Intratumoral NKT cell accumulation promotes antitumor immunity in pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) is a potentially lethal disease lacking effective treatments. Its immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME) allows it to evade host immunosurveillance and limits response to immunotherapy. Here, using the mouse KRT19-deficient (sgKRT19-edited) PDA model, we find that intratumoral accumulation of natural killer T (NKT) cells is required to establish an immunologically active TME. Mechanistically, intratumoral NKT cells facilitate type I interferon (IFN) production to initiate an antitumor adaptive immune response, and orchestrate the intratumoral infiltration of T cells, dendritic cells, natural killer cells, and myeloid-derived suppressor cells. At the molecular level, NKT cells promote the production of type I IFN through the interaction of their CD40L with CD40 on myeloid cells. To evaluate the therapeutic potential of these observations, we find that administration of folinic acid to mice bearing PDA increases NKT cells in the TME and improves their response to anti-PD-1 antibody treatment. In conclusion, NKT cells have an essential role in the immune response to mouse PDA and are potential targets for immunotherapy.

Combining CD40 agonist mitazalimab with mFOLFIRINOX in previously untreated metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (OPTIMIZE-1): a single-arm, multicentre phase 1b/2 study.

BACKGROUND: Current systemic therapies for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma are associated with poor outcomes with a 5-year overall survival rate under 5%. We aimed to assess the safety and antitumour activity of mitazalimab, a human CD40 agonistic IgG1 antibody, with modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX; fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan), in chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: OPTIMIZE-1 was a single-arm, multicentre, phase 1b/2 study which enrolled adults with histologically-confirmed metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and European Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1 in 14 university hospitals in Belgium, France, and Spain. The primary endpoint of phase 1b was to determine the recommended phase 2 dose of intravenous mitazalimab (450 µg/kg or 900 µg/kg) when combined with intravenous mFOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2, fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2). In the first 21-day treatment cycle, mitazalimab was administered on days 1 and 10, and mFOLFIRINOX on day 8. In subsequent 14-day cycles mitazalimab was administered 2 days after mFOLFIRINOX. The phase 2 primary endpoint was objective response rate. Activity and safety analyses were conducted on the full analysis set (all patients who received the combination of mitazalimab at the recommended phase 2 dose and mFOLFIRINOX for at least two treatment cycles) and safety set (all patients who received any study treatment), respectively. Enrolment is complete, and data represents a primary analysis of the ongoing trial. The trial is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04888312). FINDINGS: Between Sept 29, 2021, and March 28, 2023, 88 patients were screened and 70 patients were enrolled (40 [57%] were female and 30 [43%] were male). In phase 1b, 900 µg/kg mitazalimab was determined as the recommended phase 2 dose. Overall, five patients received 450 µg/kg mitazalimab; 65 received 900 µg/kg mitazalimab. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed at 450 µg/kg, and one dose-limiting toxicity was observed at 900 µg/kg. 57 patients were evaluated for activity, and all 70 patients were included in the safety set. At data cutoff on Nov 14, 2023, median follow-up was 12·7 months (95% CI 11·1-15·7). Of the 57 patients, 29 (51%) remained on study and 18 (32%) remained on treatment. The primary endpoint (objective response rate >30%) was met (objective response rates in 23 [40%]; one-sided 90% CI ≥32 of 57 patients). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (18 [26%] of 70 patients), hypokalaemia (11 patients [16%]), and anaemia and thrombocytopenia (eight patients [11%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 29 (41%) of 70 patients, the most common being vomiting (five [7%] of 70 patients), decreased appetite (four [6%]), and diarrhoea and cholangitis (three [4%] of 70 patients for each), none considered related to mitazalimab. No treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: Mitazalimab with mFOLFIRINOX demonstrated manageable safety and encouraging activity, warranting continued development in a phase 3, randomised, controlled trial. The results from OPTIMIZE-1 pave the way for further exploration and confirmation of a novel immunotherapy treatment regimen for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, which is a complex and aggressive cancer with very low survival rates and restricted treatment options. FUNDING: Alligator Bioscience.

Prognostic and predictive impact of metastatic organ involvement on maintenance therapy in advanced metastatic colorectal cancer: Subgroup analysis of patients treated within the PanaMa trial (AIO KRK 0212).

Despite molecular selection, patients (pts) with RAS wildtype mCRC represent a heterogeneous population including diversity in metastatic spread. We investigated metastatic patterns for their prognostic and predictive impact on maintenance therapy with 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid ± panitumumab. The study population was stratified according to (1) number of involved metastatic sites (single vs multiple organ metastasis), liver-limited disease vs (2) liver metastasis plus one additional site, and (3) vs liver metastasis plus ≥two additional sites. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regressions were used to correlate efficacy endpoints. Single organ metastasis was observed in 133 pts (53.6%) with 102 pts (41.1%) presenting with liver-limited disease, while multiple organ metastases were reported in 114 pts (46.0). Multiple compared to single organ metastases were associated with less favorable PFS (HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.13-1.93; P = .004) and OS (HR 1.37, 95% CI 0.98-1.93; P = .068) of maintenance therapy. While metastatic spread involving one additional extrahepatic site was not associated with clearly impaired survival compared to liver-limited disease, pts with liver metastasis plus ≥two additional sites demonstrated less favorable PFS (HR 1.92, 95% CI 1.30-2.83; P < .001), and OS (HR 2.38, 95% CI 1.51-3.76; P < .001) of maintenance therapy. Pmab-containing maintenance therapy appeared active in both pts with multiple (HR 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39-0.86; P = .006) as well as to a lesser numerical extent in pts with single organ metastasis (HR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.57-1.21; P = .332; Interaction P = .183). These data may support clinical decisions when EGFR-based maintenance therapy is considered.

