Overall survival and treatment modalities in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a retrospective analysis of a single centre in Western Australia.

Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has a 5-year survival rate of approximately 10.7% in Australia. It is becoming an increasingly common cause of cancer mortality. The therapeutic model for PDAC remains limited, especially for those with metastatic disease on presentation. Methods: We completed a retrospective cohort study including all patients with PDAC presenting between April 2008 and October 2021 to St. John of God Subiaco Hospital in Western Australia. Overall survival (OS) was calculated via Kaplan-Meier method. Results: We identified 251 patients treated for PDAC. Of these, 134 patients (53%) had resectable, borderline resectable or locally advanced (LA) disease at diagnosis and 117 patients (47%) had metastatic disease. The median age of all patients was 66 years (range, 25-87 years). OS in PDAC was 26 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 23-30]. In the non-metastatic group OS was 34 months (95% CI: 30-39). In the metastatic group OS was 19 months (95% CI: 14-22). Treatment modalities varied between patients. Overall 123 patients were treated with chemotherapy alone, 55 patients had chemoradiotherapy, 34 patients had chemotherapy and surgery and 37 had tri-modality treatment including chemotherapy, surgery and radiotherapy. Two patients received cyberknife radiation alone. Conclusions: This retrospective study shows a significant prolonged survival for PDAC patients. Further studies are needed to validate second- and third-line regimens in PDAC.

Smoking, tobacco dependence, and neurometabolites in the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex.

Cigarette smoking has a major impact on global health and morbidity, and positron emission tomographic research has provided evidence for reduced inflammation in the human brain associated with cigarette smoking. Given the consequences of inflammatory dysfunction for health, the question of whether cigarette smoking affects neuroinflammation warrants further investigation. The goal of this project therefore was to validate and extend evidence of hypoinflammation related to smoking, and to examine the potential contribution of inflammation to clinical features of smoking. Using magnetic resonance spectroscopy, we measured levels of neurometabolites that are putative neuroinflammatory markers. N-acetyl compounds (N-acetylaspartate + N-acetylaspartylglutamate), glutamate, creatine, choline-compounds (phosphocholine + glycerophosphocholine), and myo-inositol, have all been linked to neuroinflammation, but they have not been examined as such with respect to smoking. We tested whether people who smoke cigarettes have brain levels of these metabolites consistent with decreased neuroinflammation, and whether clinical features of smoking are associated with levels of these metabolites. The dorsal anterior cingulate cortex was chosen as the region-of-interest because of previous evidence linking it to smoking and related states. Fifty-four adults who smoked daily maintained overnight smoking abstinence before testing and were compared with 37 nonsmoking participants. Among the smoking participants, we tested for associations of metabolite levels with tobacco dependence, smoking history, craving, and withdrawal. Levels of N-acetyl compounds and glutamate were higher, whereas levels of creatine and choline compounds were lower in the smoking group as compared with the nonsmoking group. In the smoking group, glutamate and creatine levels correlated negatively with tobacco dependence, and creatine correlated negatively with lifetime smoking, but none of the metabolite levels correlated with craving or withdrawal. The findings indicate a link between smoking and a hypoinflammatory state in the brain, specifically in the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex. Smoking may thereby increase vulnerability to infection and brain injury.

NALIRIFOX versus nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine in treatment-naive patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (NAPOLI 3): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma remains one of the most lethal malignancies, with few treatment options. NAPOLI 3 aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of NALIRIFOX versus nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine as first-line therapy for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC). METHODS: NAPOLI 3 was a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study conducted at 187 community and academic sites in 18 countries worldwide across Europe, North America, South America, Asia, and Australia. Patients with mPDAC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive NALIRIFOX (liposomal irinotecan 50 mg/m2, oxaliplatin 60 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2, administered sequentially as a continuous intravenous infusion over 46 h) on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle or nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2, administered intravenously, on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. Balanced block randomisation was stratified by geographical region, performance status, and liver metastases, managed through an interactive web response system. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population, evaluated when at least 543 events were observed across the two treatment groups. Safety was evaluated in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04083235. FINDINGS: Between Feb 19, 2020 and Aug 17, 2021, 770 patients were randomly assigned (NALIRIFOX, 383; nab-paclitaxel-gemcitabine, 387; median follow-up 16·1 months [IQR 13·4-19·1]). Median overall survival was 11·1 months (95% CI 10·0-12·1) with NALIRIFOX versus 9·2 months (8·3-10·6) with nab-paclitaxel-gemcitabine (hazard ratio 0·83; 95% CI 0·70-0·99; p=0·036). Grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 322 (87%) of 370 patients receiving NALIRIFOX and 326 (86%) of 379 patients receiving nab-paclitaxel-gemcitabine; treatment-related deaths occurred in six (2%) patients in the NALIRIFOX group and eight (2%) patients in the nab-paclitaxel-gemcitabine group. INTERPRETATION: Our findings support use of the NALIRIFOX regimen as a possible reference regimen for first-line treatment of mPDAC. FUNDING: Ipsen. TRANSLATION: For the plain language summary see Supplementary Materials section.

