Pilot Study of Recurrent Ewing's Sarcoma Management with Vigil/Temozolomide/Irinotecan and Assessment of Circulating Tumor (ct) DNA.

PURPOSE: Treatment options for recurrent or refractory Ewing's sarcoma (ES) are limited. Vigil is a novel autologous tumor cell therapy expressing bi-shRNA furin/GMCSF plasmid, which previously demonstrated monotherapy activity in advanced ES. Herein we report safety and evidence of benefit to Vigil for ES as potential treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this pilot trial, eligible patients with recurrent or refractory ES who failed initial standard-of-care therapy received treatment with temozolomide (TEM) 100 mg/m2/day oral and irinotecan (IRI) 50 mg/m2/day oral, Days 1 to 5, in combination with Vigil (1 × 106-107 cells/mL/day intradermal, Day 15), every 21 days (Vigil/TEM/IRI). Objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST v1.1, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Circulating tumor (ct) DNA analysis was done by patient-specific droplet digital PCR on baseline and serially collected on-treatment samples. RESULTS: Eight of 10 enrolled patients were evaluable for safety and efficacy (mean age 24.6; 12.6-46.1 years old); 2 did not receive Vigil. Seven of 8 patients previously received TEM/IRI. No Vigil-related adverse events were reported. Common ≥Grade 3 chemotherapy-related toxicity included neutropenia (50%) and thrombocytopenia (38%). We observed two partial response patients by RECIST; both showed histologic complete response without additional cancer therapy. Median PFS was 8.2 months (95% confidence interval, 4.3-NA). Five patients showed stable disease or better for ≥6 months. Patient-specific EWS/FLI1 ctDNA was detectable in all 8 evaluable patients at baseline. Changes in ctDNA levels corresponded to changes in disease burden. CONCLUSIONS: Results demonstrated safety of combination Vigil/TEM/IRI.

Assessment of Irinotecan Loading and Releasing Profiles of a Novel Drug-Eluting Microsphere (CalliSpheres) In Vitro.

Background: This study investigated irinotecan loading efficiency and release profiles of CalliSpheres in vitro. Materials and Methods: CalliSpheres with size of 50-150, 100-300, and 300-500 µm and irinotecan at different amounts (20, 40, 80, and 100 mg) and concentrations (5 and 10 mg/mL) were prepared for experiments. Dynamic light scattering and Agilent 1260 high-performance liquid chromatography system were used to quantify bead diameters and the efficiency of irinotecan loading and releasing properties, respectively. Results: The diameters of CalliSpheres with all sizes were reduced after being loaded with irinotecan compared with unloaded ones with shrinkage rate ranging from 8.5% to 16.2%. Above 80% irinotecan was incorporated with CalliSpheres with all sizes when being loaded with irinotecan 20, 40, and 80 mg, while loading efficiencies were 70%-80% when being loaded with irinotecan 100 mg. Besides, elevated loading efficiency was observed at a higher concentration of irinotecan solutions (10 mg/mL) compared with a lower concentration (5 mg/mL) for CalliSpheres with all sizes. As to release profiles, irinotecan was released from CalliSpheres very quickly, and irinotecan release rate was elevated in CalliSpheres with smaller size than CalliSpheres with larger size within the first 12 h, whereas it was similar among CalliSpheres with different sizes at 24 and 48 h with maximum release rate ∼100%. In addition, fetal bovine serum seemed to have an effect on the accelerating irinotecan release. Conclusion: CalliSpheres exhibits good physical characteristics, satisfied irinotecan loading efficiency, and acceptable releasing profiles.

Transmissible Gastroenteritis Virus Nucleocapsid Protein Interacts with Na+/H+ Exchanger 3 To Reduce Na+/H+ Exchanger Activity and Promote Piglet Diarrhea.

Transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV) is member of the family Coronaviridae and mainly causes acute diarrhea. TGEV infection is characterized by vomiting, watery diarrhea, and severe dehydration, resulting in high mortality rates in neonatal piglets. TGEV infection symptoms are related to an imbalance of sodium absorption in small intestinal epithelial cells; however, the etiology of sodium imbalance diarrhea caused by TGEV remains unclear. In this study, we performed transcriptomic analysis of intestinal tissues from infected and healthy piglets and observed that the expression of NHE3, encoding Na+/H+ exchanger 3 (NHE3), the main exchanger of electroneutral sodium in intestinal epithelial cells, was significantly reduced upon TGEV infection. We also showed that specific inhibition of intestinal NHE3 activity could lead to the development of diarrhea in piglets. Furthermore, we revealed an interaction between TGEV N protein and NHE3 near the nucleus. The binding of TGEV N to NHE3 directly affected the expression and activity of NHE3 on the cell surface and affected cellular electrolyte absorption, leading to diarrhea. Molecular docking and computer-aided screening techniques were used to screen for the blocker of the interaction between TGEV N and NHE3, which identified irinotecan. We then demonstrated that irinotecan was effective in relieving TGEV-induced diarrhea in piglets. These findings provide new insights into the mechanism of TGEV-induced sodium imbalance diarrhea and could lead to the design of novel antiviral strategies against TGEV. IMPORTANCE A variety of coronaviruses have been found to cause severe diarrhea in hosts, including TGEV; however, the pathogenic mechanism is not clear. Therefore, prompt determination of the mechanism and identification of efficient therapeutic agents are required, both for public health reasons and for economic development. In this study, we demonstrated that NHE3 is the major expressed protein of NHEs in the intestine, and its expression decreased by nearly 70% after TGEV infection. Also, specific inhibition of intestinal NHE3 resulted in severe diarrhea in piglets. This demonstrated that NHE3 plays an important role in TGEV-induced diarrhea. In addition, we found that TGEV N directly regulates NHE3 expression and activity through protein-protein interaction, which is essential to promote diarrhea. Molecular docking and other techniques demonstrated that irinotecan could block the interaction and diarrhea caused by TGEV. Thus, our results provide a basis for the development of novel therapeutic agents against TGEV and guidance for the development of drugs for other diarrhea-causing coronaviruses.

Economic evaluation of encorafenib with cetuximab in patients with BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer in France: a cost-effectiveness analysis using data from the BEACON CRC randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The BEACON CRC randomised controlled trial (NCT02928224) in BRAF-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients showed improved overall survival for the combination treatment of encorafenib (BRAF inhibitor) with cetuximab (EGFR inhibitor) compared with cetuximab with chemotherapy (FOLFIRI (folinic acid, fluorouracil and irinotecan) or irinotecan). We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of encorafenib with cetuximab in adult patients with BRAF-mutant mCRC after prior systemic therapy, from the perspective of the French healthcare system. DESIGN: A partitioned survival analysis model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of encorafenib with cetuximab using data from BEACON CRC (encorafenib with cetuximab and cetuximab with FOLFIRI or irinotecan). For two further comparator treatments (FOLFIRI alone and bevacizumab with FOLFIRI), a systemic literature review identified appropriate clinical trial data for indirect comparison. Piecewise modelling extrapolation was used to fulfil a lifetime horizon in the model. A discount rate of 2.5% was used. Treatment-emergent adverse events ≥grade 3 with an incidence of ≥2% were included, as well as relative dose intensity and utility values. OUTCOME MEASURES: The effectiveness outcomes of the model were expressed in terms of incremental life years gained and incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained. The cost-effectiveness of encorafenib with cetuximab was assessed using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results were presented probabilistically to account for parametric uncertainty. Deterministic and scenario analyses were conducted. RESULTS: The ICER for encorafenib with cetuximab versus cetuximab with FOLFIRI or irinotecan, FOLFIRI alone and bevacizumab with FOLFIRI was €69 823/QALY, €70 421/QALY and €72 336/QALY, respectively. Encorafenib with cetuximab was considered cost-effective compared with the three comparators at a willingness to pay threshold of €90 000/QALY, with probabilities of being cost-effective of 89.8%, 98.2% and 86.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis showed encorafenib with cetuximab to be a cost-effective treatment in mCRC patients with a BRAF V600E mutation.

