SNAI1-expressing fibroblasts and derived-extracellular matrix as mediators of drug resistance in colorectal cancer patients.

Resistance to antitumor treatments is one of the most important problems faced by clinicians in the management of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. Cancer-Associated Fibroblasts (CAFs) are the main producers and remodelers of the extracellular matrix (ECM), which is directly involved in drug resistance mechanisms. Primary Normal Fibroblasts (NFs) and CAFs and cell lines (fibroblasts and tumor cells), were used to generate ECM and to identify its role in the oxaliplatin and cetuximab chemoresistance processes of CRC cells mediated by SNAI1-expressing fibroblasts. Matrices generated by Snai1 KO MEFs (Knockout Mouse Embryonic Fibroblasts) confer less resistance on oxaliplatin and cetuximab than wild-type MEF-derived matrices. Similarly, matrices derived from CAFs cause greater survival of colorectal cancer cells than NF-derived matrices, in a similar way to Snai1 expression levels. In addition, Snail1 expression in fibroblasts regulates drug resistance and metabolism gene expression in tumor cells mediated by ECM. Finally, a series of 531 patients (TCGA) with CRC was used to assess the role of SNAI1 expression in patients' prognosis indicating an association between tumor SNAI1 expression and overall survival in colon cancer patients but not in rectal cancer patients. SNAI1 expression in CRC cancer patients, together with in vitro experimentation, suggests the possible use of SNAI1 expression in tumor-associated fibroblasts as a predictive biomarker of response to oxaliplatin and cetuximab treatments in patients with CRC.

Ultra-selection of metastatic colorectal cancer patients using next-generation sequencing to improve clinical efficacy of anti-EGFR therapy.

BACKGROUND: Extended RAS analysis is mandatory in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. The optimal threshold of RAS mutated subclones to identify patients most likely to benefit from antiepidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy is controversial. Our aim was to assess the clinical impact of detecting mutations in RAS, BRAF, PIK3CA and EGFRS492R in basal tissue tumour samples by using a highly sensitive next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology in mCRC patients treated with chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR or anti-vascular endothelial growth factor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five hundred and eighty-one tumour samples from untreated mCRC patients from 7 clinical studies were collected. Mutational analysis was carried out by standard-of-care (therascreen pyro) with a sensitivity detection of 5% mutant allele fraction (MAF), and compared with NGS technology using 454GS Junior platform (Roche Applied Science, Germany) with a sensitivity of 1%. Molecular results were correlated with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: After quality assessment, 380 samples were evaluable for molecular analysis. Standard-of-care mutational analysis detected RAS, BRAFV600E or PIK3CA mutations in 56.05% of samples compared with 69.21% by NGS (P = 0.00018). NGS identified coexistence of multiple low-frequency mutant alleles in 96 of the 263 mutated cases (36.5%; range 2-7). Response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were increasingly improved in patients with RAS wild-type, RAS/BRAF wild-type or quadruple (KRAS/NRAS/BRAF/PIK3CA) wild-type tumours treated with anti-EGFR, assessed by standard-of-care. No additional benefit in RR, PFS or OS was observed by increasing the detection threshold to 1% by NGS. An inverse correlation between the MAF of the most prevalent mutation detected by NGS and anti-EGFR response was observed (P = 0.039). EGFRS492Rmutation was not detected in untreated samples. CONCLUSIONS: No improvement in the selection of patients for anti-EGFR therapy was obtained by adjusting the mutation detection threshold in tissue samples from 5% to 1% MAF. Response to anti-EGFR was significantly better in patients with quadruple wild-type tumours.

First-line single-agent regorafenib in frail patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a pilot phase II study of the Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours (TTD).

