Influence of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy-Chemotherapy on Perioperative Outcomes in Locally Advanced Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the perioperative outcomes for patients who had locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) treated with neoadjuvant immunotherapy (IO) and chemotherapy versus a matched cohort of patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) alone. METHODS: A single-center non-randomized phase 2 trial was undertaken with locally advanced (cT3-4 and/or N+) EAC, and 49 patients completed neoadjuvant avelumab + docetaxel, cisplatin, 5FU (DCF) and esophagectomy between February 2018 and February 2020. These patients were matched with contemporary patients (January 2018 to June 2020) who met the inclusion criteria but received neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone (NAC) with a comparable docetaxel-based therapy. The postoperative outcomes then were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: For this study, 99 patients with locally advanced EAC underwent esophagectomy and met the enrolment criteria. Of these patients, 50 received NAC alone and 49 received IO + NAC. Baseline characteristics such as age, gender, and clinical stage were comparable between the two groups. Operative approach and rate of minimally invasive esophagectomy (~ 60%) were similar in the two groups. For the NAC-alone and IO + NAC groups, the respective overall and major complication rates were similar between the two groups (50% vs. 51% [p = 0.91] and 20% vs. 26% [p = 0.44], respectively), with concordant rates for anastomotic leak (6 [12%] vs. 6 [12%]; p = 0.86) and respiratory complications (13 [26%] vs. 11 [22%]; p = 0.68). The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of hospital length of stay or 30- and 90-day mortality rates. CONCLUSION: The addition of immunotherapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma does not appear to alter perioperative short-term outcomes significantly after esophagectomy.

Docetaxel-Based Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Followed by En Bloc Resection for Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A 15-Year Retrospective Analysis from a Regional Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Network.

BACKROUND: Real-world, long-term survival outcomes of neoadjuvant, docetaxel-based therapy for esophageal and junctional adenocarcinoma are lacking. This study describes the long-term survival outcomes of patients with esophageal and junctional adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant docetaxel-based chemotherapy and en bloc transthoracic esophagectomy. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of a prospectively maintained database from a regional upper gastrointestinal cancer network in Quebec, Canada, was performed. From January 2007 to December 2021, all patients with locally advanced (cT3 and/or N1) esophageal/Siewert I/II adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant DCFx3 (Docetaxel/Cisplatin/5FU) or FLOTx4 (5FU/Leucovorin/Oxaliplatin/Docetaxel) and transthoracic en bloc esophagectomy were identified. Postoperative, pathological, and survival outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Overall, 236 of 420 patients met the inclusion criteria. Tumor location was esophageal/Siewert I/Siewert II (118/33/85), most were cT3-4 (93.6%) and cN+ (61.0%). DCF and FLOT were used in 127 of 236 (53.8%) and 109 of 236 (46.2%). All neoadjuvant cycles were completed in 87.3% with no difference between the regimens. Operative procedures included Ivor Lewis (81.8%), left thoraco-abdominal esophagectomy (10.6%) and McKeown (7.6%) with an R0 resection in 95.3% and pathological complete response in 9.7% (DCF 12.6%/FLOT 6.4%, p = 0.111). The median lymph node yield was 32 (range 4-79), and 60.6% were ypN+. Median follow-up was longer for the DCF group (74.8 months 95% confidence interval [CI] 4-173 vs. 37.8 months 95% CI 2-119, p <0.001. Overall survival was similar between the groups (FLOT 97.3 months, 78.6-115.8 vs. DCF 92.9, 9.2-106.5, p = 0.420). CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant DCF and FLOT followed by transthoracic en bloc resection are both highly effective regimens for locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma with equivalent survival outcomes despite high disease load.