Eficacia y seguridad de bevacizumab más capecitabina para el tratamiento de pacientes adultos mayores con cáncer colorrectal metastásico, ECOG 0-2, sin tratamiento previo, no tributario a quimioterapia basada en platino (oxaliplatino) ni irinotecán / Efficacy and safety of bevacizumab plus capecitabine for the treatment of older adult patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, ECOG 0-2, treatment-naïve, not amenable to platinum-based chemotherapy (oxaliplatin) or irinotecan

ANTECEDENTES: En el marco de la metodología ad hoc para evaluar solicitudes de tecnologías sanitarias, aprobada mediante Resolución de Institución de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación N° 111-IETSI-ESSALUD-2021, se ha elaborado el presente dictamen que expone la evaluación de la eficacia y seguridad de bevacizumab más capecitabina para el tratamiento de pacientes adultos mayores con cáncer colorrectal metastásico, ECOG 0-2, sin tratamiento previo, no tributario a quimioterapia basada en platino (oxaliplatino) ni irinotecán. Así, el médico Nelson Cuevas Muñoz, especialista en oncología médica del Hospital Nacional Edgardo Rebagliati Martins, siguiendo la Directiva N° 003-IETSIESSALUD-2016, envió al Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación - IETSI la solicitud de uso por fuera del Petitorio Farmacológico de EsSalud el producto farmacéutico producto bevacizumab más capecitabina. ASPECTOS GENERALES: En el Dictamen Preliminar N° 002-SDEPFYOTS-DETS-IETSI-2017 se detallan los aspectos generales del cáncer colorrectal metastásico (CCRM). Brevemente, en Perú, en el 2020, el CCR fue la quinta causa de muerte por cáncer en pacientes mayores de 65 años, con una tasa de muerte estandarizada por edad de 52 muertes por cada 100000 habitantes, y una incidencia ajustada por edad de 95 casos por cada 100000 habitantes (GLOBOCAN, 2020). En Estados Unidos, se ha estimado que el 20 % de los pacientes con CCR presentan enfermedad metastásica (Siegel et al., 2022), y que la sobrevida de cinco años en pacientes con CCRM es del 15 %, siendo la más baja comparada con el CCR localizado o regional (NIH, 2022). METODOLOGÍA: La búsqueda bibliográfica exhaustiva se llevó a cabo con el objetivo de identificar la mejor evidencia disponible sobre la eficacia y seguridad de bevacizumab más capecitabina para el tratamiento de pacientes adultos mayores con cáncer colorrectal metastásico, ECOG 0-2, sin tratamiento previo, no tributario a quimioterapia basada en platino (oxaliplatino) ni irinotecán. La búsqueda bibliográfica se realizó en las bases de datos PubMed, The Cochrane Library y LiLACS. Adicionalmente, se amplió la búsqueda revisando la evidencia generada por grupos internacionales que realizan revisiones sistemáticas, evaluaciones de tecnologías sanitarias y guías de práctica clínica, tales como: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), The Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH), Centro Nacional de Excelencia Tecnológica en Salud (CENETEC), Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG), Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC), Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS), lnstitute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's (AHRQ), National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), New Zealand Guidelines Group (NZGG), Canadian Medical Association (CMA), American College of Physicians Clinical Practice Guidelines, Registered Nurses Association of Ontario (RNAO), y Comissáo nacional de incorporagáo de tecnologías no sus (CONITEC). Adicionalmente, se realizó una búsqueda manual en las bases The Guidelines International Network (G-I-N), el portal de la Base Regional de Informes de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud de las Américas (BRISA), y el repositorio institucional de la Dirección General de .... V Medicamentos, Insumos y Drogas (DIGEMID). Finalmente, se realizó una búsqueda ... A manual en el portal ClinicalTrials.govdel National Institutes of Health (NIH) para identificar ensayos clínicos en desarrollo o que aún no hayan sido publicados. RESULTADOS: Luego de la búsqueda bibliográfica, se incluyeron seis GPC elaboradas por The Cancer Council Australia Colorectal Cancer Guidelines Working Party (CCACCGWP) (Nott et al., 2017), ASCO (Chiorean et al., 2020), The Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) (Hashiguchi et al., 2020), SIGN (SIGN, 2016), y la NCCN, que elaboró dos GPC, una para pacientes con cáncer de colon (NCCN, 2022a) y otra para pacientes con cáncer rectal (NCCN, 2022b). Además, se incluyó una ETS elaborada por CADTH (CADTH, 2015), y el ECA de fase III, denominado AVEX (Cunningham et al., 2013). CONCLUSIÓN: Por lo expuesto, el Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación no aprueba el uso de bevacizumab más capecitabina para el tratamiento de pacientes adultos mayores con cáncer colorrectal metastásico, ECOG 0-2, sin tratamiento previo, no tributario a quimioterapia basada en platino (oxaliplatino) ni irinotecán.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Three-Drug Regimen Containing Bevacizumab for the Treatment of Recurrent Pediatric Medulloblastoma in China: Based on a COG Randomized Phase II Screening Trial.

