Early onset pancreatic cancer-exploring contemporary treatment and outcomes using real-world data.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer incidence is increasing in younger populations. Differences between early onset pancreatic cancer (EOPC) and later onset pancreatic cancer (LOPC), and how these should inform management warrant exploration in the contemporary setting. METHODS: A prospectively collected multi-site dataset on consecutive pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients was interrogated. Patient, tumour, treatment, and outcome data were extracted for EOPC (≤50 years old) vs LOPC (>50 years old). RESULTS: Of 1683 patients diagnosed between 2016 and 2022, 112 (6.7%) were EOPC. EOPC more frequently had the tail of pancreas tumours, earlier stage disease, surgical resection, and trended towards increased receipt of chemotherapy in the curative setting compared to LOPC. EOPC more frequently received 1st line chemotherapy, 2nd line chemotherapy, and chemoradiotherapy than LOPC in the palliative setting. Recurrence-free survival was improved for the tail of pancreas EOPC vs LOPC in the resected setting; overall survival was superior for EOPC compared to LOPC across the resected, locally advanced unresectable and metastatic settings. CONCLUSIONS: EOPC remains a small proportion of pancreatic cancer diagnoses. The more favourable outcomes in EOPC suggest these younger patients are overall deriving benefits from increased treatment in the curative setting and increased therapy in the palliative setting.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Older Patients With Stage III Colorectal Cancer: A Real-World Analysis of Treatment Recommendations, Treatment Administered and Impact on Cancer Recurrence.

BACKGROUND: A substantial proportion of patients with stage III colorectal cancer (CRC) are older than 70 years. Optimal adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) for older patients (OP) continues to be debated, with subgroup analyses of randomized trials not demonstrating a survival benefit from the addition of oxaliplatin to a fluoropyrimidine backbone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed the multisite Australian ACCORD registry, which prospectively collects patient, tumor and treatment data along with long term clinical follow-up. We compared OP (≥70) with stage III CRC to younger patients ([YP] <70), including the proportion recommended AC and any reasons for not prescribing AC. AC administration, regimen choice, completion rates, and survival outcomes were also examined. RESULTS: One thousand five hundred twelve patients enrolled in the ACCORD registry from 2005 to 2018 were included. Median follow-up was 57.0 months. Compared to the 827 YP, the 685 OP were less likely to be offered AC (71.5% vs. 96.5%, P < .0001) and when offered, were more likely to decline treatment (15.1% vs. 2.8%, P < .0001). Ultimately, 60.0% of OP and 93.7% of YP received AC (P < .0001). OP were less likely to receive oxaliplatin (27.5% vs. 84.7%, P < .0001) and to complete AC (75.9% vs. 85.7%, P < .0001). The probability of remaining recurrence-free was significantly higher in OP who received AC compared to those not treated (HR 0.73, P = .04) but not significantly improved with the addition of oxaliplatin (HR 0.75, P = .18). CONCLUSION: OP were less likely than YP to receive AC. Receipt of AC reduced recurrences in OP, supporting its use, although no significant benefit was observed from the addition of oxaliplatin.

Circulating Tumour DNA Guided Adjuvant Chemotherapy Decision Making in Stage II Colon Cancer-A Clinical Vignette Study.

Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) is a promising biomarker that may better identify stage II colon cancer (CC) patients who will benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) compared to standard clinicopathological parameters. The DYNAMIC study demonstrated that ctDNA-informed treatment decreased AC utilisation without compromising recurrence free survival, but medical oncologists' willingness to utilise ctDNA results to inform AC decision is unknown. Medical oncologists from Australia, Canada and New Zealand were presented with clinical vignettes for stage II CC comprised of two variables with three levels each (age: ≤50, 52-69, ≥70 years; and clinicopathological risk of recurrence: low, intermediate, high) and were queried about ctDNA testing and treatment recommendations based on results. Sixty-four colorectal oncologists completed at least one vignette (all vignettes, n = 59). The majority of oncologist were Australian (70%; Canada: n = 13; New Zealand: n = 6) and had over 10 years of clinical experience (n = 41; 64%). The proportion of oncologists requesting ctDNA testing exceeded 80% for all vignettes, except for age ≥ 70 and low-risk disease (63%). Following a positive ctDNA result, the proportion of oncologists recommending AC (p < 0.01) and recommending oxaliplatin-based doublet (p < 0.01) increased in all vignettes. Following a negative result, the proportion recommending AC decreased in all intermediate and high-risk vignettes (p < 0.01).

A tailored approach to horizon scanning for cancer medicines.