BACKGROUND: Treatment of frail patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) is controversial. This pilot phase II trial aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of regorafenib when administered in first-line to frail patients with advanced CRC. METHODS: Frail patients without prior advanced colorectal cancer treatment were included in the study. Definition of frailty was defined per protocol based on dependency criteria, presence of chronic comorbid pathologies and/or geriatric features. MAIN OBJECTIVE: to assess progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. Treatment consisted of 28-day cycles of orally administered regorafenib 160 mg/day (3 weeks followed by 1 week rest). RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were included in the study. Median age was 81 years (range 63-89). Frailty criteria: dependency was observed in 26 patients (55%), comorbidities in 27 (57%) and geriatric features in 18 (38%). PFS rate at 6 months was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI] 30-60]. Median PFS was 5.6 months (95%CI 2.7-8.4). Median overall survival (OS) was 16 months (95%CI 7.8-24). Complete response, partial response and stable disease were observed in one, two and 21 patients respectively (objective response rate 6.4%; disease control rate 51%). Thirty-nine patients (83%) experienced grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs). The most common grade 3-4 AEs were hypertension (15 patients; 32%), asthenia (14; 30%), hypophosphatemia (6; 13%); diarrhea (4; 8%), hand-foot-skin reaction (4; 8%). There were two toxic deaths (4.2%) (grade 5 rectal bleeding and death not further specified). Dose reduction was required in 26 patients (55%) and dose-delays in 13 patients (28%). CONCLUSIONS: The study did not meet the pre-specified boundary of 55% PFS rate at 6 months. Toxicity observed (83% patients experienced grade 3 and 4 AEs) preclude its current use in clinical practice on this setting. Disease control rate and overall survival results are interesting and might warrant further investigation to identify those who benefit from this approach. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was prospectively registered at EudraCT ( 2013-000236-94 ). Date of trial registration: April 9th, 2013.

Genotype-based selection of treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer (SETICC): a pharmacogenetic-based randomized phase II trial.

Background: There has been little progress toward personalized therapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). TYMS-3' untranslated region (UTR) 6 bp ins/del and ERCC1-118C/T polymorphisms were previously reported to facilitate selecting patients for fluoropyrimidine-based treatment in combination with oxaliplatin as first-line therapy. We assessed the utility of these markers in selecting therapy for patients with mCRC. Patients and methods: This randomized, open-label phase II trial compared bevacizumab plus XELOX (control) versus treatment tailored according to TYMS-3'UTR 6 bp ins/del and ERCC1-118C/T polymorphisms. Patients randomized to the experimental treatment received bevacizumab plus FUOX, FUIRI, XELIRI, or XELOX depending on their combination of favorable polymorphisms for FUOX treatment (TYMS-3'UTR ins/del or del/del; ERCC1-118T/T). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary end point. Results: Overall, 195 patients were randomized (control n = 65; experimental n = 130). The primary objective was not met: median PFS was 9.4 months in the control group and 10.1 months in the experimental group (P = 0.745). Median overall survival was similar in both groups (16.5 versus 19.1 months, respectively; P = 0.797). Patients in the experimental group had a significantly higher overall response rate (ORR; 65% versus 47% in the control group; P = 0.042) and R0 resection rate (86% versus 44%, respectively; P = 0.018). Neuropathy, hand-foot syndrome, thrombocytopenia, and dysesthesia were significantly less common in the experimental group. Conclusions: This study did not show survival benefits after treatment personalization based on polymorphisms in mCRC. However, the improved ORR and R0 resection rate and fewer disabling toxicities suggest that tailoring therapy by TYMS-3'UTR and ERCC1-118 polymorphisms warrants further investigation in patients with mCRC. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01071655.