Clinical impact of whole-body MRI in staging and surveillance of patients with myxoid liposarcoma: a 14-year single-centre retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical impact of regular whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WBMRI) surveillance in myxoid liposarcoma patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of myxoid liposarcoma patients who underwent at least one WBMRI at our institution between October 2006 and December 2020. The effect of WBMRI on clinical management, namely treatment modification or additional diagnostic investigations was studied. A standardised WBMRI surveillance protocol was instituted in 2015. We compared patient outcomes for the metastatic patients who had and had not received regular WBMRI surveillance and performed survival analysis for both subgroups. RESULTS: Of the 56 patients (60.7% male, median age: 48.1 years) who underwent 345 WBMRI, 17 (30.3%) had metastases, and 168 WBMRI were performed in this group. The median imaging follow-up for the entire cohort was 35 months; the metastatic group had a median follow-up of 42 months. WBMRI changed the clinical management in 13 (76.5%) metastatic patients, with 33 instances of treatment modification. Thirty-five lesions were labelled 'indeterminate,' 16 (45.7%) had additional investigations/interventions, and 4 (11.4%) were confirmed to be metastatic. Twenty-one metastatic lesions were missed initially on WBMRI and confirmed on subsequent WBMRI, of which 5 (23.8%) were clinically significant. The 5-year survival since the detection of metastasis was better in the regular surveillance subgroup (85.7% vs. 45%), but this was not statistically significant (p = 0.068). Five patients (8.9%) developed their first metastasis more than 5 years after diagnosing the primary lesion. CONCLUSION: Regular WBMRI surveillance of myxoid liposarcoma patients considerably impacts clinical management by frequently influencing treatment decisions. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: WBMRI has been recently recommended as an imaging option for the staging and surveillance of myxoid liposarcoma patients. Our study highlights the impact of regular WBMRI surveillance on the clinical management of these patients and how it affects their survival.

A Phase II Exploratory Study to Identify Biomarkers Predictive of Clinical Response to Regorafenib in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Who Have Failed First-Line Therapy.

Single-agent regorafenib is approved in Canada for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who have failed previous lines of therapy. Identifying prognostic biomarkers is key to optimizing therapeutic strategies for these patients. In this clinical study (NCT01949194), we evaluated the safety and efficacy of single-agent regorafenib as a second-line therapy for mCRC patients who received it after failing first-line therapy with an oxaliplatin or irinotecan regimen with or without bevacizumab. Using various omics approaches, we also investigated putative biomarkers of response and resistance to regorafenib in metastatic lesions and blood samples in the same cohort. Overall, the safety profile of regorafenib seemed similar to the CORRECT trial, where regorafenib was administered as ≥ 2 lines of therapy. While the mutational landscape showed typical mutation rates for the top five driver genes (APC, KRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA, and TP53), KRAS mutations were enriched in intrinsically resistant lesions. Additional exploration of genomic-phenotype associations revealed several biomarker candidates linked to unfavorable prognoses in patients with mCRC using various approaches, including pathway analysis, cfDNA profiling, and copy number analysis. However, further research endeavors are necessary to validate the potential utility of these promising genes in understanding patients' responses to regorafenib treatment.

Building the Evidence for Systemic Treatment in Desmoid Fibromatosis: Is a New Metronomic Regimen Another Layer in the Foundation?

@Thalcin explains how a metronomic regimen for desmoid tumors fits in the current treatment landscape.

Safety and Efficacy of the Combination Lurbinectedin plus Doxorubicin from a Phase 1b Trial in Patients with Advanced/Metastatic Soft-Tissue Sarcoma.

PURPOSE: While cytotoxic chemotherapy is the standard first-line treatment for patients with metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma (STS), clinical outcomes remain suboptimal. Our prior study showed lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin is well tolerated with promising clinical activity in STS. We designed this phase 1b trial to optimize dosing as the basis for a randomized trial in leiomyosarcoma and to further explore the safety profile and efficacy signal. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients had advanced/metastatic STS and no prior anthracycline/lurbinectedin/trabectedin. Escalation followed a 3 + 3 design with 3-week cycles: lurbinectedin (3.2 mg/m2 day 1) and two doxorubicin levels (DL1, 25 mg/m2 day 1; DL2, 25 mg/m2 days 1 and 8). The primary objectives were to identify the maximum tolerated dose and recommended dose for subsequent randomized trials. RESULTS: Ten patients were enrolled in a 6-month period. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were grade (G) 2 fatigue and nausea, and G2 cytopenias with no febrile neutropenia events. There were two dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) at DL2 [day 8 (G2 alanine aminotransferase [ALT]/aspartate aminotransferase increase, G3 neutropenia)], and one DLT in DL1 (G3 ALT increase). These were reversible and all patients continued the study. DL1 was chosen for further study. At the time of data cutoff, the estimated median progression-free survival is 16.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 6.0-ND]. The objective response rate was 60% (6/10 confirmed partial responses). CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 1b study, the recommended dose is lurbinectedin 3.2 mg/m2 in combination with doxorubicin 25 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. The study combination was well tolerated and demonstrated intriguing clinical activity.