BACKGROUND: Horizon scanning (HS) is the systematic identification of emerging therapies to inform policy and decision-makers. We developed an agile and tailored HS methodology that combined multi-criteria decision analysis weighting and Delphi rounds. As secondary objectives, we aimed to identify new medicines in melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer and colorectal cancer most likely to impact the Australian government's pharmaceutical budget by 2025 and to compare clinician and consumer priorities in cancer medicine reimbursement. METHOD: Three cancer-specific clinician panels (total n = 27) and a consumer panel (n = 7) were formed. Six prioritisation criteria were developed with consumer input. Criteria weightings were elicited using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Candidate medicines were identified and filtered from a primary database and validated against secondary and tertiary sources. Clinician panels participated in a three-round Delphi survey to identify and score the top five medicines in each cancer type. RESULTS: The AHP and Delphi process was completed in eight weeks. Prioritisation criteria focused on toxicity, quality of life (QoL), cost savings, strength of evidence, survival, and unmet need. In both curative and non-curative settings, consumers prioritised toxicity and QoL over survival gains, whereas clinicians prioritised survival. HS results project the ongoing prevalence of high-cost medicines. Since completion in October 2021, the HS has identified 70 % of relevant medicines submitted for Pharmaceutical Benefit Advisory Committee assessment and 60% of the medicines that received a positive recommendation. CONCLUSION: Tested in the Australian context, our method appears to be an efficient and flexible approach to HS that can be tailored to address specific disease types by using elicited weights to prioritise according to incremental value from both a consumer and clinical perspective. POLICY SUMMARY: Since HS is of global interest, our example provides a reproducible blueprint for adaptation to other healthcare settings that integrates consumer input and priorities.

Clinical application of circulating tumour DNA in colorectal cancer.

Liquid biopsies that detect circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) have the potential to revolutionise the personalised management of colorectal cancer. For patients with early-stage disease, emerging clinical applications include the assessment of molecular residual disease after surgery, the monitoring of adjuvant chemotherapy efficacy, and early detection of recurrence during surveillance. In the advanced disease setting, data highlight the potential of ctDNA levels as a prognostic marker and as an early indicator of treatment response. ctDNA assessment can complement standard tissue-based testing for molecular characterisation, with the added ability to monitor emerging mutations under the selective pressure of targeted therapy. Here we provide an overview of the evidence supporting the use of ctDNA in colorectal cancer, the studies underway to address some of the outstanding questions, and the barriers to widespread clinical uptake.

Health economic evidence for adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II and III colon cancer: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study was to appraise the health economic evidence for adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) strategies in stage II and III colon cancer (CC) and identify gaps in the available evidence that might inform further research. METHOD: A systematic review of published economic evaluations was undertaken. Four databases were searched and full-text publications in English were screened for inclusion. A narrative synthesis was performed to summarise the evidence. RESULTS: Thirty-eight studies were identified and stratified by cancer stage and AC strategy. The majority (89%) were full economic evaluations considering both health outcomes, usually measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs. AC was found to be cost-effective compared to no AC for both stage II and III CC. Oral and oxaliplatin-based AC was cost-effective for stage III. Three months of CAPOX was cost-effective compared to 6-month in high-risk stage II and stage III CC. Preliminary evidence suggests that biomarker approaches to AC selection in stage II can reduce costs and improve health outcomes. Notably, assessment of QALYs were predominantly reliant on a small number of non-contemporary health-utility studies. Only 32% of studies considered societal costs such as travel and time off work. CONCLUSIONS: Published economic evaluations consistently supported the use of AC in stage II and III colon cancer. Biomarker-driven approaches to patient selection have great potential to be cost-effective, but more robust clinical and economic evidence is warranted. Patient surveys embedded into clinical trials may address critical knowledge gaps regarding accurate assessment of QALYs and societal costs in the modern era.

