standard combinations. Survival analysis was performed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Log rank tests were used to determine differences in survival between treated rPDAC patients and those not treated. Cox regression analysis was employed to evaluate factors associated with OS. RESULTS: We identified 435 patients with resected PDAC treated between 2008 and 2014. Two hundred and twenty-three patients (51.2%) were diagnosed with rPDAC. Of these, 140 patients (63%) received chemotherapy whereas 71 patients (32%) did not receive chemotherapy. The 74 patients (53%) who received any standard, approved multiagent combination regimen had a median OS of 14 months compared to 8 months for the 47 patents (34%) who received other non-standard combinations and the 19 (13%) who received single agent therapy (P = 0.029). Multivariate cox regression analysis showed that margin negative resection, peri-operative therapy, radiotherapy and the use of any chemotherapy for rPDAC were associated with improved OS. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the use of standard approved multi-agent therapy in rPDAC. Patients derive significant benefit from these standard combination therapies with median OS that is comparable to what is observed with treatment for de novo mPDAC.

Phase 1 study of EUS-guided photodynamic therapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) has a poor prognosis. There are limited data describing the use of photodynamic therapy (PDT) for pancreatic cancer in humans. We hypothesized that EUS-guided PDT for LAPC is safe, technically feasible, and produces a dose- and time-dependent increasing degree of image-defined tumor necrosis. METHODS: In a single-center, prospective, dose-escalation phase 1 study, patients with treatment-naïve LAPC received intravenous porfimer sodium (Concordia Laboratories Inc, St Michael, Barbados) followed 2 days later by EUS-PDT. EUS-PDT was performed by puncture with a 19-gauge needle and insertion of a 1.0-cm light diffuser (Pioneer Optics, Bloomfield, Conn) and illumination with a 630-nm light (Diomed Inc, Andover, Mass). A CT scan 18 days after PDT was done to assess for change in pancreatic necrosis. Nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/ m2 intravenously) and gemcitabine (1000 mg /m2 intravenously) were initiated 7 days after CT and given weekly for 3 of 4 weeks (1 cycle) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Twelve patients (mean age, 67 ± 6 years; 8 male) with tumors (mean diameter, 45.2 ± 12.9 mm) in the head and/or neck (8) or body and/or tail (4) underwent EUS-PDT. Compared with baseline imaging, increased volume and percentage of tumor necrosis were observed in 6 of 12 patients (50%) after EUS-PDT. The mean overall increases in volume and percentage necrosis were 10 ± 26 cm3 (P = .20) and 18% ± 22% (P = .016), respectively. After a median follow-up of 10.5 months (range, 1.0-37.4 months), median progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 2.6 months (95% confidence interval, 0.7, not estimable) and 11.5 months (95% confidence interval, 1.1, 16.9), respectively. Surgical resection was attempted in 2 patients, and pathology showed a complete response (n = 1) and residual 2-mm tumor (n = 1). There were 8 serious adverse events and none related to EUS or EUS-PDT. CONCLUSION: EUS-PDT for LAPC appears to be safe and produces measurable imaged-defined tumor necrosis. Phase 2 studies are warranted. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01770132.).

Social correlates of mental health in gastrointestinal cancer patients and their family caregivers: Exploring the role of loneliness.

PURPOSE: The present study examined the degree to which loneliness mediated the influence of negative (social constraints) and positive (emotional support) relationship qualities on the global mental health of advanced gastrointestinal (GI) cancer patients and their family caregivers. METHODS: Fifty patient-caregiver dyads completed measures assessing social constraints (e.g., avoidance, criticism) from the other dyad members, emotional support from others, loneliness, and global mental health. Structural equation modeling was used to examine individual models, and Actor-Partner Interdependence Mediation Modeling was used to examine dyadic associations. RESULTS: Individual path analyses for patients and caregivers demonstrated that emotional support had a significant indirect effect on mental health through loneliness (Bs = 0.32 and 0.30, respectively), but no associations were found between social constraints and mental health. In dyadic analyses, participants' loneliness and mental health were not significantly related to their partner's emotional support, loneliness, or mental health (Bs = - 0.18 to 0.18). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that for advanced GI cancer patients and caregivers, emotional support from others alleviates feelings of loneliness, which may lead to better mental health. However, the benefits of emotional support appear to be primarily intrapersonal rather than interpersonal in nature. Additionally, participants endorsed low levels of social constraints, which might explain their lack of relation to loneliness and mental health. Continued examination of interdependence in social processes between cancer patients and caregivers will inform intervention development.