Cetuximab plus FOLFOXIRI versus cetuximab plus FOLFOX as conversion regimen in RAS/BRAF wild-type patients with initially unresectable colorectal liver metastases (TRICE trial): A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether intensification of the chemotherapy backbone in tandem with an anti-EGFR can confer superior clinical outcomes in a cohort of RAS/BRAF wild-type colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with initially unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). To that end, we sought to comparatively evaluate the efficacy and safety of cetuximab plus FOLFOXIRI (triplet arm) versus cetuximab plus FOLFOX (doublet arm) as a conversion regimen (i.e., unresectable to resectable) in CRC patients with unresectable CRLM. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This open-label, randomized clinical trial was conducted from April 2018 to December 2022 in 7 medical centers across China, enrolling 146 RAS/BRAF wild-type CRC patients with initially unresectable CRLM. A stratified blocked randomization method was utilized to assign patients (1:1) to either the cetuximab plus FOLFOXIRI (n = 72) or cetuximab plus FOLFOX (n = 74) treatment arms. Stratification factors were tumor location (left versus right) and resectability (technically unresectable versus ≥5 metastases). The primary outcome was the objective response rate (ORR). Secondary outcomes included the median depth of tumor response (DpR), early tumor shrinkage (ETS), R0 resection rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (not mature at the time of analysis), and safety profile. Radiological tumor evaluations were conducted by radiologists blinded to the group allocation. Primary efficacy analyses were conducted based on the intention-to-treat population, while safety analyses were performed on patients who received at least 1 line of chemotherapy. A total of 14 patients (9.6%) were lost to follow-up (9 in the doublet arm and 5 in the triplet arm). The ORR was comparable following adjustment for stratification factors, with 84.7% versus 79.7% in the triplet and doublet arms, respectively (odds ratio [OR] 0.70; 95% confidence intervals [CI] [0.30, 1.67], Chi-square p = 0.42). Moreover, the ETS rate showed no significant difference between the triplet and doublet arms (80.6% (58/72) versus 77.0% (57/74), OR 0.82, 95% CI [0.37, 1.83], Chi-square p = 0.63). Although median DpR was higher in the triplet therapy group (59.6%, interquartile range [IQR], [50.0, 69.7] versus 55.0%, IQR [42.8, 63.8], Mann-Whitney p = 0.039), the R0/R1 resection rate with or without radiofrequency ablation/stereotactic body radiation therapy was comparable with 54.2% (39/72) of patients in the triplet arm versus 52.7% (39/74) in the doublet arm. At a median follow-up of 26.2 months (IQR [12.8, 40.5]), the median PFS was 11.8 months in the triplet arm versus 13.4 months in the doublet arm (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74, 95% CI [0.50, 1.11], Log-rank p = 0.14). Grade ≥ 3 events were reported in 47.2% (35/74) of patients in the doublet arm and 55.9% (38/68) of patients in the triplet arm. The triplet arm was associated with a higher incidence of grade ≥ 3 neutropenia (44.1% versus 27.0%, p = 0.03) and diarrhea (5.9% versus 0%, p = 0.03). The primary limitations of the study encompass the inherent bias in subjective surgical decisions regarding resection feasibility, as well as the lack of a centralized assessment for ORR and resection. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of cetuximab with FOLFOXIRI did not significantly improve ORR compared to cetuximab plus FOLFOX. Despite achieving an enhanced DpR, this improvement did not translate into improved R0 resection rates or PFS. Moreover, the triplet arm was associated with an increase in treatment-related toxicity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03493048.

Phase I trial of apatinib and paclitaxel+oxaliplatin+5-FU/levoleucovorin for treatment-naïve advanced gastric cancer.

Chinese guidelines recommend POF (paclitaxel, oxaliplatin, and 5-FU/levoleucovorin) as first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Apatinib can augment the antitumor effect of paclitaxel, oxaliplatin, or fluorouracil in preclinical studies of AGC. A phase I clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the anticancer activity and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of apatinib plus POF in treatment-naïve patients with AGC and to establish a recommended phase II dose. Participants received escalating doses of daily oral apatinib (250, 375, 500, 625, 750, and 850 mg) plus POF every 2 weeks using a conventional "3 + 3" study design. Among 21 treated patients, one experienced a dose-limiting toxicity (grade 3 skin ulceration at 850 mg). No MTD was reached. Apatinib 750 mg plus POF was recommended for phase II study. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (33.3%), mucositis (14.3%), and hand-foot syndrome (14.3%). Median progression-free and overall survival were 10.4 months (95% CI: 6.3, 14.6) and 18.4 months (95% CI: 9.8, 28.2), respectively. Apatinib up to 850 mg coadministered with POF was well tolerated with manageable AEs. The safety and anticancer activity of this regimen warrants its further investigation as first-line treatment for AGC in a larger study.

