NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Rectal Cancer, Version 3.2024.

The determination of an optimal treatment plan for an individual patient with rectal cancer is a complex process. In addition to decisions relating to the intent of rectal cancer surgery (ie, curative or palliative), consideration must also be given to the likely functional results of treatment, including the probability of maintaining or restoring normal bowel function/anal continence and preserving genitourinary functions. Particularly for patients with distal rectal cancer, finding a balance between curative-intent therapy while having minimal impact on quality of life can be challenging. Furthermore, the risk of pelvic recurrence is higher in patients with rectal cancer compared with those with colon cancer, and locally recurrent rectal cancer is associated with a poor prognosis. Careful patient selection and the use of sequenced multimodality therapy following a multidisciplinary approach is recommended. These NCCN Guidelines Insights detail recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer, including the addition of endoscopic submucosal dissection as an option for early-stage rectal cancer, updates to the total neoadjuvant therapy approach based on the results of recent clinical trials, and the addition of a "watch-and-wait" nonoperative management approach for clinical complete responders to neoadjuvant therapy.

Colon Cancer, Version 3.2024, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most frequently diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Management of disseminated metastatic CRC involves various active drugs, either in combination or as single agents. The choice of therapy is based on consideration of the goals of therapy, the type and timing of prior therapy, the mutational profile of the tumor, and the differing toxicity profiles of the constituent drugs. This manuscript summarizes the data supporting the systemic therapy options recommended for metastatic CRC in the NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy plus rucosopasem in locally advanced or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: GRECO-2 phase II study design.

Ablative doses of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) may improve pancreatic cancer outcomes but may carry greater potential for gastrointestinal toxicity. Rucosopasem, an investigational selective dismutase mimetic that converts superoxide to hydrogen peroxide, can potentially increase tumor control of SBRT without compromising safety. GRECO-2 is a phase II, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of rucosopasem in combination with SBRT in locally advanced or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Patients will be randomized to rucosopasem 100 mg or placebo via intravenous infusion over 15 min, before each SBRT fraction (5 × 10 Gy). The primary end point is overall survival. Secondary end points include progression-free survival, locoregional control, time to metastasis, surgical resection rate, best overall response, in-field local response and acute and long-term toxicity.

The use of high doses of radiation delivered directly to tumors (stereotactic body radiation therapy [SBRT]) may improve survival compared with lower doses of radiation in patients with pancreatic cancer, but it may increase side effects. Rucosopasem, an investigational new drug being developed, can potentially improve the ability of SBRT to treat tumors without decreasing safety. In a previous study, median overall survival was improved when patients were treated with SBRT plus avasopasem, a drug that works the same way as rucosopasem. GRECO-2 is a clinical trial of rucosopasem used in combination with SBRT for treatment of localized pancreatic cancer. Patients will be randomly selected to receive either rucosopasem 100 mg or placebo via intravenous infusion over 15 min, before each SBRT treatment. The main result being studied is overall survival. Additional results include amount of time before tumors start to grow, how often patients get tumors surgically removed, best overall response and long-term safety. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04698915 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Imbalanced specialty representation of USMLE and NBME test writers.

PURPOSE: The United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) is an examination series required for allopathic physician licensure in the United States (US). USMLE content is created and maintained by the National Board of Medical Examinations (NBME). The specialty composition of the USMLE and NBME taskforce members involved in the creation of examination content is currently unknown. METHODS: Using the 2021 USMLE and 2021 NBME Committees and Task Forces documents, we determined each member's board-certified primary specialty and involvement in test material development committees who we dubbed "test writers". Total active physicians by primary specialty were recorded from the 2020 Physician Specialty Data Report published by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC). Descriptive statistics and chi-square analysis were used to analyze the cohorts. RESULTS: The USMLE and NBME test writer primary specialty composition was found to be significantly different compared to the US active physician population (USMLE χ2[32] = 172, p < .001 and NBME χ2[32] = 200, p < .001). Only nineteen specialties were represented within USMLE test writers, with three specialties being proportionally represented. Two specialties were represented within NBME test writers. Obstetrics and Gynecology physicians were proportionally represented in USMLE but not within NBME test writers. Internal Medicine (IM) accounts for the largest percentage of all USMLE test writers (60/197, 30%) with an excess representation of 31 individuals. CONCLUSIONS: There is an imbalance in the specialty representation of USMLE and NBME test writers compared to the US active physician population. These findings may have implications for the unbiased and accurate portrayal of topics in such national examinations; thus, future investigation is warranted.

Radiation Oncology Resident Education: Is Change Needed?