Background: Medulloblastoma is the most common malignant brain tumor of childhood, accounting for 6 to 7 percent of all childhood CNS tumors. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the economic efficacy of a bevacizumab combined with temozolomide + irinotecan regimen for the treatment of recurrent pediatric medulloblastoma in China. Methods: The data analyzed were from a randomized phase II screening trial that showed an improved survival benefit in child patients with recurrent medulloblastoma treated with a T+I+B combination regimen. A Markov model is constructed to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) from the perspective of Chinese society. The uncertainty in the model is solved by one-way certainty and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Results: Our base case analysis showed that the total costs of treatment increased from $8,786.403 to $27,603.420 with the combination bevacizumab vs. the two-agent chemotherapy regimen. Treatment with T+I+B combination therapy was associated with an increase in effectiveness of 0.280 QALYs from 0.867 to 1.147 QALYs T+I regimen. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $67,203.632/QALY, which exceeded our pre-specified willingness-to-pay threshold ($38,136.26/QALY). Cost changes associated with grade 3-4 AE management, tests used, or hospitalization costs had little effect on the ICER values predicted by sensitivity analysis. Conclusions: Taken together, the results of this study suggest that the combination of bevacizumab with temozolomide and irinotecan is not a cost-effective option from the perspective of Chinese payers as a first-line treatment option for children with recurrent medulloblastoma in China.

Encorafenib in Combination With Cetuximab After Systemic Therapy in Patients With BRAFV600E Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: German Health Technology Assessment-Driven Analyses From the BEACON CRC Study.

BACKGROUND: Purpose of this analysis was to report data of the BEACON CRC trial used in the German Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and previously unpublished data focusing on the dual blockade (encorafenib + cetuximab) and appropriate comparative therapy (ACT/control: cetuximab + irinotecan-based chemotherapy) of patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Analyses included overall survival (OS) and time-to-event analyses of morbidity and safety. RESULTS: A total of 220 patients received encorafenib + cetuximab and 221 patients ACT/control. Median OS was 9.3 (encorafenib + cetuximab) versus 5.9 months (ACT/control) (stratified hazard ratio (HRstrat): 0.61 [95% confidence interval: 0.48-0.77]). Time-to-response (TTR) showed a statistically significant advantage for encorafenib + cetuximab compared to ACT/control (HRstrat [95% CI]: 10.46 [3.75; 29.15]; P < .0001). Median progression-free survival 2, ie, PFS after initiation of subsequent treatment after completion of study treatment, was 8.3 (dual blockade) versus 5.3 months (ACT/control), representing a statistically significant benefit for the dual blockade (HRstrat [95% CI]: 0.62 [0.48; 0.78]; P < .0001). The statistically significant advantage for diarrhea (EORTC QLQ-C30) reached clinical relevance (LS-mean [95% CI]; P-value / Hedges'g [95% CI]: -12.61 [-17.75; -7.47]; P < .0001 / -0.53 [-0.74; -0.31]). The time-to-event analyses showed a statistically significant benefit for the dual blockade for serious adverse events (AE), severe AEs and AEs leading to discontinuation. CONCLUSION: In the HTA, the German G-BA granted a "hint for a considerable additional benefit" of encorafenib + cetuximab compared to the ACT in BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC patients. This treatment is considered the new standard of care for these patients.