Examining the effect of peer helping in a coping skills intervention: a randomized controlled trial for advanced gastrointestinal cancer patients and their family caregivers.

PURPOSE: At the end of life, spiritual well-being is a central aspect of quality of life for many patients and their family caregivers. A prevalent spiritual value in advanced cancer patients is the need to actively give. To address this need, the current randomized trial examined whether adding a peer helping component to a coping skills intervention leads to improved meaning in life and peace for advanced gastrointestinal cancer patients and their caregivers. Feasibility and acceptability outcomes were also assessed. METHODS: Advanced gastrointestinal cancer patients and caregivers (n = 50 dyads) were randomly assigned to a 5-session, telephone-based coping skills intervention or a peer helping + coping skills intervention. One or both dyad members had moderate-severe distress. Peer helping involved contributing to handouts on coping skills for other families coping with cancer. Patients and caregivers completed measures of meaning in life/peace, fatigue, psychological symptoms, coping self-efficacy, and emotional support. Patient pain and caregiver burden were also assessed. RESULTS: Small effects in favor of the coping skills group were found regarding meaning in life/peace at 1 and 5 weeks post-intervention. Other outcomes did not vary as a function of group assignment, with both groups showing small decreases in patient and caregiver fatigue and caregiver distress and burden. High recruitment and retention rates supported feasibility, and high participant satisfaction ratings supported acceptability. CONCLUSIONS: Although a telephone-based intervention is feasible and acceptable for this population, peer helping in the context of a coping skills intervention does not enhance spiritual well-being relative to coping skills alone.

A Multidisciplinary Approach to Pancreas Cancer in 2016: A Review.

In this article, we review our multidisciplinary approach for patients with pancreatic cancer. Specifically, we review the epidemiology, diagnosis and staging, biliary drainage techniques, selection of patients for surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and discuss other palliative interventions. The areas of active research investigation and where our knowledge is limited are emphasized.

A systematic review of psychosocial interventions for colorectal cancer patients.

PURPOSE: A significant minority of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients experience clinically meaningful distress that may warrant intervention. The goal of this systematic review was to assess the impact of psychosocial interventions on quality-of-life and psychosocial outcomes for CRC patients. METHODS: A systematic search of CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and PsycARTICLES was undertaken to obtain relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published through October 2016. RESULTS: Fourteen RCTs of psychosocial interventions for CRC patients were identified. Only three of these RCTs showed significant intervention effects on multiple mental health outcomes. These interventions included written and verbal emotional expression, progressive muscle relaxation training, and a self-efficacy enhancing intervention. Eight of the 14 trials, testing a range of psychoeducational and supportive care interventions, produced little to no effects on study outcomes. An evaluation of RCT quality highlighted the need for greater rigor in study methods and reporting. CONCLUSION: A limited evidence base supports the efficacy of psychosocial interventions for CRC patients. Large-scale trials are needed before drawing definitive conclusions regarding intervention impact.