A systems approach identifies time-dependent associations of multimorbidities with pancreatic cancer risk.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is usually diagnosed in late adulthood; therefore, many patients suffer or have suffered from other diseases. Identifying disease patterns associated with PDAC risk may enable a better characterization of high-risk patients. METHODS: Multimorbidity patterns (MPs) were assessed from 17 self-reported conditions using hierarchical clustering, principal component, and factor analyses in 1705 PDAC cases and 1084 controls from a European population. Their association with PDAC was evaluated using adjusted logistic regression models. Time since diagnosis of morbidities to PDAC diagnosis/recruitment was stratified into recent (<3 years) and long term (≥3 years). The MPs and PDAC genetic networks were explored with DisGeNET bioinformatics-tool which focuses on gene-diseases associations available in curated databases. RESULTS: Three MPs were observed: gastric (heartburn, acid regurgitation, Helicobacter pylori infection, and ulcer), metabolic syndrome (obesity, type-2 diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, and hypertension), and atopic (nasal allergies, skin allergies, and asthma). Strong associations with PDAC were observed for ≥2 recently diagnosed gastric conditions [odds ratio (OR), 6.13; 95% confidence interval CI 3.01-12.5)] and for ≥3 recently diagnosed metabolic syndrome conditions (OR, 1.61; 95% CI 1.11-2.35). Atopic conditions were negatively associated with PDAC (high adherence score OR for tertile III, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.36-0.55). Combining type-2 diabetes with gastric MP resulted in higher PDAC risk for recent (OR, 7.89; 95% CI 3.9-16.1) and long-term diagnosed conditions (OR, 1.86; 95% CI 1.29-2.67). A common genetic basis between MPs and PDAC was observed in the bioinformatics analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Specific multimorbidities aggregate and associate with PDAC in a time-dependent manner. A better characterization of a high-risk population for PDAC may help in the early diagnosis of this cancer. The common genetic basis between MP and PDAC points to a mechanistic link between these conditions.

Refinement of screening for familial pancreatic cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Surveillance programmes are recommended for individuals at risk (IAR) of familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) to detect early pancreatic cancer (pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, PDAC). However, the age to begin screening and the optimal screening protocol remain to be determined. METHODS: IAR from non-CDKN2A FPC families underwent annual screening by MRI with endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in board-approved prospective screening programmes at three tertiary referral centres. The diagnostic yield according to age and different screening protocols was analysed. RESULTS: 253 IAR with a median age of 48 (25-81) years underwent screening with a median of 3 (1-11) screening visits during a median follow-up of 28 (1-152) months. 134 (53%) IAR revealed pancreatic lesions on imaging, mostly cystic (94%), on baseline or follow-up screening. Lesions were significantly more often identified in IAR above the age of 45 years (p<0.0001). In 21 IAR who underwent surgery, no significant lesions (PDAC, pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN) 3 lesions, high-grade intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia (IPMN)) were detected before the age of 50 years. Potentially relevant lesions (multifocal PanIN2 lesions, low/moderate-grade branch-duct IPMNs) occurred also significantly more often after the age of 50 years (13 vs 2, p<0.0004). The diagnostic yield of potentially relevant lesions was not different between screening protocols using annual MRI with EUS (n=98) or annual MRI with EUS every 3rd year (n=198) and between IAR screened at intervals of 12 months (n=180) or IAR that decided to be screened at ≥24 months intervals (n=30). CONCLUSIONS: It appears safe to start screening for PDAC in IAR of non-CDKN2a FPC families at the age of 50 years. MRI-based screening supplemented by EUS at baseline and every 3rd year or when changes in MRI occur appears to be efficient.

Prediction of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer outcomes assessed by innovative multimarker prognostic models.

BACKGROUND: We adapted Bayesian statistical learning strategies to the prognosis field to investigate if genome-wide common SNP improve the prediction ability of clinico-pathological prognosticators and applied it to non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) patients. METHODS: Adapted Bayesian sequential threshold models in combination with LASSO were applied to consider the time-to-event and the censoring nature of data. We studied 822 NMIBC patients followed-up >10 years. The study outcomes were time-to-first-recurrence and time-to-progression. The predictive ability of the models including up to 171,304 SNP and/or 6 clinico-pathological prognosticators was evaluated using AUC-ROC and determination coefficient. RESULTS: Clinico-pathological prognosticators explained a larger proportion of the time-to-first-recurrence (3.1 %) and time-to-progression (5.4 %) phenotypic variances than SNPs (1 and 0.01 %, respectively). Adding SNPs to the clinico-pathological-parameters model slightly improved the prediction of time-to-first-recurrence (up to 4 %). The prediction of time-to-progression using both clinico-pathological prognosticators and SNP did not improve. Heritability (h (2)) of both outcomes was <1 % in NMIBC. CONCLUSIONS: We adapted a Bayesian statistical learning method to deal with a large number of parameters in prognostic studies. Common SNPs showed a limited role in predicting NMIBC outcomes yielding a very low heritability for both outcomes. We report for the first time a heritability estimate for a disease outcome. Our method can be extended to other disease models.