Somatostatin Receptor PET/MR Imaging of Inflammation in Patients With Large Vessel Vasculitis and Atherosclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Assessing inflammatory disease activity in large vessel vasculitis (LVV) can be challenging by conventional measures. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to investigate somatostatin receptor 2 (SST2) as a novel inflammation-specific molecular imaging target in LVV. METHODS: In a prospective, observational cohort study, in vivo arterial SST2 expression was assessed by positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI) using 68Ga-DOTATATE and 18F-FET-ßAG-TOCA. Ex vivo mapping of the imaging target was performed using immunofluorescence microscopy; imaging mass cytometry; and bulk, single-cell, and single-nucleus RNA sequencing. RESULTS: Sixty-one participants (LVV: n = 27; recent atherosclerotic myocardial infarction of ≤2 weeks: n = 25; control subjects with an oncologic indication for imaging: n = 9) were included. Index vessel SST2 maximum tissue-to-blood ratio was 61.8% (P < 0.0001) higher in active/grumbling LVV than inactive LVV and 34.6% (P = 0.0002) higher than myocardial infarction, with good diagnostic accuracy (area under the curve: ≥0.86; P < 0.001 for both). Arterial SST2 signal was not elevated in any of the control subjects. SST2 PET/MRI was generally consistent with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/computed tomography imaging in LVV patients with contemporaneous clinical scans but with very low background signal in the brain and heart, allowing for unimpeded assessment of nearby coronary, myocardial, and intracranial artery involvement. Clinically effective treatment for LVV was associated with a 0.49 ± 0.24 (standard error of the mean [SEM]) (P = 0.04; 22.3%) reduction in the SST2 maximum tissue-to-blood ratio after 9.3 ± 3.2 months. SST2 expression was localized to macrophages, pericytes, and perivascular adipocytes in vasculitis specimens, with specific receptor binding confirmed by autoradiography. SSTR2-expressing macrophages coexpressed proinflammatory markers. CONCLUSIONS: SST2 PET/MRI holds major promise for diagnosis and therapeutic monitoring in LVV. (PET Imaging of Giant Cell and Takayasu Arteritis [PITA], NCT04071691; Residual Inflammation and Plaque Progression Long-Term Evaluation [RIPPLE], NCT04073810).

Efficacy and Safety of Mirvetuximab Soravtansine in Patients With Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer With High Folate Receptor Alpha Expression: Results From the SORAYA Study.

PURPOSE: Single-agent chemotherapies have limited activity and considerable toxicity in patients with platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer (PROC). Mirvetuximab soravtansine (MIRV) is an antibody-drug conjugate targeting folate receptor α (FRα). SORAYA is a single-arm, phase II study evaluating efficacy and safety of MIRV in patients with PROC. METHODS: SORAYA enrolled FRα-high patients with PROC who had received one to three prior therapies, including required bevacizumab. The primary end point was confirmed objective response rate (ORR) by investigator; duration of response was the key secondary end point. RESULTS: One hundred six patients were enrolled; 105 were evaluable for efficacy. All patients had received prior bevacizumab, 51% had three prior lines of therapy, and 48% received a prior poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitor. Median follow-up was 13.4 months. ORR was 32.4% (95% CI, 23.6 to 42.2), including five complete and 29 partial responses. The median duration of response was 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 9.7). In patients with one to two priors, the ORR by investigator was 35.3% (95% CI, 22.4 to 49.9) and in patients with three priors was 30.2% (95% CI, 18.3 to 44.3). The ORR by investigator was 38.0% (95% CI, 24.7 to 52.8) in patients with prior poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitor exposure and 27.5% (95% CI, 15.9 to 41.7) in those without. The most common treatment-related adverse events (all grade and grade 3-4) were blurred vision (41% and 6%), keratopathy (29% and 9%), and nausea (29% and 0%). Treatment-related adverse events led to dose delays, reductions, and discontinuations in 33%, 20%, and 9% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: MIRV demonstrated consistent clinically meaningful antitumor activity and favorable tolerability and safety in patients with FRα-high PROC who had received up to three prior therapies, including bevacizumab, representing an important advance for this biomarker-selected population.