Real-world adjuvant chemotherapy treatment patterns and outcomes over time for resected stage II and III colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The administration of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) to colorectal cancer (CRC) patients in Australia and impact of recent trial data has not been well reported. We aim to evaluate temporal trends in AC treatment and outcomes in real-world Australian patients. METHODS: CRC patients were analyzed from 13 hospitals, stratified by stage (II or III) and three 5-year time periods (A: 2005-2009, B: 2010-2014, C: 2015-2019). Stage III was further stratified as pre- and post publication of the International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Therapy (IDEA) collaboration (March 2018). AC prescription, time-to-recurrence (TTR), and overall survival (OS) was compared across the time periods. RESULTS: Of 3977 identified patients, 1148 (stage II: 640, stage III: 508), 1525 (856 vs. 669), and 1304 (669 vs. 635) were diagnosed in Period A, B, and C, respectively. Fewer patients in Period C received AC compared to Period B in stage II (10% vs. 15%, p <.01) and III (70% vs. 79%, p <.01). Post-IDEA, the proportion of patients receiving ≤3 months of oxaliplatin-based AC increased (45% vs. 13%, p <.01). The proportion of patients who remained recurrence free at 3 years was similar between time periods in stage II (A: 89% vs. B: 88% vs. C: 90%, p = .53) and stage III (72% vs. 76% vs. 72%, p = .08). OS significantly improved for stage II (80%-85%, p = .04) and stage III (69%-77%, <.01) from period A to B. CONCLUSION: AC use has moderately decreased over time with no impact on recurrence rates. Improved survival in more recent years despite similar recurrence rates may be related to improved baseline staging, better postrecurrence treatment, and reduced noncancer-related mortality.

Biology and Clinical Implications of Fecal Occult Blood Test Screen-Detected Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Fecal occult blood test (FOBT)-based screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) reduces mortality, with earlier stage at diagnosis a prominent feature. Other characteristics of FOBT screen-detected cancers and any implications for clinical management have not been well explored. METHODS: We examined a multisite clinical registry to compare the characteristics and outcomes of FOBT screen-detected CRC via the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP), which is offered biennially to individuals aged 50-74 years, and age-matched non-screen-detected CRC in the same registry. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using the Baptista-Pike method, and hazard ratios via the log-rank method. RESULTS: Of 7153 registry patients diagnosed June 1, 2006, to June 30, 2020, 4142 (57.9%) were aged between 50 and 74 years. Excluding 406 patients with non-NBCSP screen-detected cancers and 35 patients with unknown method of detection, 473 (12.8%) were screen detected via the NBCSP, and 3228 (87.2%) were non-screen detected. Screen-detected patients were younger (mean age = 62.4 vs 64.2 years; P < .001) and more medically fit (OR for ASA score 1-2 = 1.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.51 to 2.41; P < .001). Pathologic characteristics within each stage favored the screen-detected patients. Stage III screen-detected colon cancers were more likely to receive adjuvant therapy (OR = 3.58, 95% CI = 1.52 to 8.36; P = .002). Screen-detected patients had superior relapse-free (hazard ratio = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.29 to 0.60; P < .001) and overall survival (hazard ratio = 0.22, 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.35; P < .001), which was maintained in matched stage comparisons and multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Beyond stage at diagnosis, multiple other factors associated with a favorable outcome are observed in FOBT screen-detected CRC. Given the substantial stage-by-stage differences in survival outcomes, if independently confirmed, individualized adjuvant therapy and surveillance strategies could be warranted for FOBT screen-detected cancers.

Treatment and outcomes of unresectable and metastatic pancreatic cancer treated in public and private Australian hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have reported for several cancer types that treatment in the private sector is associated with improved survival outcomes. Data for patients with locally advanced unresectable and metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) have not previously been reported. METHODS: Analysis of patients from January 2016 to June 2020 registered to a multicentre prospective cancer database. Baseline demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics were compared. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare overall survival (OS). Multivariate Cox and logistic regression analyses were used to determine predictors of mortality and first-line chemotherapy treatment, respectively. RESULTS: Of 822 patients, 22.5% received private care. Private patients were older (median 71.5 vs. 68.9 years, p ≤ .05), had better performance status (ECOG 0 to 1: 82.2 vs. 73.5%, p = .05) and more likely to reside in an area with high socioeconomic advantage (67.0 vs. 19.6%, p ≤ .01). Private patients were more likely to receive first-line chemotherapy (69.7 vs. 54.2%, p ≤ .01) with logistic regression demonstrating private care (OR: 1.87, 95% CI: 1.20 to 2.97) as an independent predictor of receiving chemotherapy. Private patients had prolonged survival (median OS: 9.2 vs. 6.9 months, HR 1.2, p = .05). Receiving first-line chemotherapy was an independent predictor of mortality, but private care was not. CONCLUSIONS: Care in the private system is associated with improved OS, with higher uptake of first-line chemotherapy appearing to be the main contributor. Given the discrepancy, further studies are needed to determine what factors are driving this difference.

Biomarkers in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Review.

Locally advanced rectal cancers (LARC) are the subject of a rapidly evolving treatment paradigm. The critical timepoints where management decisions are required during the care of the LARC patient are: prior to the institution of any treatment, post neoadjuvant therapy and post-surgery. This article reviews the clinical, imaging, blood-based, tissue-based, and molecular biomarkers that can assist clinicians at these timepoints in the patient's management, in prognosticating for their LARC patients or in predicting responses to therapy in the multi-modality neoadjuvant treatment era.