Phase I Study of Lenalidomide and Sorafenib in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

LESSONS LEARNED: Combination therapies in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma can be associated with overlapping toxicity and are therefore poorly tolerated.Using sorafenib at the maximum tolerated dose can lead to a higher incidence of toxicities. Consequently, combination studies might evaluate sorafenib at alternative schedules or doses to improve tolerance, recognizing this could affect sorafenib efficacy.Although this combination was poorly tolerated, it does not exclude further evaluation of new-generation immunomodulator drugs or immune checkpoint inhibitors in the hope of optimizing tolerance and safety. BACKGROUND: Sorafenib is the standard treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and to date, no combination therapy has demonstrated superior survival compared with sorafenib alone. The immunosuppressive microenvironment in HCC is a negative predictor for survival. Lenalidomide is an immunomodulator and antiangiogenic agent, with limited single-agent efficacy in HCC. Based on these data, we designed a phase I study of sorafenib plus lenalidomide to determine the safety and preliminary antitumor activity of this combination. METHODS: This was an open-label, phase I study with a 3+3 dose escalation/de-escalation design. The starting dose of sorafenib was 400 mg p.o. b.i.d. and of lenalidomide was 15 mg p.o. daily with a planned dose escalation by 5 mg per cohort up to 25 mg daily. Dose de-escalation was planned to a sorafenib dose of 400 mg p.o. daily combined with two doses of lenalidomide: 10 mg p.o. daily for a 28-day cycle (cohort 1) and 10 mg p.o. daily for a 21- or 28-day cycle (cohort 2). Patients with cirrhosis, a Child-Pugh score of A-B7, and no previous systemic therapy were eligible. RESULTS: Five patients were enrolled. Their median age was 56 years (range 39-61), and the ECOG status was 0-2. Four patients were treated at dose level (DL) 1. Because of the poor tolerance to the combination associated with grade 2 toxicities, one more patient was treated at DL -1. No dose-limiting toxicity was observed as specified per protocol. The most common toxicities were nausea, anorexia, pruritus, elevated liver enzymes, and elevated bilirubin. Three patients experienced one or more of the following grade 3 toxicities: fatigue (DL 1), increased bilirubin (DL 1), skin desquamation (DL -1), and elevated transaminase levels (DL 1). The median duration of therapy was 1 cycle (range 1-3). All patients discontinued the study, 4 because of progressive disease and 1 by patient preference. The best confirmed response was progressive disease. The median progression-free survival was 1.0 month (95% confidence interval 0.9-2.8), and the median overall survival was 5.9 months (95% confidence interval 3.68-23.4). CONCLUSION: In our small study, the combination of lenalidomide and sorafenib was poorly tolerated and showed no clinical activity. Although the study was closed early because of toxicity concerns, future studies assessing combinations of sorafenib with new-generation immunomodulator drugs or other immunomodulatory agents, should consider lower starting doses of sorafenib to avoid excessive toxicity.

Family caregiving challenges in advanced colorectal cancer: patient and caregiver perspectives.

PURPOSE: Family caregivers of advanced colorectal cancer patients may be at increased risk for psychological distress. Yet their key challenges in coping with the patient's illness are not well understood. Soliciting both patient and caregiver perspectives on these challenges would broaden our understanding of the caregiving experience. Thus, the purpose of this research was to identify caregivers' key challenges in coping with their family member's advanced colorectal cancer from the perspective of patients and caregivers. METHODS: Individual, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 23 advanced colorectal cancer patients and 23 primary family caregivers. Interview data were analyzed via thematic analysis. RESULTS: In nearly all cases, patient and caregiver reports of the caregiver's key challenge were discrepant. Across patient and caregiver reports, caregivers' key challenges included processing emotions surrounding the patient's initial diagnosis or recurrence and addressing the patient's practical and emotional needs. Other challenges included coping with continual uncertainty regarding the patient's potential functional decline and prognosis and observing the patient suffer from various physical symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that eliciting the perspectives of both patients and caregivers regarding caregivers' challenges provides a more comprehensive understanding of their experience. Results also point to the need to assist caregivers with the emotional and practical aspects of caregiving.

Sex specificity of pancreatic cancer cachexia phenotypes, mechanisms, and treatment in mice and humans: role of Activin.