Nationwide Use and Outcome of Surgery for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Following Induction Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Several international high-volume centers have reported good outcomes after resection of locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) following chemo(radio)therapy, but it is unclear how this translates to nationwide clinical practice and outcome. This study aims to assess the nationwide use and outcome of resection of LAPC following induction chemo(radio)therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study including all patients who underwent resection for LAPC following chemo(radio)therapy in all 16 Dutch pancreatic surgery centers (2014-2020), registered in the mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. LAPC is defined as arterial involvement > 90° and/or portomesenteric venous > 270° involvement or occlusion. RESULTS: Overall, 142 patients underwent resection for LAPC, of whom 34.5% met the 2022 National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. FOLFIRINOX was the most commonly (93.7%) used chemotherapy [median 5 cycles (IQR 4-8)]. Venous and arterial resections were performed in 51.4% and 14.8% of patients. Most resections (73.9%) were performed in high-volume centers (i.e., ≥ 60 pancreatoduodenectomies/year). Overall median volume of LAPC resections/center was 4 (IQR 1-7). In-hospital/30-day major morbidity was 37.3% and 90-day mortality was 4.2%. Median OS from diagnosis was 26 months (95% CI 23-28) and 5-year OS 18%. Surgery in high-volume centers [HR = 0.542 (95% CI 0.318-0.923)], ypN1-2 [HR = 3.141 (95% CI 1.886-5.234)], and major morbidity [HR = 2.031 (95% CI 1.272-3.244)] were associated with OS. CONCLUSIONS: Resection of LAPC following chemo(radio)therapy is infrequently performed in the Netherlands, albeit with acceptable morbidity, mortality, and OS. Given these findings, a structured nationwide approach involving international centers of excellence would be needed to improve selection of patients with LAPC for surgical resection following induction therapy.

Outcomes of Hepatic Artery-Based Therapies and Systemic Multiagent Chemotherapy in Unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of unresectable colorectal liver metastases (UCRLM) includes locoregional and systemic therapy. A comprehensive analysis capturing long-term outcomes of these treatment options has not been performed. OBJECTIVE: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to calculate pooled outcomes of hepatic artery infusion with systemic chemotherapy (HAI-S), transarterial chemoembolization with systemic chemotherapy (TACE-S), transarterial radioembolization with systemic chemotherapy (TARE-S), doublet (FOLFOX, FOLFIRI), and triplet chemotherapy (FOLFOXIRI). METHODS: Outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), rate of conversion to resection (CTR), and response rate (RR). RESULTS: A total of 32, 7, 9, and 14 publications were included in the HAI-S, TACE-S, and TARE-S chemotherapy arms. The 6/12/24/36-month OS estimates for HAI-S, TACE-S, TARE-S, FOLFOX, FOLFIRI, and FOLFOXIRI were 97%/80%/54%/35%, 100%/83%/40%/14%, 82%/61%/34%/21%, 96%/83%/53%/36%, and 96%/93%/72%/55%. Similarly, the 6/12/24/36-month PFS estimates were 74%/44%/19%/14%, 66%/20%/9%/3%, 57%/23%/10%/3%, 69%/30%/12%/7%, and 88%/55%/18%/11%. The corresponding CTR and RR rates were 31, 20%, unmeasurable (TARE-S), 35, 53; and 49, 45, 45, 50, 80%, respectively. The majority of chemotherapy studies included first-line therapy and liver-only metastases, whereas most HAI-S studies were pretreated. On subgroup analysis in first-line setting with liver-only metastases, the HAI-S arm had comparable outcomes to FOLFOXIRI and outperformed doublet chemotherapy regimens. Although triplet chemotherapy appeared to outperform other arms, high toxicity and inclusion of potentially resectable patients must be considered while interpreting results. CONCLUSIONS: HAI-S and multiagent chemotherapy are effective therapies for UCRLM. To make definitive conclusions, a randomized trial with comparable patient characteristics and line of therapy will be required. The upcoming EA2222 PUMP trial may help to address this question.

Adjuvant Gemcitabine Versus Neoadjuvant/Adjuvant FOLFIRINOX in Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: The Randomized Multicenter Phase II NEPAFOX Trial.

BACKGROUND: Although addition of adjuvant chemotherapy is the current standard, the prognosis of pancreatic cancers still remains poor. The NEPAFOX trial evaluated perioperative treatment with FOLFIRINOX in resectable pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter phase II trial randomized patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer without metastases into arm (A,) upfront surgery plus adjuvant gemcitabine, or arm (B,) perioperative FOLFIRINOX. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Owing to poor accrual, recruitment was prematurely stopped after randomization of 40 of the planned 126 patients (A: 21, B: 19). Overall, approximately three-quarters were classified as primarily resectable (A: 16, B: 15), and the remaining patients were classified as borderline resectable (A: 5, B: 4). Of the 12 evaluable patients, 3 achieved partial response under neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX. Of the 21 patients in arm A and 19 patients in arm B, 17 and 7 underwent curative surgery, and R0-resection was achieved in 77% and 71%, respectively. Perioperative morbidity occurred in 72% in arm A and 46% in arm B, whereas non-surgical toxicity was comparable in both arms. Median RFS/PFS was almost doubled in arm B (14.1 months) compared with arm A (8.4 months) in the population with surgical resection, whereas median OS was comparable between both arms. CONCLUSIONS: Although the analysis was only descriptive owing to small patient numbers, no safety issues regarding surgical complications were observed in the perioperative FOLFIRINOX arm. Thus, considering the small number of patients, perioperative treatment approach appears feasible and potentially effective in well-selected cohorts of patients. In pancreatic cancer, patient selection before initiation of neoadjuvant therapy appears to be critical.