Circulating Tumour DNA as a Potential Cost-Effective Biomarker to Reduce Adjuvant Chemotherapy Overtreatment in Stage II Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Substantial adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) overtreatment for stage II colorectal cancer results in a health and financial burden. Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) can improve patient selection for AC by detecting micro-metastatic disease. We estimated the health economic potential of ctDNA-guided AC for stage II colorectal cancer. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis was performed to compare ctDNA-guided AC to standard of care, where 22.6% of standard of care patients and all ctDNA-positive patients (8.7% of tested patients) received AC and all ctDNA-negative patients (91.3%) did not. A third preference-sensitive ctDNA strategy was included where 6.8% of ctDNA-negative patients would receive AC. A state-transition model was populated using data from a prospective cohort study and clinical registries. Health and economic outcomes were discounted at 5% over a lifetime horizon from a 2019 Australian payer perspective. Extensive scenario and probabilistic analyses quantified model uncertainty. RESULTS: Compared to standard of care, the ctDNA and preference-sensitive ctDNA strategies increased quality-adjusted life-years by 0.20 (95% confidence interval - 0.40 to 0.81) and 0.19 (- 0.40 to 0.78), and resulted in incremental costs of AUD - 4055 (- 16,853 to 8472) and AUD - 2284 (- 14,685 to 10,116), respectively. Circulating tumour DNA remained cost effective at a willingness to pay of AUD 20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained throughout most scenario analyses in which the proportion of ctDNA-positive patients cured by AC and compliance to a ctDNA-negative test results were decreased. CONCLUSIONS: Circulating tumour-guided AC is a potentially cost-effective strategy towards reducing overtreatment in stage II colorectal cancer. Results from ongoing randomised clinical studies will be important to reduce uncertainty in the estimates.

Cancer clinical trial vs real-world outcomes for standard of care first-line treatment in the advanced disease setting.

Clinical trials have strict eligibility criteria, potentially limiting external validity. However, while often discussed this has seldom been explored, particularly across cancer types and at variable time frames posttrial completion. We examined comprehensive registry data (January 2014 to June 2019) for standard first-line treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), advanced pancreatic cancer (PC), metastatic HER2-amplified breast cancer (BC) and castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CaP). Registry patient characteristics and outcomes were compared to the practice-changing trial. Registry patients were older than the matched trial cohort by a median of 2-6 years (all P = <.01) for the CRC, BC and PC cohorts. The proportion of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 0-1 patients was lower for CRC (94.1% vs 99.2%, P = .001) and BC (94.9% vs 99.3%, P = .001). Progression-free survival (PFS) for registry patients was similar to the trial patients or significantly longer (CaP, Hazard Ratio [HR] = 0.65, P = <.001). Overall survival (OS) was also similar or significantly longer (CaP, HR 0.49, P = <.001). In conclusion, despite real-world patients sometimes being older or having inferior PS to trial cohorts, the survival outcomes achieved were consistently equal or superior to those reported for the same treatment in the trial. We suggest that this is potentially due to optimised use of each treatment over time, improved multidisciplinary care and increased postprogression options. We can reassure clinicians and patients that outcomes matching or exceeding those reported in trials are possible. The potential for survival gains over time should routinely be factored into future trial statistical plans.

Circulating Tumour DNA to Guide Treatment of Gastrointestinal Malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal cancers are among the most common cancers worldwide and account for a high proportion of cancer-related mortality. Advancements to improve outcomes are constrained by the lack of biomarkers that can offer early diagnostic and prognostic information as traditional serological tumour markers and conventional imaging approaches are not able to provide early information regarding disease recurrence and treatment outcomes. Recent advances in technology have allowed the detection of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) in plasma, nucleic acid fragments released into the circulation from primary or metastatic lesions undergoing apoptosis and necrosis. A growing body of evidence has emerged supporting the use of ctDNA in many aspects of cancer care. SUMMARY: This review focuses on the potential role of ctDNA in the management of patients with gastrointestinal cancers including colorectal, pancreatic, and upper gastrointestinal cancers. In this review, we discuss its possible utility in screening, detection of minimal residual disease and prognostication, longitudinal surveillance, and identification of therapeutic targets and resistance incorporating recent literature and ongoing randomised clinical trials. KEY MESSAGES: ctDNA has substantial potential as a clinically useful marker in the management of gastrointestinal cancers from cancer screening through to treatment of advanced disease.