BACKGROUND: Cachexia is frequent, deadly, and untreatable for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The reproductive hormone and cytokine Activin is a mediator of PDAC cachexia, and Activin receptor targeting was clinically tested for cancer cachexia therapy. However, sex-specific manifestations and mechanisms are poorly understood, constraining development of effective treatments. METHODS: Cachexia phenotypes, muscle gene/protein expression, and effects of the Activin blocker ACVR2B/Fc were assessed in LSL-KrasG12D/+ , LSL-Trp53R172H/+ , and Pdx-1-Cre (KPC) mice with autochthonic PDAC. Effects of PDAC and sex hormones were modelled by treating C2C12 myotubes with KPC-cell conditioned medium (CM) and estradiol. Muscle gene expression by RNAseq and change in muscle from serial CT scans were measured in patients with PDAC. RESULTS: Despite equivalent tumour latency (median 17 weeks) and mortality (24.5 weeks), male KPC mice showed earlier and more severe cachexia than females. In early PDAC, male gastrocnemius, quadriceps, and tibialis anterior muscles were reduced (-21.7%, -18.9%, and -20.8%, respectively, all P < 0.001), with only gastrocnemius reduced in females (-16%, P < 0.01). Sex differences disappeared in late PDAC. Plasma Activin A was similarly elevated between sexes throughout, while oestrogen and testosterone levels suggested a virilizing effect of PDAC in females. Estradiol partially protected myotubes from KPC-CM induced atrophy and promoted expression of the potential Activin inhibitor Fstl1. Early-stage female mice showed greater muscle expression of Activin inhibitors Fst, Fstl1, and Fstl3; this sex difference disappeared by late-stage PDAC. ACVR2B/Fc initiated in early PDAC preserved muscle and fat only in male KPC mice, with increases of 41.2%, 52.6%, 39.3%, and 348.8%, respectively, in gastrocnemius, quadriceps, tibialis, and fat pad weights vs. vehicle controls, without effect on tumour. No protection was observed in females. At protein and RNA levels, pro-atrophy pathways were induced more strongly in early-stage males, with sex differences less evident in late-stage disease. As with mass, ACVR2B/Fc blunted atrophy-associated pathways only in males. In patients with resectable PDAC, muscle expression of Activin inhibitors FSTL1, FSLT3, and WFIKKN2/GASP2 were higher in women than men. Overall, among 124 patients on first-line gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel for PDAC, only men displayed muscle loss (P < 0.001); average muscle wasting in men was greater (-6.63 ± 10.70% vs. -1.62 ± 12.00% mean ± SD, P = 0.038) and more rapid (-0.0098 ± 0.0742%/day vs. -0.0466 ± 0.1066%/day, P = 0.017) than in women. CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma cachexia displays sex-specific phenotypes in mice and humans, with Activin a preferential driver of muscle wasting in males. Sex is a major modulator of cachexia mechanisms. Consideration of sexual dimorphism is essential for discovery and development of effective treatments.

Profiling of Adipose and Skeletal Muscle in Human Pancreatic Cancer Cachexia Reveals Distinct Gene Profiles with Convergent Pathways.

The vast majority of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) suffer cachexia. Although cachexia results from concurrent loss of adipose and muscle tissue, most studies focus on muscle alone. Emerging data demonstrate the prognostic value of fat loss in cachexia. Here we sought to identify the muscle and adipose gene profiles and pathways regulated in cachexia. Matched rectus abdominis muscle and subcutaneous adipose tissue were obtained at surgery from patients with benign conditions (n = 11) and patients with PDAC (n = 24). Self-reported weight loss and body composition measurements defined cachexia status. Gene profiling was done using ion proton sequencing. Results were queried against external datasets for validation. 961 DE genes were identified from muscle and 2000 from adipose tissue, demonstrating greater response of adipose than muscle. In addition to known cachexia genes such as FOXO1, novel genes from muscle, including PPP1R8 and AEN correlated with cancer weight loss. All the adipose correlated genes including SCGN and EDR17 are novel for PDAC cachexia. Pathway analysis demonstrated shared pathways but largely non-overlapping genes in both tissues. Age related muscle loss predominantly had a distinct gene profiles compared to cachexia. This analysis of matched, externally validate gene expression points to novel targets in cachexia.