Real-World Cost-Effectiveness of First-Line Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel vs FOLFIRINOX in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: There are no randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (Gem-Nab) and fluorouracil, folinic acid, irinotecan, oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) for advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). Although it is well known that RCT-based efficacy often does not translate to real-world effectiveness, there is limited literature investigating comparative cost-effectiveness of Gem-Nab vs FOLFIRINOX for APC. We aimed to examine the real-world cost-effectiveness of Gem-Nab vs FOLFIRINOX for APC in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: This study compared patients treated with first-line Gem-Nab or FOLFIRINOX for APC in Ontario from April 2015 to March 2019. Patients were linked to administrative databases. Using propensity scores and a stabilizing weights method, an inverse probability of treatment weighted cohort was developed. Mean survival and total costs were calculated over a 5-year time horizon, adjusted for censoring, and discounted at 1.5%. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and net monetary benefit were computed to estimate cost-effectiveness from the public health-care payer's perspective. Sensitivity analysis was conducted using the propensity score matching method. RESULTS: A total of 1988 patients were identified (Gem-Nab: n = 928; FOLFIRINOX: n = 1060). Mean survival was lower for patients in the Gem-Nab than the FOLFIRINOX group (0.98 vs 1.26 life-years; incremental effectiveness = -0.28 life-years [95% confidence interval = -0.47 to -0.13]). Patients in the Gem-Nab group incurred greater mean 5-year total costs (Gem-Nab: $103 884; FOLFIRINOX: $101 518). Key cost contributors include ambulatory cancer care, acute inpatient hospitalization, and systemic therapy drug acquisition. Gem-Nab was dominated by FOLFIRINOX, as it was less effective and more costly. Results from the sensitivity analysis were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Gem-Nab is likely more costly and less effective than FOLFIRINOX and therefore not considered cost-effective at commonly accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds.

Cost-effectiveness of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel in borderline resectable/locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: The 2020 National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX or neoadjuvant gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (G-nP) for borderline resectable/locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (BR/LA PDAC). AIM: The purpose of our study was to compare treatment outcomes, toxicity profiles, costs, and quality-of-life measures between these two treatments to further inform clinical decision-making. METHODS AND RESULTS: We developed a decision-analytic mathematical model to compare the total cost and health outcomes of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX against G-nP over 12 years. The model inputs were estimated using clinical trial data and published literature. The primary endpoint was incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY). Secondary endpoints included overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), total cost of care, QALYs, PDAC resection rate, and monthly treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) costs (USD). FOLFIRINOX was the cost-effective strategy, with an ICER of $60856.47 per QALY when compared to G-nP. G-nP had an ICER of $44639.71 per QALY when compared to natural history. For clinical outcomes, more patients underwent an "R0" resection with FOLFIRINOX compared to G-nP (84.9 vs. 81.0%), but FOLFIRINOX had higher TRAE costs than G-nP ($10905.19 vs. $4894.11). A one-way sensitivity analysis found that the ICER of FOLFIRINOX exceeded the threshold when TRAE costs were higher or PDAC recurrence rates were lower. CONCLUSION: Our modeling analysis suggests that FOLFIRNOX is the cost-effective treatment compared to G-nP for BR/LA PDAC despite having a higher cost of total care due to TRAE costs. Trial data with sufficient follow-up are needed to confirm our findings.

UGT1A1 genotype-guided dosing of irinotecan: A prospective safety and cost analysis in poor metaboliser patients.

AIM: To determine the safety, feasibility, pharmacokinetics, and cost of UGT1A1 genotype-guided dosing of irinotecan. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective, multicentre, non-randomised study, patients intended for treatment with irinotecan were pre-therapeutically genotyped for UGT1A1∗28 and UGT1A1∗93. Homozygous variant carriers (UGT1A1 poor metabolisers; PMs) received an initial 30% dose reduction. The primary endpoint was incidence of febrile neutropenia in the first two cycles of treatment. Toxicity in UGT1A1 PMs was compared to a historical cohort of UGT1A1 PMs treated with full dose therapy, and to UGT1A1 non-PMs treated with full dose therapy in the current study. Secondary endpoints were pharmacokinetics, feasibility, and costs. RESULTS: Of the 350 evaluable patients, 31 (8.9%) patients were UGT1A1 PM and received a median 30% dose reduction. The incidence of febrile neutropenia in this group was 6.5% compared to 24% in historical UGT1A1 PMs (P = 0.04) and was comparable to the incidence in UGT1A1 non-PMs treated with full dose therapy. Systemic exposure of SN-38 of reduced dosing in UGT1A1 PMs was still slightly higher compared to a standard-dosed irinotecan patient cohort (difference: +32%). Cost analysis showed that genotype-guided dosing was cost-saving with a cost reduction of €183 per patient. CONCLUSION: UGT1A1 genotype-guided dosing significantly reduces the incidence of febrile neutropenia in UGT1A1 PM patients treated with irinotecan, results in a therapeutically effective systemic drug exposure, and is cost-saving. Therefore, UGT1A1 genotype-guided dosing of irinotecan should be considered standard of care in order to improve individual patient safety.