Liposomal irinotecan (HR070803) in combination with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin in patients with advanced solid tumors: a phase 1b dose-escalation and expansion study.

This phase 1b study aimed to evaluate the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy of HR070803, a novel nanoliposomal formulation of irinotecan, in combination with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin in patients with pretreated advanced solid tumors. This study consisted of dose-escalation and expansion stages. Dose escalation was performed with a traditional 3 + 3 design; patients received intravenous infusion of HR070803 from 60 to 80 mg/m2, followed by leucovorin (200 mg/m2) and 5-fluorouracil (2000 mg/m2) every 2 weeks. In the expansion stage, patients received treatments at selected tolerable dose. Fifteen patients received treatments at 60 mg/m2 (n = 12) and 80 mg/m2 (n = 3). DLTs occurred in 2 patients at 80 mg/m2 (grade 2 neutropenia that resulted in a dose delay of ≥ 7 days, n = 1; grade 3 febrile neutropenia, n = 1). The MTD was determined to be 60 mg/m2. The most frequent HR070803related adverse events included anorexia, leukopenia, neutropenia, nausea, fatigue, and diarrhea. SN-38, the active metabolite of irinotecan, exhibited lower maximum plasma concentrations and a prolonged terminal half-life when irinotecan was administered via nanoliposome compared to conventional injection. Overall, 4 patients achieved a partial response (confirmed, n = 2), and 9 had stable disease. The MTD of HR070803 was 60 mg/m2 when infused with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin. Nanoliposomal encapsulation modified the pharmacokinetics of irinotecan and SN-38. HR070803 with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin demonstrated a manageable safety profile and promising antitumor efficacy in advanced solid tumors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT05086848. Retrospectively registered on Oct. 12, 2021.

Impact of a non-therapeutic laparotomy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated with induction (m)FOLFIRINOX: Trans-Atlantic Pancreatic Surgery (TAPS) Consortium study.

BACKGROUND: Surgery in selected patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer after induction chemotherapy may have drawbacks related to surgical risks and breaks or delays in oncological treatment, in particular when curative intent resection is not possible (that is non-therapeutic laparotomy). The aim of this study was to assess the incidence and oncological impact of a non-therapeutic laparotomy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated with induction (m)FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy. METHODS: This was a retrospective international multicentre study including patients diagnosed with pathology-proven locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated with at least one cycle of (m)FOLFIRINOX (2012-2019). Patients undergoing a non-therapeutic laparotomy (group A) were compared with those not undergoing surgery (group B) and those undergoing resection (group C). RESULTS: Overall, 663 patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer were included (67 patients (10.1%) in group A, 425 patients (64.1%) in group B, and 171 patients (25.8%) in group C). A non-therapeutic laparotomy occurred in 28.2% of all explorations (67 of 238), with occult metastases in 30 patients (30 of 67, 44.8%) and a 90-day mortality rate of 3.0% (2 of 67). Administration of palliative therapy (65.9% versus 73.1%; P = 0.307) and median overall survival (20.4 [95% c.i. 15.9 to 27.3] versus 20.2 [95% c.i. 19.1 to 22.7] months; P = 0.752) did not differ between group A and group B respectively. The median overall survival in group C was 36.1 (95% c.i. 30.5 to 41.2) months. The 5-year overall survival rates were 11.4%, 8.7%, and 24.7% in group A, group B, and group C, respectively. Compared with group B, non-therapeutic laparotomy (group A) was not associated with reduced overall survival (HR = 0.88 [95% c.i. 0.61 to 1.27]). CONCLUSION: More than a quarter of surgically explored patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer after induction (m)FOLFIRINOX did not undergo a resection. Such non-therapeutic laparotomy does not appear to substantially impact oncological outcomes.