Adjuvant nab-Paclitaxel + Gemcitabine in Resected Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Results From a Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: This randomized, open-label trial compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine with those of gemcitabine for resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01964430). METHODS: We assigned 866 treatment-naive patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2) + gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2) or gemcitabine alone to one 30-40 infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of six 28-day cycles. The primary end point was independently assessed disease-free survival (DFS). Additional end points included investigator-assessed DFS, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-seven of 432 patients and 310 of 434 patients completed nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine and gemcitabine treatment, respectively. At primary data cutoff (December 31, 2018; median follow-up, 38.5 [interquartile range [IQR], 33.8-43 months), the median independently assessed DFS was 19.4 (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 18.8 months (gemcitabine; hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.729 to 1.063; P = .18). The median investigator-assessed DFS was 16.6 (IQR, 8.4-47.0) and 13.7 (IQR, 8.3-44.1) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.694 to 0.965; P = .02). The median OS (427 events; 68% mature) was 40.5 (IQR, 20.7 to not reached) and 36.2 (IQR, 17.7-53.3) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.680 to 0.996; P = .045). At a 16-month follow-up (cutoff, April 3, 2020; median follow-up, 51.4 months [IQR, 47.0-57.0]), the median OS (511 events; 81% mature) was 41.8 (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 37.7 months (gemcitabine; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.687 to 0.973; P = .0232). At the 5-year follow-up (cutoff, April 9, 2021; median follow-up, 63.2 months [IQR, 60.1-68.7]), the median OS (555 events; 88% mature) was 41.8 versus 37.7 months, respectively (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.678 to 0.947; P = .0091). Eighty-six percent (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) and 68% (gemcitabine) of patients experienced grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events. Two patients per study arm died of treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSION: The primary end point (independently assessed DFS) was not met despite favorable OS seen with nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine.

Evaluation of a Clinic-Based Exercise Program in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer Undergoing Nonsurgical Treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence regarding the role of exercise in pancreatic cancer (PanCa) is limited and is derived exclusively under tightly controlled research conditions. This study aimed to quantify adherence, adverse events, and changes in physical and psychological outcomes in any patients with PanCa referred to undertake exercise during nonsurgical treatment. METHODS: The study involved 22 patients with localized or metastatic PanCa undertaking a clinic-based exercise program during chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. The program included supervised aerobic and resistance exercise undertaken twice weekly for 12 wk and a 12-wk follow-up with supervised exercise optional dependent on patient preference and condition. Patients were monitored for adherence and adverse events. Objective and patient-reported outcomes were assessed at baseline, 12 wk, and 24 wk. RESULTS: A total of 251 sessions were attended by 19 patients over the first 12 wk (attendance rate, 55%). Complete case analyses indicated significant ( P < 0.05) improvements in functional ability (5.2%-17.2%), muscle strength (16.9%-25.1%), and static balance (6.8%). There were no significant changes in body composition or patient-reported outcomes except for sleep quality, which deteriorated; however, at an individual level, several patients had clinically relevant improvements in cancer-related fatigue and quality of life. Patients who continued with supervised exercise to week 24 largely preserved improvements in functional ability, muscle strength, and static balance. No serious adverse events resulted from the exercise program. CONCLUSIONS: Individualized, supervised aerobic and resistance exercise in a clinic-based setting appears to be safe and may improve or maintain physical and psychological health in patients with PanCa undergoing nonsurgical treatment.

Clinical and molecular characteristics of ARIEL3 patients who derived exceptional benefit from rucaparib maintenance treatment for high-grade ovarian carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: ARIEL3 (NCT01968213) is a placebo-controlled randomized trial of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor rucaparib as maintenance treatment in patients with recurrent high-grade ovarian carcinoma who responded to their latest line of platinum therapy. Rucaparib improved progression-free survival across all predefined subgroups. Here, we present an exploratory analysis of clinical and molecular characteristics associated with exceptional benefit from rucaparib. METHODS: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive rucaparib 600 mg twice daily or placebo. Molecular features (genomic alterations, BRCA1 promoter methylation) and baseline clinical characteristics were evaluated for association with exceptional benefit (progression-free survival ≥2 years) versus progression on first scan (short-term subgroup) and other efficacy outcomes. RESULTS: Rucaparib treatment was significantly associated with exceptional benefit compared with placebo: 79/375 (21.1%) vs 4/189 (2.1%), respectively (p < 0.0001). Exceptional benefit was more frequent among patients with favorable baseline clinical characteristics and with carcinomas harboring molecular evidence of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD). A comparison between patients who derived exceptional benefit from rucaparib and those in the short-term subgroup revealed both clinical markers (no measurable disease at baseline, complete response to latest platinum, longer penultimate platinum-free interval) and molecular markers (BRCA1, BRCA2, RAD51C, and RAD51D alterations and genome-wide loss of heterozygosity) significantly associated with exceptional benefit. CONCLUSIONS: Exceptional benefit in ARIEL3 was more common in, but not exclusive to, patients with favorable clinical characteristics or molecular features associated with HRD. Our results suggest that rucaparib can deliver exceptional benefit to a diverse set of patients with recurrent high-grade ovarian carcinoma.