A phase I/II, open-label, randomised study of nintedanib plus mFOLFOX6 versus bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 in first-line metastatic colorectal cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: This randomised, open-label, phase I/II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of nintedanib, an oral, triple angiokinase inhibitor, combined with chemotherapy, relative to bevacizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with histologically confirmed mCRC (adenocarcinoma), an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 2 and adequate organ function were included. Patients were randomised 2:1 to receive nintedanib 150 mg or 200 mg b.i.d. plus mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2), l-leucovorin 200 mg/m(2) or d,l-leucovorin 400 mg/m(2), 5-fluoruracil bolus 400 mg/m(2) followed by 2400 mg/m(2), every 2 weeks) or bevacizumab (5 mg/kg every 2 weeks) plus mFOLFOX6. During phase I, patients underwent a 3 + 3 dose-escalation schema to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of nintedanib in combination with mFOLFOX6. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 9 months. Objective response (OR) was a secondary end point. RESULTS: The nintedanib recommended phase II dose was 200 mg b.i.d. plus mFOLFOX6 based on safety data from phase I (n = 12). Of 128 patients randomised in the phase II part, 126 received treatment (nintedanib plus mFOLFOX6, n = 85; bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6, n = 41). PFS at 9 months was 62.1% with nintedanib and 70.2% with bevacizumab [difference: -8.1% (95% confidence interval -27.8 to 11.5)]. Confirmed ORs were recorded in 63.5% and 56.1% of patients in the nintedanib and bevacizumab groups, respectively. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) considered related to treatment was 98.8% with nintedanib and 97.6% with bevacizumab; the incidence of serious AEs was 37.6% with nintedanib and 53.7% with bevacizumab. The pharmacokinetics of nintedanib and the components of mFOLFOX6 were unaffected by their combination. CONCLUSIONS: Nintedanib in combination with mFOLFOX6 showed efficacy as first-line therapy in patients with mCRC with a manageable safety profile and further studies in this population are warranted.

A phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of ganitumab or placebo in combination with gemcitabine as first-line therapy for metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas: the GAMMA trial.

BACKGROUND: This double-blind, phase 3 study assessed the efficacy and safety of ganitumab combined with gemcitabine as first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned 2 : 2 : 1 to receive intravenous gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) (days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle) plus placebo, ganitumab 12 mg/kg, or ganitumab 20 mg/kg (days 1 and 15 of each cycle). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), safety, and efficacy by levels of circulating biomarkers. RESULTS: Overall, 322 patients were randomly assigned to placebo, 318 to ganitumab 12 mg/kg, and 160 to ganitumab 20 mg/kg. The study was stopped based on results from a preplanned futility analysis; the final results are reported. Median OS was 7.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 6.3-8.2] in the placebo arm, 7.0 months (95% CI, 6.2-8.5) in the ganitumab 12-mg/kg arm [hazard ratio (HR), 1.00; 95% CI, 0.82-1.21; P = 0.494], and 7.1 months (95% CI, 6.4-8.5) in the ganitumab 20-mg/kg arm (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.76-1.23; P = 0.397). Median PFS was 3.7, 3.6 (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.84-1.20; P = 0.520), and 3.7 months (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.77-1.22; P = 0.403), respectively. No unexpected toxicity was observed with ganitumab plus gemcitabine. The circulating biomarkers assessed [insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), IGF-binding protein-2, and -3] were not associated with a treatment effect on OS or PFS by ganitumab. CONCLUSION: Ganitumab combined with gemcitabine had manageable toxicity but did not improve OS, compared with gemcitabine alone in unselected patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01231347.