Survival in esophageal cancer with nonregional lymphadenopathy: a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Survival among patients with esophageal cancer with stage IV nonregional lymphadenopathy treated with neoadjuvant therapy and surgical resection is not well described. This study aimed to compare the survival outcomes of patients with nonregional lymphadenopathy with a propensity-matched cohort of patients with locoregional disease. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort analysis of a prospectively maintained database from a regional upper gastrointestinal cancer network in Quebec, Canada. From January 2010 to December 2022, patients with radiologically suspicious nonregional retroperitoneal or supraclavicular lymphadenopathy were identified. Using 1:1 propensity score matching, a control group without nonregional disease was created. RESULTS: Of the 1235 patients identified, 39 met the inclusion criteria and were allocated to the study group of whom 35 of 39 (89%) had adenocarcinoma. Retroperitoneal and supraclavicular lymphadenopathy occurred in 26 of 39 patients (67%) and 13 of 39 patients (33%). Of the 39 patients, 34 (87%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and 5 (13%) received chemoradiotherapy. After resection, ypN0 of nonregional lymph node stations occurred in 21 of 39 patients (54%). When comparing the study group with a matched non-stage IV control group, the median overall survival was similar in patients with retroperitoneal lymphadenopathy (21.0 months [95% CI, 8.0-21.0] vs 27.0 months [95% CI, 13.0-41.0]; P = .262) but not with supraclavicular disease (13.0 months; 95% CI, 8.0-18.0; P = .039). The median follow-up intervals were 40.1 months (95% CI, 1.0-83.0) for the study group and 70.0 (95% CI, 33.0-106.0) for the control groups. CONCLUSION: Compared with a matched cohort of patients with similar disease burden but not stage IV disease, retroperitoneal lymphadenopathy did not negatively affect survival outcomes. Multimodal curative intent therapy may be appropriate in select cases.

CSF1R Inhibition in Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors or Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumor: A Phase 1 Study of Vimseltinib.

PURPOSE: Tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) is a locally aggressive neoplasm caused by dysregulation of the colony-stimulating factor 1 (CSF1) gene and overexpression of the CSF1 ligand. Surgery is the standard of care for most patients, but there are limited treatment options for patients with TGCT not amenable to surgery. This study evaluates vimseltinib, an investigational, oral, switch-control tyrosine kinase inhibitor designed to selectively and potently inhibit the CSF1 receptor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This first-in-human, multicenter, open-label, phase 1/2 study of vimseltinib in patients with malignant solid tumors (N = 37) or TGCT not amenable to surgery (N = 32) followed a pharmacologically guided 3 + 3 study design (NCT03069469). The primary objectives were to assess safety and tolerability, determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), and characterize the pharmacokinetics (PK); exploratory objectives included pharmacodynamics and efficacy. RESULTS: Vimseltinib was well tolerated; the majority of non-laboratory treatment-emergent adverse events were grade 1/2. There was no evidence of cholestatic hepatotoxicity or drug-induced liver injury. The RP2D was determined to be 30 mg twice weekly (no loading dose), and vimseltinib plasma exposure increased with the dose. In patients with TGCT, the median treatment duration was 25.1 months (range, 0.7 to 46.9), and the objective response rate as assessed by independent radiological review using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 was 72%. CONCLUSIONS: Vimseltinib demonstrated long-term tolerability, manageable safety, dose-dependent exposure, and robust antitumor activity in patients with TGCT whose disease is not amenable to surgery.