Clinical Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Different Neoadjuvant Strategies in the Treatment of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we retrospectively analysed the efficacy and safety of three treatment models, namely, short-course radiotherapy sequential XELOX chemotherapy, neoadjuvant mFOLFOX6 concurrent radiotherapy and long-course concurrent radiotherapy with total mesorectal excision (TME) after treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer with high-risk factors. METHODS: We collected clinical data on 177 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (cT3-4 and/or cN+) who were treated at the Department of Abdominal Oncology of the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Guizhou Medical University from December 2017 to December 2022. All patients were associated with 2-3 risk factors [T4b, N2, Extramural Vascular Invasion (EMVI), Mesorectal Fascia (MRF) positivity], positive lateral lymph nodes. Among them, there were 45 cases in the short course radiotherapy sequential XELOX chemotherapy group (RT + XELOX group); 64 cases in the neoadjuvant mFOLFOX6 concurrent radiotherapy group (mFOLFOX6 + CRT group); and 68 cases in the long course concurrent radiotherapy group (CRT group). The RT + XELOX group and mFOLFOX6 + CRT group completed radiotherapy and 4 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, respectively, and then rested for 1-2 weeks before TME surgery; the CRT group completed concurrent radiotherapy and then rested for 6-8 weeks before TME surgery.Adjuvant chemotherapy was conducted after surgery in each of the three groups: 2 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy with XELOX regimen in the RT + XELOX group, 4-6 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy with mFOLFOX6 in the mFOLFOX6 + CRT group, and 8-12 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy with mFOLFOX6 in the CRT group.The pathological complete response rate (pCR rate), tumour downstage rate, tumour complete resection rate (R0 resection rate), local recurrence rate, distant metastasis rate, overall survival rate, incidence of adverse reactions, surgical complications and completion rate of perioperative systemic chemotherapy were compared among patients in the three groups of cases after TME. RESULTS: The pCR rate (21.95% vs 17.24% vs 5.00%, p = 0.034) and and tumour downstage rate (78.05% vs 68.97% vs 53.33%, p = 0.029) were higher in the RT + XELOX group and mFOLFOX6 + CRT group compared to the CRT group. The RT + XELOX group had a lower 3-year distant metastasis rate (14.63% vs 36.67%, p = 0.048) and improved 3-year overall survival (76.57% vs 48.56%, p < 0.001) compared to the CRT group. There was no significant reduction in the 3-year distant metastasis rate in the mFOLFOX6 + CRT group versus the CRT group (27.59% vs 36.67%, p = 0.719), and the 3-year overall survival was similar (51.23% vs 48.56%, p = 0.35). Multi-logistic regression analysis and stratified analysis showed that patients in the RT + XELOX group and mFOLFOX6 + CRT group were more likely to achieve pCR than the CRT group (RT + XELOX group: OR 7.3, 95% CI [2.6-20.8], p < 0.001; mFOLFOX6 + CRT group OR 2.9, 95% CI [1.1-7.9], p = 0.036). The completion rates of perioperative systemic chemotherapy in the RT + XELOX, mFOLFOX6 + CRT, and CRT groups were 82.93% vs. 84.48% vs. 61.67% (χ2=9.95, p = 0.007), respectively. And there were significant differences in grade 3-4 leukopenia and thrombocytopenia (incidence of leukopenia: 15.50% vs. 7.81% vs. 1.47%, p = 0.045; incidence of thrombocytopenia: 13.33% vs 7.81% vs 1.47%, p = 0.027). There was no significant difference in the incidence of intraoperative and postoperative complications among the three groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: RT + XELOX group and mFOLFOX6 + CRT group significantly improved the near-term outcome (e.g., pCR rate) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer with high-risk factors compared with CRT group. The RT + XELOX group also reduced the 3-year distant metastasis rate, increased the 3-year overall survival rate, and did not increase the incidence of perioperative surgical complications. It provides an effective means for the comprehensive treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer and has important clinical guidance and application value.

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma third line systemic treatments: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) primarily relies on FOLFIRINOX (LV5FU- irinotecan - Oxaliplatine) and Gemcitabine - Nab-Paclitaxel in the first-line setting. However, second-lines remain less well-defined and there is limited data regarding third-line treatments. The objective of our study was to determine the proportion of patients advancing to third line chemotherapy, to outline the various third-line chemotherapy regimens used in routine practice and to evaluate their respective efficacy. METHODS: A retrospective single-center cohort from 2010-2022 compiled baseline characteristics, treatment outcomes and survival of PDAC patients who received at least one chemotherapy line in a French tertiary-center. Overall survivals (OS) were analyzed using a Cox multivariable model. RESULTS: In total, 676 patients were included, with a median follow-up time of 69.4 months, (Interquartile Range (IQR) = 72.1). Of these, 251 patients (37%) that proceeded to 3rd-line chemotherapy. The median PFS in 3rd line was 2.03 months, [CI95%: 1.83, 2.36]. The median 3rd line overall survival was 5.5 months, [CI95%: 4.8, 6.3]. In multivariable analysis erlotinib-based chemotherapy was found to be deleterious (HR=2.38, [CI95%: 1.30, 4.34], p=0.005) compared to fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy in terms of 3rd line overall survival while gemcitabine monotherapy showed a tendency towards negative outcomes. First and 2nd line chemotherapies sequence didn't influence 3rd line outcome. CONCLUSION: In our cohort, one-third of treated patients proceeded to 3rd line chemotherapy resulting in a 5.5 months median 3rd line OS, consistent with treatments at advanced stage. Our results argue against the use of erlotinib and gemcitabine monotherapy.