Dual αV-integrin and neuropilin-1 targeting peptide CEND-1 plus nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine for the treatment of metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a first-in-human, open-label, multicentre, phase 1 study.

BACKGROUND: CEND-1 is a novel cyclic peptide that targets αV integrins and neuropilin-1 and enhances tumour delivery of co-administered anticancer drugs. We investigated the safety, tolerability, and biological activity of CEND-1 in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in combination with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine. METHODS: This open-label, multicentre, phase 1 study, conducted at three hospitals in Australia, enrolled participants aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who had one or more lesions measurable on MRI or CT, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, and a life expectancy of at least 3 months. Exclusion criteria included previous chemotherapy and brain metastases or other malignancy (unless receiving curative intent). There was no randomisation or masking. CEND-1 monotherapy was given as an intravenous fluid bolus on day 1 of a run-in phase of 7 days (0·2-3·2 mg/kg) followed by CEND-1 plus intravenous gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) and nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2) on days 1, 8, and 15 of 28-day treatment cycles until disease progression. The primary safety endpoints were incidence, severity, and duration of treatment-emergent and treatment-related adverse events; overall survival; and clinical laboratory results, which were all assessed in the safety population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03517176, and the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12618000804280. FINDINGS: Between Aug 13, 2018, and Nov 30, 2019, 31 patients were enrolled (eight in the dose-escalation phase [cohort 1a] and 23 in the expansion phase [cohort 1b]). Two patients were excluded from the efficacy population. No CEND-1 dose-limiting toxicities were observed in the safety population (n=31). The most common grade 3 or 4 events were neutropenia (17 [55%] patients), anaemia (eight [26%]), leukopenia (five [16%]), and pulmonary embolism (four [13%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 22 (71%) patients, mostly related to disease progression. Ten deaths occurred during the study due to progression of metastatic pancreatic cancer (n=9) and a left middle cerebral artery stroke (n=1). In the efficacy population (n=29), 17 (59%) patients had an objective response, including one complete response and 16 partial responses. After a median follow-up of 26 months (IQR 24-30), median overall survival was 13·2 months (95% CI 9·7-22·5). INTERPRETATION: CEND-1 with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine has an acceptable safety profile, with no dose-limiting toxicities and encouraging activity. Adverse events were generally consistent with those seen with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine. Further randomised trials to determine the efficacy of CEND-1 are warranted. FUNDING: DrugCendR Australia Pty.

Weekly dose-dense chemotherapy in first-line epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer treatment (ICON8): overall survival results from an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Standard-of-care first-line chemotherapy for epithelial ovarian cancer is carboplatin and paclitaxel administered once every 3 weeks. The JGOG 3016 trial reported significant improvement in progression-free and overall survival with dose-dense weekly paclitaxel and 3-weekly (ie, once every 3 weeks) carboplatin. However, this benefit was not observed in the previously reported progression-free survival results of ICON8. Here, we present the final coprimary outcomes of overall survival and updated progression-free survival analyses of ICON8. METHODS: In this open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial (ICON8), women aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed stage IC-IV epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube carcinoma (here collectively termed ovarian cancer, as defined by International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics [FIGO] 1988 criteria) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were recruited from 117 hospitals with oncology departments in the UK, Australia and New Zealand, Mexico, South Korea, and Ireland. Patients could enter the trial after immediate primary surgery (IPS) or with planned delayed primary surgery (DPS) during chemotherapy, or could have no planned surgery. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London randomisation line with stratification by Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup group, FIGO disease stage, and outcome and timing of surgery, to either 3-weekly carboplatin area under the curve (AUC)5 or AUC6 and 3-weekly paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 (control; group 1), 3-weekly carboplatin AUC5 or AUC6 and weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 (group 2), or weekly carboplatin AUC2 and weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 (group 3), all administered via intravenous infusion for a total of six 21-day cycles. Coprimary outcomes were progression-free survival and overall survival, with comparisons done between group 2 and group 1, and group 3 and group 1, in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who started at least one chemotherapy cycle. The trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01654146, and ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN10356387, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between June 6, 2011, and Nov 28, 2014, 1566 patients were randomly assigned to group 1 (n=522), group 2 (n=523), or group 3 (n=521). The median age was 62 years (IQR 54-68), 1073 (69%) of 1566 patients had high-grade serous carcinoma, 1119 (71%) had stage IIIC-IV disease, and 745 (48%) had IPS. As of data cutoff (March 31, 2020), with a median follow-up of 69 months (IQR 61-75), no significant difference in overall survival was observed in either comparison: median overall survival of 47·4 months (95% CI 43·1-54·8) in group 1, 54·8 months (46·6-61·6) in group 2, and 53·4 months (49·2-59·6) in group 3 (group 2 vs group 1: hazard ratio 0·87 [97·5% CI 0·73-1·05]; group 3 vs group 1: 0·91 [0·76-1·09]). No significant difference was observed for progression-free survival in either comparison and evidence of non-proportional hazards was seen (p=0·037), with restricted mean survival time of 23·9 months (97·5% CI 22·1-25·6) in group 1, 25·3 months (23·6-27·1) in group 2, and 24·8 months (23·0-26·5) in group 3. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were reduced neutrophil count (78 [15%] of 511 patients in group 1, 183 [36%] of 514 in group 2, and 154 [30%] of 513 in group 3), reduced white blood cell count (22 [4%] in group 1, 80 [16%] in group 2, and 71 [14%] in group 3), and anaemia (26 [5%] in group 1, 66 [13%] in group 2, and 24 [5%] in group 3). No new serious adverse events were reported. Seven treatment-related deaths were reported (two in group 1, four in group 2, and one in group 3). INTERPRETATION: In our cohort of predominantly European women with epithelial ovarian cancer, we found that first-line weekly dose-dense chemotherapy did not improve overall or progression-free survival compared with standard 3-weekly chemotherapy and should not be used as part of standard multimodality front-line therapy in this patient group. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Health Research Board in Ireland, Irish Cancer Society, and Cancer Australia.