Assessment of Drug-drug Interaction and Optimization in Capecitabine and Irinotecan Combination Regimen using a Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Model.

Capecitabine and irinotecan (CPT-11) combination regimen (XELIRI) is used for colorectal cancer treatment. Capecitabine is metabolized to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) by three enzymes, including carboxylesterase (CES). CES can also convert CPT-11 to 7-ethyl-10-hydroxycamptotecin (SN-38). CES is involved in the metabolic activation of both capecitabine and CPT-11, and it is possible that drug-drug interactions occur in XELIRI. Here, a physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model was developed to evaluate drug-drug interactions. Capecitabine (180 mg/kg) and CPT-11 (180 mg/m2) were administered to rats, and blood (250 µL) was collected from the jugular vein nine times after administration. Metabolic enzyme activities and Ki values were calculated through in vitro experiments. The plasma concentration of 5-FU in XELIRI was significantly decreased compared to capecitabine monotherapy, and metabolism of capecitabine by CES was inhibited by CPT-11. A PBPK model was developed based on the in vivo and in vitro results. Furthermore, a PBPK model-based simulation was performed with the capecitabin dose ranging from 0 to 1000mol/kg in XELIRI, and it was found that an approximately 1.7-fold dosage of capecitabine was required in XELIRI for comparable 5-FU exposure with capecitabine monotherapy. PBPK model-based simulation will contribute to the optimization of colorectal cancer chemotherapy using XELIRI.

The Association of Drug-Funding Reimbursement With Survival Outcomes and Use of New Systemic Therapies Among Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer.

Importance: Gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel (GEMNAB) and fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) both improve survival of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer when compared with single-agent gemcitabine in clinical trials. Objective: To describe changes in the survival of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer associated with sequential drug-funding approvals and to determine if there exist distinct patient populations for whom GEMNAB and FOLFIRINOX are associated with survival benefit. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based, retrospective cohort study examined all incident cases of advanced pancreatic cancer treated with first-line chemotherapy in Ontario, Canada (2008-2018) that were identified from the Cancer Care Ontario (Ontario Health) New Drug Funding Program database. Statistical analysis was performed from October 2020 to January 2021. Exposures: First-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were the proportion of patients treated with each chemotherapy regimen over time and overall survival for each regimen. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to compare overall survival between treatment regimens after adjustment for confounding variables, inverse probability of treatment weighting, and matching. Results: From 2008 to 2018, 5465 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer were treated with first-line chemotherapy in Ontario, Canada. The median (range) age of patients was 66.9 (27.8-93.4) years; 2447 (45%) were female; 878 (16%) had prior pancreatic resection, and 328 (6%) had prior adjuvant gemcitabine. During the time period when only gemcitabine and FOLFIRINOX were funded (2011-2015), 49% (929 of 1887) received FOLFIRINOX. When GEMNAB was subsequently funded (2015-2018), 9% (206 of 2347) received gemcitabine, 44% (1034 of 2347) received FOLFIRINOX, and 47% (1107 of 2347) received GEMNAB. The median overall survival increased from 5.6 months (95% CI, 5.1-6.0 months) in 2008 to 2011 to 6.9 months (95% CI, 6.5-7.4 months) in 2011 to 2015 to 7.6 months (95% CI, 7.1-8.0 months) in 2015 to 2018. Patients receiving FOLFIRINOX were younger and healthier than patients receiving GEMNAB. After adjustment and weighting, FOLFIRINOX was associated with better overall survival than GEMNAB (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75 [95% CI, 0.69-0.81]). In analyses comparing patients treated with GEMNAB and gemcitabine, GEMNAB was associated with better overall survival (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.78-0.94]). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving first-line palliative chemotherapy within a universal health care system found that drug funding decisions were associated with increased uptake of new treatment options over time and improved survival. Both FOLFIRINOX and GEMNAB were associated with survival benefits in distinct patient populations.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of FOLFIRINOX vs gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel as adjuvant treatment for resected pancreatic cancer in the United States based on PRODIGE-24 and APACT trials.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer is associated with low median overall survival. Combination chemotherapy regimens FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel (GemNab) are the new adjuvant treatment standards for resectable pancreatic cancer. PRODIGE-24 and APACT trials demonstrated superior clinical outcomes with FOLFIRINOX and GemNab, each vs gemcitabine monotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of FOLFIRINOX vs GemNab for resectable pancreatic cancer in adults from the U.S. payer perspective, in order to inform decision makers about which of these treatments is optimal. METHODS: A Markov model with 3 disease states (relapse free, progressive disease, and death) was developed. Cycle length was 1 month, and time horizon was 10 years. Transition probabilities were derived from PRODIGE-24 and APACT survival data. All cost and utility input parameters were obtained from published literature. Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to obtain total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life-years (LYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). A 3% annual discount rate was applied to costs and outcomes. The effect of uncertainty on model parameters was assessed with 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA). RESULTS: Our analysis estimated that the cost for FOLFIRINOX was $40,831 higher than GemNab ($99,669 vs. $58,837). Despite increased toxicity, FOLFIRINOX was associated with additional 0.18 QALYs and 0.25 LYs compared with GemNab (QALY: 1.65 vs. 1.47; LY: 2.09 vs. 1.84). The ICER for FOLFIRINOX vs GemNab was $226,841 per QALY and $163,325 per LY. FOLFIRINOX was not cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $200,000 per QALY, and this was confirmed by the PSA. CONCLUSIONS: Total monthly cost for FOLFIRINOX was approximately 1.7 times higher than GemNab. If the WTP threshold increases to or above $250,000 per QALY, FOLFIRINOX then becomes a cost-effective treatment option. DISCLOSURES: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