Combination of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy with FOLFOX compared with adjuvant chemotherapy in management of locally advanced rectal cancers: a randomized trial of a promising therapeutic approach.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a significant malignancy with widespread implications. Despite progress in surgical interventions for rectal cancer, improvements in overall prognosis remain disproportionate. Standard preoperative chemoradiation, while established as the standard treatment for the majority of rectal cancers, exhibits limited effectiveness in enhancing disease-free survival (DFS) and mitigating distant metastases, particularly in cases of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). METHODS: This randomised clinical trial assessed 286 patients with LARC in two paralleled groups. Group A underwent six courses of neoadjuvant MFOLFOX chemotherapy, chemoradiation, surgery, and six adjuvant chemotherapy cycles. Group B received concurrent chemoradiation, surgery, and twelve adjuvant chemotherapy cycles. Patient evaluations were achieved at multiple stages of treatment and follow-up. RESULTS: Group A had significantly lower local recurrence (11.64%) than Group B (21.74%, P = 0.025). The distant metastasis rate in Group A (8.90%) was lower than in Group B (20.29%) but was not significant (p = 0.143). More patients in Group A experienced downstaging (80.82% vs. 60.87%, p < 0.001). Specifically, 72.60% demonstrated downstaging of tumour invasion and 54.79% downstaging of lymph node involvement, compared to 57.25% and 41.30% in Group B (p = 0.009 and p = 0.025, respectively) as well as higher pCR rate (26.03% vs. 15.25%, p = 0.030) and three-year DFS rate (82.19% vs. 71.01%, p = 0.035) in group A compare to group B. CONCLUSION: This innovative strategy for LARC showed promising results with lower local recurrence and higher rates of downstaging and pCR. Treatment side effects were similar in both groups but less frequent in Group A. Anaemia was the most common haematological side effect (A: 58%, B: 68%), and peripheral sensory neuropathy was the most common non-haematological complication (A: 63%, B: 64%). These findings suggest this regimen could be a valuable therapeutic approach for LARC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered on 2023-12-08 within the IRCT.IR database under the number IRCT20210308050628N1.

Safety of first-line systemic therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety of first-line systemic therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer through network meta-analysis. METHODS: The literature from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases was searched from the inception of the databases to August 15, 2023, and strict inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to screen studies. The Cochrane Bias Risk Assessment Tool (RoB 2.0) was used to evaluate the quality of the included literature. Network meta-analysis was conducted using Stata 15.0 and R4.3.1 software to compare the incidence of adverse events (AEs) among different treatment regimens. RESULTS: A total of 53 randomized controlled trials, involving 17,351 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), were ultimately included, encompassing 29 different therapeutic approaches. According to SUCRA rankings, the CAPOX regimen is most likely to rank first in terms of safety, while the FOLFOXIRI + panitumumab regimen is most likely to rank last. In terms of specific AEs, the CAPOX regimen, whether used alone or in combination with targeted drugs (bevacizumab and cetuximab), is associated with a reduced risk of neutropenia and febrile neutropenia, as well as an increased risk of thrombocytopenia and diarrhea. The FOLFOX regimen, with or without bevacizumab, is linked to an increased risk of neutropenia and peripheral sensory neuropathy. The FOLFIRI/CAPIRI + bevacizumab regimen is associated with a reduced risk of peripheral sensory neuropathy. S-1 and S-1 + oxaliplatin are well-tolerated in terms of gastrointestinal reactions. The FOLFOXIRI regimen, whether used alone or in combination with targeted drugs, is associated with various AEs. CONCLUSION: In summary, the CAPOX regimen may be the safest option among the first-line systemic treatment regimens for mCRC patients, while the FOLFOXIRI + panitumumab regimen may be associated with a higher incidence of grade 3 or higher AEs.

Association of oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant duration with post-treatment fall-related injury and fracture in patients with stage III colon cancer: a population-based retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: Oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy yields a significant survival benefit in stage III colon cancer and is the standard of care. Simultaneously, it causes dose-dependent peripheral neuropathy that may increase the risk of fall-related injury (FRI) such as fracture and laceration. Because these events carry significant morbidity and the global burden of colon cancer is on the rise, we examined the association between treatment with a full versus shortened course of adjuvant chemotherapy and post-treatment FRI and fracture. METHODS: In this overlap propensity score weighted, retrospective cohort study, we included patients aged ≥ 18 years with resected stage III colon cancer diagnosed 2007-2019 and treated with oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy (oxaliplatin plus a fluoropyrimidine; capecitabine [CAPOX] or 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin [FOLFOX]). Propensity score methods facilitate the separation of design from analysis and comparison of baseline characteristics across the weighted groups. Treatment groups were defined as 50% (4 cycles CAPOX/6 cycles FOLFOX) and > 85% (7-8 cycles CAPOX/11-12 cycles FOLFOX) of a maximal course of adjuvant chemotherapy to approximate the treatment durations received in the IDEA collaboration. The main outcomes were time to any FRI and time to fracture. We determined the subdistribution hazard ratios (sHR) estimating the association between FRI/fracture and treatment group, accounting for the competing risk of death. RESULTS: We included 3,461 patients; 473 (13.7%) received 50% and 2,988 (86.3%) received > 85% of a maximal course of adjuvant therapy. For post-treatment FRI, median follow-up was 4.6 years and total follow-up was 17,968 person-years. There were 508 FRI, 301 fractures, and 692 deaths. Treatment with > 85% of a maximal course of therapy conferred a sHR of 0.84 (95% CI 0.62-1.13) for post-treatment FRI and a sHR of 0.72 (95% CI 0.49-1.06) for post-treatment fracture. CONCLUSION: For patients with stage III colon cancer undergoing treatment with oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy, any potential neuropathy associated with longer durations of treatment was not found to result in greater rates of FRI and fracture. Within the limits of this retrospective study, our findings suggest concern about FRI, while mechanistically plausible, ought not to determine treatment duration.