Pazopanib in pretreated advanced neuroendocrine tumors: a phase II, open-label trial of the Spanish Task Force Group for Neuroendocrine Tumors (GETNE).

BACKGROUND: The management of advanced neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) has recently changed. We assessed the activity of pazopanib after failure of other systemic treatments in advanced NETs. METHODS: This was a multicenter, open-label, phase II study evaluating pazopanib as a single agent in advanced NETs (PAZONET study). The clinical benefit rate (CBR) at 6 months was the primary end point. Translational correlation of radiological response and progression-free survival (PFS) with circulating and tissue biomarkers was also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 44 patients were enrolled. Twenty-five patients (59.5%) were progression-free at 6 months (4 partial responses, 21 stable diseases) with a median PFS of 9.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.8-14.1]. The CBR varied according to prior therapy received, with 73%, 60% and 25% in patients treated with prior multitarget inhibitors, prior mTOR inhibitors and both agents, respectively. A nonsignificant increase in PFS was observed in patients presenting lower baseline circulating tumor cell (CTC) counts (9.1 versus 5.8 months; P = 0.22) and in those with decreased levels of soluble-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 (sVEGFR-2) (12.6 versus 9.1 months; P = 0.067). A trend toward reduced survival was documented in patients with VEGFR3 rs307821 and rs307826 missense polymorphisms [hazard ratio (HR): 12.3; 95% CI 1.09-139.2; P = 0.042 and HR: 6.9; 95% CI 0.96-49.9; P = 0.055, respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: Pazopanib showed clinical activity in patients with advanced NETs regardless of previous treatments. Additionally, CTCs, soluble-s VEFGR-2 and VEGFR3 gene polymorphisms constitute potential biomarkers for selecting patients for pazopanib (NCT01280201). CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT01280201.

LINE-1 methylation in leukocyte DNA, interaction with phosphatidylethanolamine N-methyltransferase variants and bladder cancer risk.

BACKGROUND: Aberrant global DNA methylation is shown to increase cancer risk. LINE-1 has been proven a measure of global DNA methylation. The objectives of this study were to assess the association between LINE-1 methylation level and bladder cancer risk and to evaluate effect modification by environmental and genetic factors. METHODS: Bisulphite-treated leukocyte DNA from 952 cases and 892 hospital controls was used to measure LINE-1 methylation level at four CpG sites by pyrosequencing. Logistic regression model was fitted to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Interactions between LINE-1 methylation levels and environmental and genetic factors were assessed. RESULTS: The risk of bladder cancer followed a nonlinear association with LINE-1 methylation. Compared with subjects in the middle tertile, the adjusted OR for subjects in the lower and the higher tertiles were 1.26 (95% CI 0.99-1.60, P=0.06) and 1.33 (95% CI 1.05-1.69, P=0.02), respectively. This association significantly increased among individuals homozygous for the major allele of five single-nucleotide polymorphisms located in the phosphatidylethanolamine N-methyltransferase gene (corrected P-interaction<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this large-scale study suggest that both low and high levels of global DNA methylation are associated with the risk of bladder cancer.