Molecular and neurological features of MELAS syndrome in paediatric patients: A case series and review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Mitochondrial encephalomyopathy, lactic acidosis and stroke-like episodes (MELAS) syndrome is one of the most well-known mitochondrial diseases, with most cases attributed to m.3243A>G. MELAS syndrome patients typically present in the first two decades of life with a broad, multi-systemic phenotype that predominantly features neurological manifestations--stroke-like episodes. However, marked phenotypic variability has been observed among paediatric patients, creating a clinical challenge and delaying diagnoses. METHODS: A literature review of paediatric MELAS syndrome patients and a retrospective analysis in a UK tertiary paediatric neurology centre were performed. RESULTS: Three children were included in this case series. All patients presented with seizures and had MRI changes not confined to a single vascular territory. Blood heteroplasmy varied considerably, and one patient required a muscle biopsy. Based on a literature review of 114 patients, the mean age of presentation is 8.1 years and seizures are the most prevalent manifestation of stroke-like episodes. Heteroplasmy is higher in a tissue other than blood in most cases. CONCLUSION: The threshold for investigating MELAS syndrome in children with suspicious neurological symptoms should be low. If blood m.3243A>G analysis is negative, yet clinical suspicion remains high, invasive testing or further interrogation of the mitochondrial genome should be considered.

Impact of the evolution in RAS mutation analysis in Australian patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: RAS mutation testing now routinely informs the optimal management of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), specifically the finding of a RAS mutation defines patients who will not benefit from treatment with an epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor. Over time more RAS genes have been tested and more sensitive techniques used. AIMS: To review routine care RAS testing and results over time. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the molecular data collected prospectively in the multi-site Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer (TRACC) registry from 2009 to 2018 was undertaken. Patients with RAS data were further analyzed. In parallel, the RAS mutation status of patients enrolled in the Test Tailor Treat (TTT) program was examined for 2011-2018. RESULTS: Of 2908 patients in the TRACC registry, 1892 (65%) were tested, with 898 (47%) of tested patients found to be RAS mutant (RASmt). RAS data were available for 5935 TTT patients. Of the tested TRACC patients diagnosed in 2009 and 2010, 38% were RASmt. For each 2-year period from 2011/2012 through to 2017/2018, the prevalence of RASmt in TRACC and TTT was 42% and 40% (2011/2012), 52% and 40% (2013/2014), 47% and 49% (2015/2016), and 47% and 49% (2017/2018). CONCLUSIONS: Based on both TRACC and TTT data, the proportion of patients reported to have a RAS mutation increased from 2009 to 2015 but has remained relatively stable in recent years. The increased proportion of RASmt patients observed over time is likely largely driven by the uptake of extended RAS testing.