Identification of Potential Serum Protein Biomarkers and Pathways for Pancreatic Cancer Cachexia Using an Aptamer-Based Discovery Platform.

Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) suffer debilitating and deadly weight loss, known as cachexia. Development of therapies requires biomarkers to diagnose, and monitor cachexia; however, no such markers are in use. Via Somascan, we measured ~1300 plasma proteins in 30 patients with PDAC vs. 11 controls. We found 60 proteins specific to local PDAC, 46 to metastatic, and 67 to presence of >5% cancer weight loss (FC ≥ |1.5|, p ≤ 0.05). Six were common for cancer stage (Up: GDF15, TIMP1, IL1RL1; Down: CCL22, APP, CLEC1B). Four were common for local/cachexia (C1R, PRKCG, ELANE, SOST: all oppositely regulated) and four for metastatic/cachexia (SERPINA6, PDGFRA, PRSS2, PRSS1: all consistently changed), suggesting that stage and cachexia status might be molecularly separable. We found 71 proteins that correlated with cachexia severity via weight loss grade, weight loss, skeletal muscle index and radiodensity (r ≥ |0.50|, p ≤ 0.05), including some known cachexia mediators/markers (LEP, MSTN, ALB) as well as novel proteins (e.g., LYVE1, C7, F2). Pathway, correlation, and upstream regulator analyses identified known (e.g., IL6, proteosome, mitochondrial dysfunction) and novel (e.g., Wnt signaling, NK cells) mechanisms. Overall, this study affords a basis for validation and provides insights into the processes underpinning cancer cachexia.

Phase I, Pharmacogenomic, Drug Interaction Study of Sorafenib and Bevacizumab in Combination with Paclitaxel in Patients with Advanced Refractory Solid Tumors.

VEGF blockade does not uniformly result in clinical benefit. We evaluated safety, dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), recommended phase II dose (RP2D), antitumor efficacy, and exploratory biomarkers including pharmacogenomics and pharmacokinetics with sorafenib, bevacizumab, and paclitaxel in patients with refractory cancers. The study had a "3 + 3" design, using paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 every week for 3 weeks, in every 4 week cycles, bevacizumab 5 mg/kg every 2 weeks, and sorafenib 200 or 400 mg twice a day, 5 or 7 days/week (5/7, 7/7). The MTD cohort was expanded. Twenty-seven patients enrolled in 3 cohorts: sorafenib 200 mg twice a day 5/7, 200 mg twice a day 7/7, and 400 mg twice a day 5/7. DLTs were grade 3 neutropenia >7 days (cohort 1, 1), grade 3 hypertension (cohort 2, 1), grade 3 hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR; cohort 3, 2). MTD was sorafenib 200 mg twice a day 7/7. Six DLTs occurred in cohort 2 expansion: grade 3 HFSR (2), grade 2 HFSR with sorafenib delay >7 days (2), grade 4 cerebrovascular accident (1), grade 3 neutropenia >7 days (1). RP2D was sorafenib 200 mg twice a day 5/7. Most patients (62%) dose reduced sorafenib to 200 mg daily 5/7 after a median 3 (range, 2-17) cycles. Response rates were 48% overall (27) and 64% for ovarian cancers (14). VEGF-A-1154AA and -7TT recessive homozygous genotypes conferred worse overall survival versus alternative genotypes (7 vs. 22 months). Intermittent, low-dose sorafenib (200 mg twice a day 5/7) combined with bevacizumab and paclitaxel was tolerable and had high antitumor efficacy in patients with refractory cancer (NCT00572078).

Phase Ib Study of Wnt Inhibitor Ipafricept with Gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel in Patients with Previously Untreated Stage IV Pancreatic Cancer.