Phase Ib study of talimogene laherparepvec in combination with atezolizumab in patients with triple negative breast cancer and colorectal cancer with liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC), a first-in-class oncolytic viral immunotherapy, enhances tumor-specific immune activation. T-VEC combined with atezolizumab, which blocks inhibitor T-cell checkpoints, could provide greater benefit than either agent alone. Safety/efficacy of the combination was explored in patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) or colorectal cancer (CRC) with liver metastases. METHODS: In this phase Ib, multicenter, open-label, parallel cohort study of adults with TNBC or CRC with liver metastases, T-VEC (106 then 108 PFU/ml; ≤4 ml) was administered into hepatic lesions via image-guided injection every 21 (±3) days. Atezolizumab 1200 mg was given on day 1 and every 21 (±3) days thereafter. Treatment continued until patients experienced dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), had complete response, progressive disease, needed alternative anticancer treatment, or withdrew due to an adverse event (AE). The primary endpoint was DLT incidence, and secondary endpoints included efficacy and AEs. RESULTS: Between 19 March 2018 and 6 November 2020, 11 patients with TNBC were enrolled (safety analysis set: n = 10); between 19 March 2018 and 16 October 2019, 25 patients with CRC were enrolled (safety analysis set: n = 24). For the 5 patients in the TNBC DLT analysis set, no patient had DLT; for the 18 patients in the CRC DLT analysis set, 3 (17%) had DLT, all serious AEs. AEs were reported by 9 (90%) TNBC and 23 (96%) CRC patients, the majority with grade ≥3 [TNBC, 7 (70%); CRC, 13 (54%)], and 1 was fatal [CRC, 1 (4%)]. Evidence of efficacy was limited. Overall response rate was 10% (95% confidence interval 0.3-44.5) for TNBC; one (10%) patient had a partial response. For CRC, no patients had a response; 14 (58%) were unassessable. CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile reflected known risks with T-VEC including risks of intrahepatic injection; no unexpected safety findings from addition of atezolizumab to T-VEC were observed. Limited evidence of antitumor activity was observed.

A phase I study of sunitinib in combination with FOLFIRI in patients with untreated metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of sunitinib, a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, combined with FOLFIRI (irinotecan 180 mg/m2 given over 90 min i.v. and l-leucovorin 200 mg/m2 given over 120 min on day 1, followed by 5-FU 400 mg/m2 bolus and then 2400 mg/m2 infused over 46 h) in untreated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multicentre, phase I, open-label, dose-finding trial, FOLFIRI was administered every 2 weeks. Two sunitinib regimens were explored: Schedule 4/2 (4 weeks on, 2 weeks off; 37.5 and 50 mg/day) and continuous daily dosing (CDD; 37.5 and 25 mg/day). Dose-limiting toxic toxicities (DLTs) were evaluated during weeks 1-6. Efficacy was a secondary objective. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients were enrolled. The 37.5 mg/day Schedule 4/2 cohort had zero of six DLTs, was expanded by 15 patients and declared the MTD. The MTD was exceeded at all other sunitinib doses and schedules; DLTs included febrile neutropenia (n=1), grade 4 neutropenia (n=4) and grade 3 deep vein thrombosis with grade 4 neutropenia (n=1). At the MTD, non-haematologic grade 3/4 adverse events with a frequency of >10% were diarrhoea, vomiting and lethargy, and the objective response rate was 57.9% (95% confidence interval 33.5-79.7). CONCLUSIONS: The MTD of sunitinib combined with FOLFIRI in chemotherapy-naive mCRC was 37.5 mg/day on Schedule 4/2. CDD of sunitinib at 37.5 or 25 mg/day plus FOLFIRI was not feasible.

Clinical nutrition as part of the treatment pathway of pancreatic cancer patients: an expert consensus.

PURPOSE: Malnutrition is a common problem among pancreatic cancer (PC) patients that negatively impacts on their quality of life (QoL) and clinical outcomes. The main objective of this consensus is to address the role of Medical Nutrition Therapy (MNT) into the comprehensive therapeutic management of PC patients. METHODS: A Spanish multidisciplinary group of specialists from the areas of Medical Oncology; Radiation Oncology; Endocrinology and Nutrition; and General Surgery agreed to assess the role of MNT as part of the best therapeutic management of PC patients. RESULTS: The panel established different recommendations focused on nutritional screening and nutritional screening tools, MNT strategies according to PC status, and MNT in palliative treatment. CONCLUSIONS: There is an unmet need to integrate nutritional therapy as a crucial part of the multimodal care process in PC patients. Health authorities, health care professionals, cancer patients, and their families should be aware of the relevance of nutritional status and MNT on clinical outcomes and QoL of PC patients.