Getting the MOST out of follow-up: a randomized controlled trial comparing 3 monthly nurse led follow-up via telehealth, including monitoring CA125 and patient reported outcomes using the MOST (Measure of Ovarian Symptoms and Treatment concerns) with routine clinic based or telehealth follow-up, after completion of first line chemotherapy in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Physical symptoms, anxiety, depression, fear of recurrence, sexual dysfunction, and social withdrawal are common in women after treatment for ovarian cancer. Most patients would like and need help dealing with these symptoms. The traditional model of follow-up care is unstructured and largely focused on diagnosing recurrent disease, and most oncologists lack skills to identify and manage psychosocial issues. No high quality prospective clinical trials have been conducted to determine the optimal follow-up regimen or the cost effectiveness of ovarian cancer surveillance strategies. PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: To assess emotional wellbeing, acceptability, safety, and cost effectiveness of nurse led follow-up via telehealth for women with ovarian cancer following completion of primary treatment. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesize that compared with routine clinic based follow-up, nurse led follow-up via telehealth, including serum CA125 monitoring and completion of a patient reported outcome instrument, the Measure of Ovarian Symptoms and Treatment concerns-Surveillance (MOST-S26), will improve emotional wellbeing in women with ovarian cancer; be feasible, safe, acceptable, and not delay the time to diagnosis of recurrent disease; will result in greater patient satisfaction; will identify more patients with psychological distress, lead to better care, and improved psychological outcomes; and be cost-effective. TRIAL DESIGN: Phase II multicenter randomized trial comparing 3 monthly nurse led telehealth consultations that include serum CA125 monitoring and completion of the MOST-S26, with routine clinic based follow-up. The allocation ratio will be 1:1. MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Eligible patients will be women with high grade epithelial ovarian cancer who have normalized serum CA125 (to <35 kU/L) at completion of first line chemotherapy. PRIMARY ENDPOINTS: Emotional wellbeing at 12 months. SAMPLE SIZE: 150 patients. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: July 2023. Results expected in 2025, 24 months after the last participant is enrolled. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12620000332921.

Patient demographics and management landscape of metastatic colorectal cancer in the third-line setting: Real-world data in an australian population.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer and second leading cause of cancer mortality in Australia, thus carrying a significant disease burden. AIMS: This analysis aims to explore real-world treatment landscape of metastatic colorectal cancer in the third-line setting. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed treatment of recurrent and advanced colorectal cancer (TRACC) registry database from 2009 onwards. Patients treated with palliative intent who progressed after two lines of therapies were included. One treatment line was defined as any combination of systemic therapy given until progression. RESULTS: Out of 1820 patients treated palliatively, 32% (590 patients) met study criteria. Of these, 43% (254 patients) proceeded to third-line therapy, equating to 14% of all metastatic patients. In KRAS mutant or unknown tumours (97 patients), fluoropyrimidine (FP)-oxaliplatin combination was the most common choice (51%), followed by FP-irinotecan (15%), trifluridine/tipiracil (11%), mono-chemotherapy (10%), regorafenib (5%) and others (7%). Majority of FP-doublet (83%) was given as rechallenge. In 157 patients with KRAS wildtype disease, monotherapy with EGFR inhibitor was most commonly used (41%), followed by EGFR inhibitor with chemotherapy (20%), FP-doublet (18%), mono-chemotherapy (6%), trifluridine/tipiracil (6%), regorafenib (1%) and others (8%). Median overall survival was 7.1 months (range 0.4-41.2), and median time on third-line treatment was 3 months (range 0.1-40). CONCLUSIONS: In real-world Australian population, treatment choices differed based on KRAS status and will likely change with the availability of newer drugs on the pharmaceutical benefits scheme. Survival outcomes are comparable to newer agents in clinical trials for select patients.

Population pharmacokinetics of liposomal irinotecan in patients with cancer and exposure-safety analyses in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Liposomal irinotecan is a liposomal formulation of irinotecan, which prolongs circulation of irinotecan and its active metabolite SN-38. A population pharmacokinetic (PK) model was developed based on data from seven studies (N = 440). Adequacy of the model was assessed using multiple methods, including visual predictive check. Associations between PK exposure and the incidence of diarrhea (grade ≥3) and neutropenia adverse events (AEs) (grade ≥3) at first event in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) were investigated using logistic regression based on data from two studies (the phase III NAPOLI-1 [N = 260] and phase I/II NCT02551991 [N = 56] trials). The PKs of total irinotecan was described by a two-compartment model with first-order elimination, with SN-38 formed directly by a first-order constant from the central compartment of irinotecan or after using a transit compartment. Clearance was 17.9 L/week (0.107 L/h) and 19,800 L/week (118 L/h) for total irinotecan and SN-38, respectively. The UGT1A1*28 7/7 homozygous genotype had no significant impact on SN-38 clearance. Model evaluation was satisfactory for both irinotecan and SN-38. The incidence of diarrhea (grade ≥3) at first event was significantly higher with increasing average concentrations of total irinotecan and SN-38; there was no significant association between an increased risk of neutropenia AEs (grade ≥3) at first event and average SN-38 concentrations. In summary, the PKs of total irinotecan and SN-38 after administration of liposomal irinotecan were well-described by the model. The UGT1A1*28 status had no significant impact on the PKs of liposomal irinotecan.