The efficiency of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in the assessment of tumor response to preoperative chemoradiation therapy for locally recurrent rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) remains a major problem after curative resection of primary rectal cancer. A noninvasive, prognostic biomarker with which to accurately evaluate disease status and assess the treatment response is critically needed to optimize treatment plans. This study assesses the effectiveness of PET/CT evaluation of preoperative chemoradiation therapy (CRT) in patients with LRRC. METHODS: Since 2004, we have been performing preoperative CRT to improve local tumor control and survival. Between 2004 and 2013, 40 patients with LRRC underwent preoperative CRT (radiation: 50 Gy/25 fractions; chemotherapy: irinotecan plus UFT [tegafur and uracil]/leucovorin) and radical surgery, and underwent 18F-FDG-PET/CT before and 3 weeks after the completion of CRT. The maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) of the pre-CRT scan (Pre-SUV) and the post-CRT scan (Post-SUV) were measured. The predictive value of the 18F-FDG-PET and CT/MRI response assessments was evaluated. RESULTS: The mean Pre-SUV was significantly higher than the Post-SUV (8.2 ± 6.1, vs. 3.8 ± 4.0; P < 0.0001). Following CRT, 17/40 patients (42.5%) were classified as responders according to the Mandard tumor regression grade (TRG1-2). The mean Post-SUV was significantly lower in responders than in nonresponders (2.0 ± 1.7 vs. 5.1 ± 3.9; P = 0.0038). Pathological response was not correlated with the response as evaluated by CT (P > 0.9999) or MRI (P > 0.9999). Multivariate regression analysis identified Post-SUV as an independent predictor of local re-recurrence-free survival (P = 0.0383) and for overall survival (P = 0.0195). CONCLUSIONS: PET/CT is useful in assessing tumor response to preoperative CRT for LRRC and predicting prognosis after surgery.

Tumour-on-chip microfluidic platform for assessment of drug pharmacokinetics and treatment response.

Microphysiological in vitro systems are platforms for preclinical evaluation of drug effects and significant advances have been made in recent years. However, existing microfluidic devices are not yet able to deliver compounds to cell models in a way that reproduces the real physiological drug exposure. Here, we introduce a novel tumour-on-chip microfluidic system that mimics the pharmacokinetic profile of compounds on 3D tumour spheroids to evaluate their response to the treatments. We used this platform to test the response of SW620 colorectal cancer spheroids to irinotecan (SN38) alone and in combination with the ATM inhibitor AZD0156, using concentrations mimicking mouse plasma exposure profiles of both agents. We explored spheroid volume and viability as a measure of cancer cells response and changes in mechanistically relevant pharmacodynamic biomarkers (γH2AX, cleaved-caspase 3 and Ki67). We demonstrate here that our microfluidic tumour-on-chip platform can successfully predict the efficacy from in vivo studies and therefore represents an innovative tool to guide drug dose and schedules for optimal efficacy and pharmacodynamic assessment, while reducing the need for animal studies.