SEOM clinical guidelines for pancreatic and biliary tract cancer (2020).

Pancreatic cancer (PC) and biliary tract cancer (BTC) are both aggressive and highly fatal malignancies. Nowadays we have a profound knowledge about the molecular landscape of these neoplasms and this has allowed new therapeutic options. Surgery is the only potentially curative therapy in both cancers, but disease recurrence is frequent. In PC, adjuvant treatment with mFOLFIRINOX has improved overall survival (OS) and in BTC adjuvant treatment with capecitabine seems to improve OS and relapse-free survival. Concomitant radio-chemotherapy could also be considered following R1 surgery in both neoplasms. Neoadjuvant treatment represents the best option for achieving an R0 resection in borderline PC. Upfront systemic chemotherapy is the treatment of choice in unresectable locally advanced PC and BTC; then locoregional therapy could be considered after an initial period of at least 3-4 months of systemic chemotherapy. In metastatic PC, FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel have improved OS compared with gemcitabine alone. In metastatic BTC, cisplatin plus gemcitabine constitute the standard treatment. Progress in the knowledge of molecular biology has enabled the identification of new targets for therapy with encouraging results that could in the future improve the survival and quality of life of patients with PC and BTC.

Gallbladder disease and pancreatic cancer risk: a multicentric case-control European study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The overall evidence on the association between gallbladder conditions (GBC: gallstones and cholecystectomy) and pancreatic cancer (PC) is inconsistent. To our knowledge, no previous investigations considered the role of tumour characteristics on this association. Thus, we aimed to assess the association between self-reported GBC and PC risk, by focussing on timing to PC diagnosis and tumour features (stage, location, and resection). METHODS: Data derived from a European case-control study conducted between 2009 and 2014 including 1431 PC cases and 1090 controls. We used unconditional logistic regression models to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) adjusted for recognized confounders. RESULTS: Overall, 298 (20.8%) cases and 127 (11.6%) controls reported to have had GBC, corresponding to an OR of 1.70 (95% CI 1.33-2.16). The ORs were 4.84 (95% CI 2.96-7.89) for GBC diagnosed <3 years before PC and 1.06 (95% CI 0.79-1.41) for ≥3 years. The risk was slightly higher for stage I/II (OR = 1.71, 95% CI 1.15-2.55) vs. stage III/IV tumours (OR = 1.23, 95% CI 0.87-1.76); for tumours sited in the head of the pancreas (OR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.13-2.24) vs. tumours located at the body/tail (OR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.62-1.68); and for tumours surgically resected (OR = 1.69, 95% CI 1.14-2.51) vs. non-resected tumours (OR = 1.25, 95% CI 0.88-1.78). The corresponding ORs for GBC diagnosed ≥3 years prior PC were close to unity. CONCLUSION: Our study supports the association between GBC and PC. Given the time-risk pattern observed, however, this relationship may be non-causal and, partly or largely, due to diagnostic attention and/or reverse causation.

UGT1A and TYMS genetic variants predict toxicity and response of colorectal cancer patients treated with first-line irinotecan and fluorouracil combination therapy.