PURPOSE: The recombinant fusion protein ipafricept blocks Wnt signaling, and in combination with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel caused tumor regression in xenografts. This phase Ib study evaluated the combination of ipafricept with nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine in patients with untreated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Dose escalation started with standard dose nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine and ipafricept (3.5 mg/kg days 1, 15). Because of fragility fractures seen with different anti-Wnt agents, following cohorts had ≥6 patients treated with ipafricept 3 to 5 mg/kg on day 1, and included bone marker monitoring and prophylactic bisphosphonates as indicated. On the basis of preclinical data, sequential dosing was evaluated in cohort 4 (ipafricept day 1 followed nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine day 3). Objectives included safety, MTD, recommended phase II dose, pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, pharmacodynamics, and efficacy. RESULTS: A total of 26 patients were enrolled, five in cohort 1 and seven each in cohorts 2-4. ipafricept-related adverse events (AEs) of any grade included fatigue, nausea, vomiting, anorexia, and pyrexia. ipafricept-related AEs grade ≥3 included two events of aspartate aminotransferase elevation, and one each of nausea, rash, vomiting, and leucopenia. No dose-limiting toxicities or fragility fractures were observed. Nine patients (34.6%) had partial response, 12 (46.2%) stable disease as best response, with clinical benefit rate of 81%. Median progression-free survival was 5.9 m [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.4-18.4], median overall survival was 9.7 m (95% CI, 7.0-14). The study was terminated by the sponsor due to bone-related toxicity within this therapeutic program and concerns for commercial viability. One patient remains on therapy under compassionate use. CONCLUSIONS: Ipafricept can be administered with nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine with reasonable tolerance. Wnt pathway remains a therapeutic target of interest in mPDAC.

The systemic activin response to pancreatic cancer: implications for effective cancer cachexia therapy.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a particularly lethal malignancy partly due to frequent, severe cachexia. Serum activin correlates with cachexia and mortality, while exogenous activin causes cachexia in mice. METHODS: Isoform-specific activin expression and activities were queried in human and murine tumours and PDAC models. Activin inhibition was by administration of soluble activin type IIB receptor (ACVR2B/Fc) and by use of skeletal muscle specific dominant negative ACVR2B expressing transgenic mice. Feed-forward activin expression and muscle wasting activity were tested in vivo and in vitro on myotubes. RESULTS: Murine PDAC tumour-derived cell lines expressed activin-ßA but not activin-ßB. Cachexia severity increased with activin expression. Orthotopic PDAC tumours expressed activins, induced activin expression by distant organs, and produced elevated serum activins. Soluble factors from PDAC elicited activin because conditioned medium from PDAC cells induced activin expression, activation of p38 MAP kinase, and atrophy of myotubes. The activin trap ACVR2B/Fc reduced tumour growth, prevented weight loss and muscle wasting, and prolonged survival in mice with orthotopic tumours made from activin-low cell lines. ACVR2B/Fc also reduced cachexia in mice with activin-high tumours. Activin inhibition did not affect activin expression in organs. Hypermuscular mice expressing dominant negative ACVR2B in muscle were protected for weight loss but not mortality when implanted with orthotopic tumours. Human tumours displayed staining for activin, and expression of the gene encoding activin-ßA (INHBA) correlated with mortality in patients with PDAC, while INHBB and other related factors did not. CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma tumours are a source of activin and elicit a systemic activin response in hosts. Human tumours express activins and related factors, while mortality correlates with tumour activin A expression. PDAC tumours also choreograph a systemic activin response that induces organ-specific and gene-specific expression of activin isoforms and muscle wasting. Systemic blockade of activin signalling could preserve muscle and prolong survival, while skeletal muscle-specific activin blockade was only protective for weight loss. Our findings suggest the potential and need for gene-specific and organ-specific interventions. Finally, development of more effective cancer cachexia therapy might require identifying agents that effectively and/or selectively inhibit autocrine vs. paracrine activin signalling.