Alliance A022104/NRG-GI010: The Janus Rectal Cancer Trial: a randomized phase II/III trial testing the efficacy of triplet versus doublet chemotherapy regarding clinical complete response and disease-free survival in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Recent data have demonstrated that in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), a total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) approach improves compliance with chemotherapy and increases rates of tumor response compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) alone. They further indicate that the optimal sequencing of TNT involves consolidation (rather than induction) chemotherapy to optimize complete response rates. Data, largely from retrospective studies, have also shown that patients with clinical complete response (cCR) after TNT may be managed safely with the watch and wait approach (WW) instead of preemptive total mesorectal resection (TME). However, the optimal consolidation chemotherapy regimen to achieve cCR has not been established, and a randomized clinical trial has not robustly evaluated cCR as a primary endpoint. Collaborating with a multidisciplinary oncology team and patient groups, we designed this NCI-sponsored study of chemotherapy intensification to address these issues and to drive up cCR rates, to provide opportunity for organ preservation, improve quality of life for patients and improve survival outcomes. METHODS: In this NCI-sponsored multi-group randomized, seamless phase II/III trial (1:1), up to 760 patients with LARC, T4N0, any T with node positive disease (any T, N +) or T3N0 requiring abdominoperineal resection or coloanal anastomosis and distal margin within 12 cm of anal verge will be enrolled. Stratification factors include tumor stage (T4 vs T1-3), nodal stage (N + vs N0) and distance from anal verge (0-4; 4-8; 8-12 cm). Patients will be randomized to receive neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiation (LCRT) followed by consolidation doublet (mFOLFOX6 or CAPOX) or triplet chemotherapy (mFOLFIRINOX) for 3-4 months. LCRT in both arms involves 4500 cGy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks + 900 cGy boost in 5 fractions with a fluoropyrimidine (capecitabine preferred). Patients will undergo assessment 8-12 (± 4) weeks post-TNT completion. The primary endpoint for the phase II portion will compare cCR between treatment arms. A total number of 312 evaluable patients (156 per arm) will provide statistical power of 90.5% to detect a 17% increase in cCR rate, at a one-sided alpha = 0.048. The primary endpoint for the phase III portion will compare disease-free survival (DFS) between treatment arms. A total of 285 DFS events will provide 85% power to detect an effect size of hazard ratio 0.70 at a one-sided alpha of 0.025, requiring enrollment of 760 patients (380 per arm). Secondary objectives include time-to event outcomes (overall survival, organ preservation time and time to distant metastasis) and adverse event rates. Biospecimens including archival tumor tissue, plasma and buffy coat, and serial rectal MRIs will be collected for exploratory correlative research. This study, activated in late 2022, is open across the NCTN and had accrued 330 patients as of May 2024. Study support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24 CA196171; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . DISCUSSION: Building on data from modern day rectal cancer trials and patient input from national advocacy groups, we have designed The Janus Rectal Cancer Trial studying chemotherapy intensification via a consolidation chemotherapy approach with the intent to enhance cCR and DFS rates, increase organ preservation rates, and improve quality of life for patients with rectal cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT05610163; Support includes U10CA180868 (NRG) and U10CA180888 (SWOG).

Cost-effectiveness of ivosidenib versus chemotherapy for previously treated IDH1-mutant advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in Taiwan.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend ivosidenib followed by modified FOLFOX (mFOLFOX) for advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) with isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutations. Taiwan National Health Insurance covers only fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) chemotherapy for this ICC group, and there has been no prior economic evaluation of ivosidenib. Therefore, we aimed to assess ivosidenib's cost-effectiveness in previously treated, advanced ICC-presenting IDH1 mutations compared with mFOLFOX or 5-FU/LV. METHODS: A 3-state partitioned survival model was employed to assess ivosidenib's cost-effectiveness over a 10-year horizon with a 3% discount rate, setting the willingness-to-pay threshold at 3 times the 2022 GDP per capita. Efficacy data for Ivosidenib, mFOLFOX, and 5-FU/LV were sourced from the ClarIDHy, ABC06, and NIFTY trials, respectively. Ivosidenib's cost was assumed to be NT$10,402/500 mg. Primary outcomes included incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and net monetary benefit. Deterministic sensitivity analyses (DSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were employed to evaluate uncertainty and explore price reduction scenarios. RESULTS: Ivosidenib exhibited ICERs of NT$6,268,528 and NT$5,670,555 compared with mFOLFOX and 5-FU/LV, respectively, both exceeding the established threshold. PSA revealed that ivosidenib was unlikely to be cost-effective, except when it was reduced to NT$4,161 and NT$5,201/500 mg when compared with mFOLFOX and 5-FU/LV, respectively. DSA underscored the significant influence of ivosidenib's cost and utility values on estimate uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: At NT$10,402/500 mg, ivosidenib was not cost-effective for IDH1-mutant ICC patients compared with mFOLFOX or 5-FU/LV, indicating that a 50-60% price reduction is necessary for ivosidenib to be cost-effective in this patient group.

