The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy following pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma depends on response to neoadjuvant therapy.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of adjuvant therapy (AT) remains unclear in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) and surgical resection. METHODS: The 2019 National Cancer Database was queried for patients with non-metastatic PDAC who received NAT followed by pancreaticoduodenectomy. Only patients with data regarding receipt of AT were included. Patients were classified if they had nodal down-staging specifically, or any downstaging (Tumor, Nodal, or overall). Propensity score matching (PSM) adjusted for pretreatment covariate imbalance between groups. The weighted Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used to estimate the cumulative survival. RESULTS: After exclusion criteria and PSM, a total of 2784 patients remained; 1689 (60.7%) received AT and 1095 (39.3%) did not receive AT. Among all, those with additional AT had a significantly improved overall survival (OS) (p < 0.001). Upon evaluation of patients without downstaging after NAT, those who received AT had improved OS (no nodal downstaging or any downstaging; p = 0.002; p = 0.001). When evaluating patients with downstaging after NAT, those receiving AT did not have improved OS (nodal downstaging or any downstaging: p = 0.352; p = 0.99). CONCLUSION: Response to NAT appears to correlate with the benefit of AT following pancreaticoduodenectomy; patients who have a favorable response to NAT may not benefit from AT.

Utility of cell-based vaccines as cancer therapy: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Cell-based therapeutic cancer vaccines use autologous patient-derived tumor cells, allogeneic cancer cell lines or autologous antigen presenting cells to mimic the natural immune process and stimulate an adaptive immune response against tumor antigens. The primary objective of this study is to perform a systematic literature review with an embedded meta-analysis of all published Phase 2 and 3 clinical trials of cell-based cancer vaccines in human subjects. The secondary objective of this study is to review trials demonstrating biological activity of cell-based cancer vaccines that could uncover additional hypotheses, which could be used in the design of future studies. We performed the systematic review and meta-analysis according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The final review included 36 studies - 16 single-arm studies, and 20 controlled trials. Our systematic review of the existing literature revealed largely negative trials and our meta-analysis did not show evidence of clinical benefit from cell-based cancer-vaccines. However, as we looked beyond the stringent inclusion criteria of our systematic review, we identified significant examples of biological activity of cell-based cancer vaccines that are worth highlighting. In conclusion, the existing literature on cell-based cancer vaccines is highly variable in terms of cancer type, vaccine therapies and the clinical setting with no overall statistically significant clinical benefit, but there are individual successes that represent the promise of this approach. As cell-based vaccine technology continues to evolve, future studies can perhaps fulfill the potential that this exciting field of anti-cancer therapy holds.

Predictors and benefits of multiagent chemotherapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: Timing matters.

INTRODUCTION: Adjuvant (A) multiagent chemotherapy (MC) is the standard of care for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Tolerating MC following a morbid operation may be difficult, thus neoadjuvant (NA) treatment is preferable. This study examined how the timing of chemotherapy was related to the regimen given and ultimately the overall survival (OS). METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried from 2006 to 2017 for nonmetastatic PDAC patients who underwent surgical resection and received MC or single-agent chemotherapy (SC) pre- or postresection. Predictors of receiving MC were determined using multivariable logistic regression. Five-year OS was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: A total of 12,440 patients (NA SC, n = 663; NA MC, n = 2313; A SC, n = 6152; A MC, n = 3312) were included. MC utilization increased from 2006-2010 to 2011-2017 (33.1%-49.7%; odds ratio [OR]: 0.59; p < 0.001). Younger age, fewer comorbidities, higher clinical stage, and larger tumor size were all associated with receipt of MC (all p < 0.001), but NA treatment was the greatest predictor (OR 5.18; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.63-5.80; p < 0.001). MC was associated with increased median 5-year OS (26.0 vs. 23.9 months; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.88-0.96) and NA MC was associated with the highest survival (28.2 months) compared to NA SC (23.3 months), A SC (24.0 months), and A MC (24.6 months; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Use and timing of MC contribute to OS in PDAC with an improved 5-year OS compared to SC. The greatest predictor of receiving MC was being given as NA therapy and the greatest survival benefit was the NA MC subgroup. Randomized studies evaluating the timing of effective MC in PDAC are needed.

Prospective, randomized, double-blind phase 2B trial of the TLPO and TLPLDC vaccines to prevent recurrence of resected stage III/IV melanoma: a prespecified 36-month analysis.

BACKGROUND: The tumor lysate, particle-loaded, dendritic cell (TLPLDC) vaccine is made by ex vivo priming matured autologous dendritic cells (DCs) with yeast cell wall particles (YCWPs) loaded with autologous tumor lysate (TL). The tumor lysate, particle only (TLPO) vaccine uses autologous TL-loaded YCWPs coated with silicate for in vivo DC loading. Here we report the 36-month prespecified analyses of this prospective, randomized, double-blind trial investigating the ability of the TLPO and TLPLDC (±granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF)) vaccines to prevent melanoma recurrence in high-risk patients. METHODS: Patients with clinically disease-free stage III/IV melanoma were randomized 2:1 initially to TLPLDC versus placebo (n=124) and subsequently TLPO versus TLPLDC (n=63). All patients were randomized and blinded; however, the placebo control arm was replaced in the second randomization scheme with another novel vaccine; some analyses in this paper therefore reflect a combination of the two randomization schemes. Patients receiving the TLPLDC vaccine were further divided by their method of DC harvest (with or without G-CSF pretreatment); this was not randomized. The use of standard of care checkpoint inhibitors was not stratified between groups. Safety was assessed and Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analyses compared disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: After combining the two randomization processes, a total of 187 patients were allocated between treatment arms: placebo (n=41), TLPLDC (n=103), or TLPO (n=43). The allocation among arms created by the addition of patients from the two separate randomization schemes does not reflect concurrent randomization among all treatment arms. TLPLDC was further divided by use of G-CSF in DC harvest: no G-CSF (TLPLDC) (n=47) and with G-CSF (TLPLDC+G) (n=56). Median follow-up was 35.8 months. Only two patients experienced a related adverse event ≥grade 3, one each in the TLPLDC+G and placebo arms. DFS was 27.2% (placebo), 55.4% (TLPLDC), 22.9% (TLPLDC+G), and 60.9% (TLPO) (p<0.001). OS was 62.5% (placebo), 93.6% (TLPLDC), 57.7% (TLPLDC+G), and 94.6% (TLPO) (p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The TLPO and TLPLDC (without G-CSF) vaccines were associated with improved DFS and OS in this clinical trial. Given production and manufacturing advantages, the efficacy of the TLPO vaccine will be confirmed in a phase 3 trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02301611.

Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes as an endpoint in cancer vaccine trials.

Checkpoint inhibitors have invigorated cancer immunotherapy research, including cancer vaccination. Classic early phase trial design and endpoints used in developing chemotherapy are not suited for evaluating all forms of cancer treatment. Peripheral T cell response dynamics have demonstrated inconsistency in assessing the efficacy of cancer vaccination. Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), reflect the local tumor microenvironment and may prove a superior endpoint in cancer vaccination trials. Cancer vaccines may also promote success in combination immunotherapy treatment of weakly immunogenic tumors. This review explores the impact of TILs as an endpoint for cancer vaccination in multiple malignancies, summarizes the current literature regarding TILs analysis, and discusses the challenges of providing validity and a standardized implementation of this approach.