Conversion to biosimilar pegfilgrastim-cbqv enables budget-neutral access to FOLFIRINOX treatment for metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Aim: To estimate the cost-savings from conversion to biosimilar pegfilgrastim-cbqv that can be reallocated to provide budget-neutral expanded access to FOLFIRINOX in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Methods: Simulation modeling in a panel of 2500 FOLFIRINOX-treated patients, using varying treatment duration (1-12 cycles) and conversion rates (10-100%), to estimate cost-savings and additional FOLFIRINOX treatment that could be budget neutral. Results: In a 2500-patient panel at 100% conversion, savings of US$6,907.41 per converted patient over 12 cycles of prophylaxis translate to US$17.3 million and could provide 72,273 additional FOLFIRINOX doses or 6023 full 6-month regimens. Conclusion: Conversion to biosimilar CIN/FN prophylaxis can generate significant cost-savings and provide budget-neutral expanded access to FOLFIRINOX treatment for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Lay abstract Pegfilgrastim is used to prevent low white blood cell count in patients receiving chemotherapy. Comparable to a generic version of a drug, a biosimilar is a follow-on version of a biologic treatment. The authors calculated the savings from using biosimilar pegfilgrastim in a hypothetical group of 2500 patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer and then computed the number of additional doses of FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy that could be purchased with those savings. Using biosimilar pegfilgrastim for 12 cycles could save US$6,907.41 per patient. If all 2500 patients were treated with biosimilar pegfilgrastim, US$17.3 million could be saved. This could provide 72,273 additional FOLFIRINOX doses. Biosimilar pegfilgrastim can generate significant savings to purchase chemotherapy for additional patients cost-free.

The impact of socioeconomic status on stage at presentation, receipt of diagnostic imaging, receipt of treatment and overall survival in colorectal cancer patients.

Socioeconomic factors influence patterns of care in colorectal cancer. Our study investigates the impact of socioeconomic status (SES) on stage at presentation, receipt of diagnostic imaging, receipt of treatment and overall survival (OS) in a universal healthcare system. The Ontario Cancer Registry (OCR) was accessed to identify a cohort of patients diagnosed with colorectal adenocarcinoma from 2007 to 2016 in Ontario, Canada. SES was measured using median neighborhood income divided into quintiles (Q1-Q5; Q1 = lowest income). Logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate stage, imaging and treatment. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate OS. All endpoints were adjusted for demographics and comorbidities with OS models also adjusting for stage, imaging and treatment. In total, 39 802 colon and 13 164 rectal patients were identified. Lower SES was associated with advanced stage at presentation in both cohorts (Q1 vs Q5: Colon odds ratio [OR] = 1.08, P = .046, rectal OR = 1.25, P < .0001). Lower SES colon patients were less likely to receive adjuvant oxaliplatin (Q1 vs Q5: OR = 0.78, P < .001) and all palliative chemotherapies studied including oxaliplatin (Q1 vs Q5: OR = 0.60, P < 0.0001), irinotecan (Q1 vs Q5: OR = 0.65, P < .0001), bevacizumab (Q1 vs Q5: OR = 0.70, P < .001), cetuximab (Q1 vs Q5: OR = 0.40, P = .0053) and panitumumab (Q1 vs Q5: OR = 0.54, P = .0036). In rectal patients, lower SES was associated with decreased receipt of rectal cancer resection for stages I-III (Q1 vs Q5: OR = 0.78, P < .001), adjuvant oxaliplatin (Q1 vs Q5: OR = 0.72, P = .0020) and palliative chemotherapies including oxaliplatin (Q1 vs Q5: OR = 0.59, P < .001), irinotecan (Q1 vs Q5: OR = 0.53, P < .001) and bevacizumab (Q1 vs Q5: OR = 0.71, P = .046). All survival models identified poorer OS for lower SES patients (total colorectal; Q1 vs Q5: Hazard ratio [HR] = 1.25, P < .0001). These findings suggest disparities persist even within universal healthcare.