Clinical outcomes of second-line therapy following disease progression on first-line modified FOLFIRINOX for borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX) is one of the standard first-line therapies in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer (LAPC). However, there is no globally accepted second-line therapy following progression on mFOLFIRINOX. METHODS: Patients with BRPC and LAPC (n = 647) treated with first-line mFOLFIRINOX between January 2017 and December 2020 were included in this retrospective analysis. The details of the treatment outcomes and patterns of subsequent therapy after mFOLFIRINOX were reviewed. RESULTS: With a median follow-up duration of 44.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 42.3-47.6), 322 patients exhibited disease progression on mFOLFIRINOX-locoregional progression only in 177 patients (55.0%) and distant metastasis in 145 patients (45.0%). The locoregional progression group demonstrated significantly longer post-progression survival (PPS) than that of the distant metastasis group (10.1 vs. 7.3 months, p = 0.002). In the locoregional progression group, survival outcomes did not differ between second-line chemoradiation/radiotherapy and systemic chemotherapy (progression-free survival with second-line therapy [PFS-2], 3.2 vs. 4.3 months; p = 0.649; PPS, 10.7 vs. 10.2 months; p = 0.791). In patients who received second-line systemic chemotherapy following progression on mFOLFIRINOX (n = 211), gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel was associated with better disease control rates (69.2% vs. 42.3%, p = 0.005) and PFS-2 (3.8 vs. 1.7 months, p = 0.035) than gemcitabine monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The current study showed the real-world practice pattern of subsequent therapy and clinical outcomes following progression on first-line mFOLFIRINOX in BRPC and LAPC. Further investigation is necessary to establish the optimal therapy after failure of mFOLFIRINOX.

A real-world analysis of second-line treatment option, gemcitabine plus anlotinib and anti-PD1, in advanced pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: In the second-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer (APC), there is only one approved regimen based on the phase III NAPOLI-1 trial. However, for patients progressing after Nab-paclitaxel and Gemcitabine (Nab-P/Gem) or Nab-P combinations, second-line treatment were very limited. METHODS: This is a retrospective single-center analysis of patients. Our aim was to determine the effectiveness and tolerability of a novel regimen, gemcitabine plus Anlotinib and anti-PD1, in APC patients and to compare it with oxaliplatin, irinotecan, leucovorin, and fluorouracil (FOLFIRINOX) in the second-line setting who have failed on the first-line Nab-P combinations. RESULTS: In total, twenty-three patients received Gemcitabine plus Anlotinib and anti-PD1 in the second-line, 28 patients were treated with FOLFORINOX. There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) or progression free survival (PFS) for either of the two sequences (p > 0.05). Patients who received Gemcitabine plus Anlotinib and anti-PD1 had a median PFS of 4.0 months (95% CI: 1.1-6.9) versus 3.5 months (95% CI 1.8-5.2) in FOLFORINOX group (p = 0.953). The median OS of Gemcitabine plus Anlotinib and anti-PD1 was 9.0 months (95% CI: 4.0-13.7) and 8.0 months (95% CI: 5.5-10.5) in FOLFORINOX group (p = 0.373). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) occurred for 13% of patients with Gemcitabine plus Anlotinib and anti-PD1 and 40% for FOLFORINOX. CONCLUSION: Our data confirms the effectiveness of Gemcitabine plus Anlotinib and anti-PD1 as a well-tolerated regimen in the second-line treatment of APC and extends available data on its use as a second-line treatment option when compared with FOLFIRINOX.

Impact of previous S-1 treatment on efficacy of liposomal irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Liposomal irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV) provides survival benefits for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) refractory to gemcitabine-based treatment, mainly gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GA), in current practice. Gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS) is another commonly administered first-line regimen before nab-paclitaxel reimbursement; however, the efficacy and safety of nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV for mPDAC after failed GS treatment has not been reported and was therefore explored in this study. METHODS: In total, 177 patients with mPDAC received first-line GS or GA treatment, followed by second-line nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV treatment (identified from a multicenter retrospective cohort in Taiwan from 2018 to 2020); 85 and 92 patients were allocated to the GS and GA groups, respectively. Overall survival (OS), time-to-treatment failure (TTF), and adverse events were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics of the two groups were generally similar; however, a higher median age (67 versus 62 years, p < 0.001) and fewer liver metastases (52% versus 78%, p < 0.001) were observed in the GS versus GA group. The median OS was 15.0 and 15.9 months in the GS and GA groups, respectively (p = 0.58). The TTF (3.1 versus 2.8 months, p = 0.36) and OS (7.6 versus 6.7 months, p = 0.83) after nal-IRI treatment were similar between the two groups. More patients in the GS group developed mucositis during nal-IRI treatment (15% versus 4%, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of second-line nal-IRI +5-FU/LV treatment was unaffected by prior S-1 exposure. GS followed by nal-IRI treatment is an alternative treatment sequence for patients with mPDAC.