Metachronous gastric metastasis from lung primary, with synchronous pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma.

The finding of gastric metachronous metastasis, several years after the diagnosis of primary lung large cell carcinoma is rare and incidental. Even more extremely rare is the finding of a synchronous primary pancreas cancer. EUS-FNA with immunohistochemistry is useful for diagnosing metastatic lesions and differentiating those from synchronous primary lesions.

Simultaneous Inhibition of MEK and Hh Signaling Reduces Pancreatic Cancer Metastasis.

Pancreatic cancer, mostly pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), is one of the most lethal cancer types, with an estimated 44,330 death in 2018 in the US alone. While targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors have significantly improved treatment options for patients with lung cancer and renal cell carcinomas, little progress has been made in pancreatic cancer, with a dismal 5-year survival rate currently at ~8%. Upon diagnosis, the majority of pancreatic cancer cases (~80%) are already metastatic. Thus, identifying ways to reduce pancreatic cancer metastasis is an unmet medical need. Furthermore, pancreatic cancer is notorious resistant to chemotherapy. While Kirsten RAt Sarcoma virus oncogene (K-RAS) mutation is the major driver for pancreatic cancer, specific inhibition of RAS signaling has been very challenging, and combination therapy is thought to be promising. In this study, we report that combination of hedgehog (Hh) and Mitogen-activated Protein/Extracellular Signal-regulated Kinase Kinase (MEK) signaling inhibitors reduces pancreatic cancer metastasis in mouse models. In mouse models of pancreatic cancer metastasis using human pancreatic cancer cells, we found that Hh target gene Gli1 is up-regulated during pancreatic cancer metastasis. Specific inhibition of smoothened signaling significantly altered the gene expression profile of the tumor microenvironment but had no significant effects on cancer metastasis. By combining Hh signaling inhibitor BMS833923 with RAS downstream MEK signaling inhibitor AZD6244, we observed reduced number of metastatic nodules in several mouse models for pancreatic cancer metastasis. These two inhibitors also decreased cell proliferation significantly and reduced CD45⁺ cells (particularly Ly6G⁺CD11b⁺ cells). We demonstrated that depleting Ly6G⁺ CD11b⁺ cells is sufficient to reduce cancer cell proliferation and the number of metastatic nodules. In vitro, Ly6G⁺ CD11b⁺ cells can stimulate cancer cell proliferation, and this effect is sensitive to MEK and Hh inhibition. Our studies may help design novel therapeutic strategies to mitigate pancreatic cancer metastasis.

Clinical Characteristics of Patients Experiencing Pathologic Complete Response Following Neoadjuvant Therapy for Borderline Resectable/Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to describe clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) or locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) who achieved pathologic complete response (pCR) following neoadjuvant therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single institution clinical database for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma was queried. Between 2008 and 2014 patients were identified with BRPC and LAPC, who underwent surgical resection after receiving neoadjuvant treatment. Clinical and pathologic features of the patients who achieved pCR were acquired retrospectively. RESULTS: Six patients were identified to have pCR on pathology of the postoperative specimen. On the basis of pretreatment clinical staging, 2 patients were considered to have BRPC and 4 LAPC. Four patients received gemcitabine-based chemotherapy and 2 patients received FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and leucovorin). Five of 6 patients received radiation therapy before operative resection. Operative procedures included distal pancreatectomy (n=3) and pancreatoduodenectomy (n=3). Pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia 1 to 2 was present in 3 cases, and pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia 3 in 1 case. During a median follow-up of 21.3 months, 2 patients died, with a median survival of 11.0 months (range, 10.4 to 11.6 mo). Four patients are alive and continue to follow-up with median survival of 28.7 months (range, 20.1 to 42.4 mo). CONCLUSIONS: Multimodality neoadjuvant therapy may lead to complete pathologic response in a small number of patients with borderline resectable/locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. pCR to neoadjuvant therapy does not lead to cure in most cases, and the majority of patients appear to relapse locally or systemically.