Preexisting TP53-Variant Clonal Hematopoiesis and Risk of Secondary Myeloid Neoplasms in Patients With High-grade Ovarian Cancer Treated With Rucaparib.

IMPORTANCE: A total of 1% to 3% of patients treated with a poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor for high-grade ovarian cancer (HGOC) develop therapy-related myeloid neoplasms (t-MNs), which are rare but often fatal conditions. Although the cause of these t-MNs is unknown, clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP) variants can increase the risk of primary myeloid malignant neoplasms and are more frequent among patients with solid tumors. OBJECTIVES: To examine whether preexisting CHIP variants are associated with the development of t-MNs after rucaparib treatment and how these CHIP variants are affected by treatment. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective genetic association study used peripheral blood cell (PBC) samples collected before rucaparib treatment from patients in the multicenter, single-arm ARIEL2 (Study of Rucaparib in Patients With Platinum-Sensitive, Relapsed, High-Grade Epithelial Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, or Primary Peritoneal Cancer) (n = 491; between October 30, 2013, and August 9, 2016) and the multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind ARIEL3 (Study of Rucaparib as Switch Maintenance Following Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Patients With Platinum-Sensitive, High-Grade Serous or Endometrioid Epithelial Ovarian, Primary Peritoneal or Fallopian Tube Cancer) (n = 561; between April 7, 2014, and July 19, 2016), which tested rucaparib as HGOC therapy in the treatment and maintenance settings, respectively. The follow-up data cutoff date was September 1, 2019. Of 1052 patients in ARIEL2 and ARIEL3, PBC samples from 20 patients who developed t-MNs (cases) and 44 randomly selected patients who did not (controls) were analyzed for the presence of CHIP variants using targeted next-generation sequencing. Additional longitudinal analysis was performed on available ARIEL2 samples collected during treatment and at the end of treatment. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Enrichment analysis of preexisting variants in 10 predefined CHIP-associated genes in cases relative to controls; association with clinical correlates. RESULTS: Among 1052 patients (mean [SE] age, 61.7 [0.3] years) enrolled and dosed in ARIEL2 and ARIEL3, 22 (2.1%) developed t-MNs. The t-MNs were associated with longer overall exposure to prior platinum therapies (13.2 vs 9.0 months in ARIEL2, P = .04; 12.4 vs 9.6 months in ARIEL3, P = .003). The presence of homologous recombination repair gene variants in the tumor, either germline or somatic, was associated with increased prevalence of t-MNs (15 [4.1%] of 369 patients with HGOC associated with an HRR gene variant vs 7 [1.0%] of 683 patients with wild-type HGOC, P = .002). The prevalence of preexisting CHIP variants in TP53 but not other CHIP-associated genes at a variant allele frequency of 1% or greater was significantly higher in PBCs from cases vs controls (9 [45.0%] of 20 cases vs 6 [13.6%] of 44 controls, P = .009). TP53 CHIP was associated with longer prior exposure to platinum (mean 14.0 months of 15 TP53 CHIP cases vs 11.1 months of 49 non-TP53 CHIP cases; P = .02). Longitudinal analysis showed that preexisting TP53 CHIP variants expanded in patients who developed t-MNs. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The findings of this genetic association study suggest that preexisting TP53 CHIP variants may be associated with t-MNs after rucaparib treatment.

Maintenance treatment with rucaparib for recurrent ovarian carcinoma in ARIEL3, a randomized phase 3 trial: The effects of best response to last platinum-based regimen and disease at baseline on efficacy and safety.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of rucaparib maintenance treatment in ARIEL3 were evaluated in subgroups based on best response to most recent platinum-based chemotherapy and baseline disease. METHODS: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive either oral rucaparib at a dosage of 600 mg twice daily or placebo. Investigator-assessed PFS was assessed in prespecified, nested cohorts: BRCA-mutated, homologous recombination deficient (HRD; BRCA mutated or wild-type BRCA/high loss of heterozygosity), and the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. RESULTS: Median PFS for patients in the ITT population with a complete response to most recent platinum-based chemotherapy was 11.1 months in the rucaparib arm (126 patients) versus 5.6 months in the placebo arm (64 patients) (HR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.23-0.48]), and in patients with a partial response (249 vs. 125), it was 9.0 versus 5.3 months (HR, 0.38 [0.30-0.49]). In subgroups of the ITT population based on baseline disease, median PFS was 8.2 versus 5.3 months (HR, 0.40 [0.28-0.57]) in patients with measurable disease (141 rucaparib vs. 66 placebo), 10.4 versus 4.5 months (HR, 0.31 [0.20-0.48]) in those with nonmeasurable but evaluable disease (104 vs. 56), and 14.1 versus 7.3 months (HR, 0.35 [0.24-0.51]) in those with no residual disease (130 vs. 67). Across subgroups, significantly longer median PFS was observed with rucaparib versus placebo in the BRCA-mutated and HRD cohorts. Objective responses were reported in patients with measurable disease and in patients with nonmeasurable but evaluable baseline disease. Safety was consistent across subgroups. CONCLUSION: Rucaparib maintenance treatment provided clinically meaningful efficacy benefits across subgroups based on response to last platinum-based chemotherapy or baseline disease.