BACKGROUND: The impact of thymidylate synthase (TYMS) and UDP-glucoronosyltransferase 1A (UGT1A) germline polymorphisms on the outcome of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients treated with irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil (irinotecan/5FU) is still controversial. Our objective was to define a genetic-based algorithm to select patients to be treated with irinotecan/5FU. METHODS: Genotyping of TYMS (5'TRP and 3'UTR), UGT1A1(*)28, UGT1A9(*)22 and UGT1A7(*)3 was performed in 149 metastatic CRC patients treated with irinotecan/5FU as first-line chemotherapy enrolled in a randomised phase 3 study. Their association with response, toxicity and survival was investigated by univariate and multivariate statistical analysis. RESULTS: TYMS 3TRP/3TRP genotype was the only independent predictor of tumour response (OR=5.87, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.68-20.45; P=0.005). UGT1A1(*)28/(*)28 was predictive for haematologic toxicity (OR=6.27, 95% CI=1.09-36.12; P=0.04), specifically for neutropenia alone (OR=6.40, 95% CI=1.11-37.03; P=0.038) or together with diarrhoea (OR=18.87, 95% CI=2.14-166.67; P=0.008). UGT1A9(*)1/(*)1 was associated with non-haematologic toxicity (OR=2.70, 95% CI=1.07-6.82; P=0.035). Haplotype VII (all non-favourable alleles) was associated with non-haematologic toxicity (OR=2.11, 95% CI=1.12-3.98; P=0.02). CONCLUSION: TYMS and UGT1A polymorphisms influence on tumour response and toxicities derived from irinotecan/5FU treatment in CRC patients. A genetic-based algorithm to optimise treatment individualisation is proposed.

Risk assessment model for first-cycle chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with solid tumours.

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia, the major dose-limiting toxicity of chemotherapy, is directly associated with concomitant morbidity, mortality and health-care costs. The use of prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factors may reduce the incidence and duration of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia, and is recommended in high-risk patients. The objective of this study was to develop a model to predict first-cycle chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (defined as neutropenia grade>or=3, with or without body temperature>or=38 degrees C) in patients with solid tumours. A total of 1194 patients [56% women; mean age 58+/-12 years; 94% Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) status

Treatment patterns for metastatic colorectal cancer in Spain.

PURPOSE: The primary aim of this retrospective study was to describe the treatment patterns according to the type of treatment received by patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in Spain. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational, multicenter study performed by 33 sites throughout Spain that included consecutive patients aged 18 years or older who had received or were receiving treatment for mCRC. RESULTS: At the time of inclusion, of the 873 evaluable patients, 507 (58%) had received two lines, 235 (27%) had received three lines, 106 (12%) had received four lines, and the remaining patients had received up to ten lines. The most frequent chemotherapy schemes were the FOLFOX or CAPOX regimens (66%) for first-line treatment, FOLFOX, CAPOX or FOLFIRI (70%) for second-line treatment, and FOLFOX, FOLFIRI or other fluoropyrimidine-based regimens for third- and fourth-line (over 60%) treatment. Sixty percent of patients received targeted therapy as part of their first-line treatment, and this proportion increased up to approximately 70% of patients as part of the second-line of treatment. A relevant proportion of patients were treated with unknown KRAS, and especially the BRAF, mutation statuses. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals inconsistencies regarding adherence to the recommendations of the ESMO guidelines for the management of mCRC in Spain. Improved adherence to the standard practice described in such guidelines for the determination of RAS and BRAF mutation statuses and the use of targeted therapies in first-line treatment should be considered to guarantee that patients can benefit from the best therapeutic approaches available.

Survey of treatment recommendations for elderly patients with glioblastoma.

INTRODUCTION: Glioblastoma, which is the most commonly diagnosed primary CNS neoplasm, is more frequent in individuals aged 65 years or more. Our purpose is to identify how glioblastoma diagnosed in elderly population is treated by Spanish oncologists. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A survey was emailed to all members of Spanish Group for Neuro-oncology Research (GEINO). RESULTS: Twenty-six neuro-oncologists from 26 hospitals completed the survey. The answers were different depending on the age, performance status, and MGMT methylation status. Patients between 65 and 70 years of age are mainly treated with Stupp treatment. For patients between ages of 70 and 80 years, 46.2% made recommendations for Perry regimen, for both methylated and non-methylated patients. For patients older than 80  years, monotherapy treatment is considered more frequently. In cases of non-MGMT promoter methylation, systemic therapy with temozolomide is still recommended in many hospitals. CONCLUSION: Our research demonstrates there is no uniform approach to the management of elderly patients with glioblastoma among academic neuro-oncologists.