Treatment and Outcomes of Oligometastatic Colorectal Cancer Limited to Lymph Node Metastases.

INTRODUCTION: The optimal management of isolated distant lymph node metastases (IDLNM) from a colorectal primary, is not clearly established. We aimed to analyze the outcomes of patients with IDLNM treated with systemic therapies plus locoregional therapy with curative intent versus systemic therapies with palliative intent. MATERIALS & METHODS: Clinical data were collected and reviewed from the Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer registry, a prospective, comprehensive registry for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated at multiple tertiary hospitals across Australia. Clinicopathological characteristics, treatment modalities and survival outcomes were analyzed in patients with IDLNM and compared to patients with disease at other sites. RESULTS: Of 3408 mCRC patients diagnosed 2009 to 2020, with median follow-up of 38.0 months, 93 (2.7%) were found to have IDLNM. Compared to mCRC at other sites, patients with IDLNM were younger (mean age: 62.1 vs. 65.6 years, P = .02), more likely to have metachronous disease (57.0% vs. 38.9%, P < .01), be KRAS wild-type (74.6% vs. 53.9%, P< .01) and BRAF mutant (12.9% vs. 6.2%, P = .01). Amongst mCRC patients with IDLNM, 24 (25.8%) received treatment with curative intent and had a significantly better overall median survival than those treated with palliative intent (73.5 months vs. 23.2 months, P = .01). These 24 patients had an overall median survival similar (62.7 months, P = .82) to patients with isolated liver or lung metastases also treated with curative intent. CONCLUSION: Curative treatment strategies (radiotherapy or surgery), with or without systemic therapy, should be considered for mCRC patients with IDLNM where appropriate as assessed by the multidisciplinary team.

Rucaparib maintenance treatment for recurrent ovarian carcinoma: the effects of progression-free interval and prior therapies on efficacy and safety in the randomized phase III trial ARIEL3.

INTRODUCTION: In ARIEL3 (NCT01968213), the poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor rucaparib significantly improved progression-free survival versus placebo regardless of biomarker status when used as maintenance treatment for recurrent ovarian cancer. The aim of the current analyses was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rucaparib in subgroups based on progression-free interval following penultimate platinum, number of prior chemotherapies, and prior use of bevacizumab. METHODS: Patients were randomized 2:1 to rucaparib 600 mg twice daily or placebo. Within subgroups, progression-free survival was assessed in prespecified, nested cohorts: BRCA-mutant, homologous recombination deficient (BRCA-mutant or wild-type BRCA/high genomic loss of heterozygosity), and the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS: In the intent-to-treat population, median investigator-assessed progression-free survival was 8.2 months with rucaparib versus 4.1 months with placebo (n=151 vs n=76; HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.46, p<0.0001) for patients with progression-free interval 6 to ≤12 months, and 13.6 versus 5.6 months (n=224 vs n=113; HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.52, p<0.0001) for those with progression-free interval >12 months. Median progression-free survival was 10.4 versus 5.4 months (n=231 vs n=124; HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.54, p<0.0001) for patients who had received two prior chemotherapies, and 11.1 versus 5.3 months (n=144 vs n=65; HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.41, p<0.0001) for those who had received ≥3 prior chemotherapies. Median progression-free survival was 10.3 versus 5.4 months (n=83 vs n=43; HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.68, p=0.0004) for patients who had received prior bevacizumab, and 10.9 versus 5.4 months (n=292 vs n=146; HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.45, p<0.0001) for those who had not. Across subgroups, median progression-free survival was also significantly longer with rucaparib versus placebo in the BRCA-mutant and homologous recombination deficient cohorts. Safety was consistent across subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Rucaparib maintenance treatment significantly improved progression-free survival versus placebo irrespective of progression-free interval following penultimate platinum, number of lines of prior chemotherapy, and previous use of bevacizumab.