Leading successful change efforts first requires assessment of the "before change" environment and culture. At our institution, the radiation oncology (RO) residents follow a longitudinal didactic learning program consisting of weekly 1-h lectures, case conferences, and journal clubs. The resident didactic education series format has not changed since its inception over 10 years ago. We evaluated the perceptions of current residents and faculty about the effectiveness of the curriculum in its present form. Two parallel surveys were designed, one each for residents and attendings, to assess current attitudes regarding the effectiveness and need for change in the RO residency curriculum, specifically the traditional didactic lectures, the journal club sessions, and the case conferences. We also investigated perceived levels of engagement among residents and faculty, whether self-assessments would be useful to increase material retention, and how often the content of didactic lectures is updated. Surveys were distributed individually to each resident (N = 10) and attending (N = 24) either in-person or via Zoom. Following completion of the survey, respondents were informally interviewed about their perspectives on the curriculum's strengths and weaknesses. Compared to 46% of attendings, 80% of RO residents believed that the curriculum should be changed. Twenty percent of residents felt that the traditional didactic lectures were effective in preparing them to manage patients in the clinic, compared to 74% of attendings. Similarly, 10% of residents felt that the journal club sessions were effective vs. 42% of attendings. Finally, 40% of residents felt that the case conferences were effective vs. 67% of attendings. Overall, most respondents (56%) favored change in the curriculum. Our results suggest that the perceptions of the residents did not align with those of the attending physicians with respect to the effectiveness of the curriculum and the need for change. The discrepancies between resident and faculty views highlight the importance of a dedicated change management effort to mitigate this gap. Based on this project, we plan to propose recommended changes in structure to the residency program directors. Main changes would be to increase the interactive nature of the course material, incorporate more ways to increase faculty engagement, and consider self-assessment questions to promote retention. Once we get approval from the residency program leadership, we will follow Kotter's "Eight steps to transforming your organization" to ensure the highest potential for faculty to accept the expectations of a new curriculum.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy with or without selective dismutase mimetic in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: an adaptive, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1b/2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has the potential to ablate localised pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Selective dismutase mimetics sensitise tumours while reducing normal tissue toxicity. This trial was designed to establish the efficacy and toxicity afforded by the selective dismutase mimetic avasopasem manganese when combined with ablative SBRT for localised pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: In this adaptive, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1b/2 trial, patients aged 18 years or older with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer who had received at least 3 months of chemotherapy and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled at six academic sites in the USA. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1), with block randomisation (block sizes of 6-12) with a maximum of 24 patients per group, to receive daily avasopasem (90 mg) or placebo intravenously directly before (ie, within 180 min) SBRT (50, 55, or 60 Gy in five fractions, adaptively assigned in real time by Bayesian estimates of 90-day safety and efficacy). Patients and physicians were masked to treatment group allocation, but not to SBRT dose. The primary objective was to find the optimal dose of SBRT with avasopasem or placebo as determined by the late onset EffTox method. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03340974, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Jan 25, 2018, and April 29, 2020, 47 patients were screened, of whom 42 were enrolled (median age was 71 years [IQR 63-75], 23 [55%] were male, 19 [45%] were female, 37 [88%] were White, three [7%] were Black, and one [2%] each were unknown or other races) and randomly assigned to avasopasem (n=24) or placebo (n=18); the placebo group was terminated early after failing to meet prespecified efficacy parameters. At data cutoff (June 28, 2021), the avasopasem group satisfied boundaries for both efficacy and toxicity. Late onset EffTox efficacy response was observed in 16 (89%) of 18 patients at 50 Gy and six (100%) of six patients at 55 Gy in the avasopasem group, and was observed in three (50%) of six patients at 50 Gy and nine (75%) of 12 patients at 55 Gy in the placebo group, and the Bayesian model recommended 50 Gy or 55 Gy in five fractions with avasopasem for further study. Serious adverse events of any cause were reported in three (17%) of 18 patients in the placebo group and six (25%) of 24 in the avasopasem group. In the placebo group, grade 3 adverse events within 90 days of SBRT were abdominal pain, acute cholangitis, pyrexia, increased blood lactic acid, and increased lipase (one [6%] each); no grade 4 events occurred. In the avasopasem group, grade 3-4 adverse events within 90 days of SBRT were acute kidney injury, increased blood alkaline phosphatase, haematoma, colitis, gastric obstruction, lung infection, abdominal abscess, post-surgical atrial fibrillation, and pneumonia leading to respiratory failure (one [4%] each).There were no treatment-related deaths but one late death in the avasopasem group due to sepsis in the setting of duodenal obstruction after off-study treatment was reported as potentially related to SBRT. INTERPRETATION: SBRT that uses 50 or 55 Gy in five fractions can be considered for patients with localised pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. The addition of avasopasem might further enhance disease outcomes. A larger phase 2 trial (GRECO-2, NCT04698915) is underway to validate these results. FUNDING: Galera Therapeutics.

FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine-based Chemotherapy for Borderline Resectable and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Multi-institutional, Patient-Level, Meta-analysis and Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer often presents as locally advanced (LAPC) or borderline resectable (BRPC). Neoadjuvant systemic therapy is recommended as initial treatment. It is currently unclear what chemotherapy should be preferred for patients with BRPC or LAPC. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and multi-institutional meta-analysis of patient-level data regarding the use of initial systemic therapy for BRPC and LAPC. Outcomes were reported separately for tumor entity and by chemotherapy regimen including FOLFIRINOX (FIO) or gemcitabine-based. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies comprising 2930 patients were analyzed for overall survival (OS) calculated from the beginning of systemic treatment. OS for patients with BRPC was 22.0 months with FIO, 16.9 months with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (Gem/nab), 21.6 months with gemcitabine/cisplatin or oxaliplatin or docetaxel or capecitabine (GemX), and 10 months with gemcitabine monotherapy (Gem-mono) (p < 0.0001). In patients with LAPC, OS also was higher with FIO (17.1 months) compared with Gem/nab (12.5 months), GemX (12.3 months), and Gem-mono (9.4 months; p < 0.0001). This difference was driven by the patients who did not undergo surgery, where FIO was superior to other regimens. The resection rates for patients with BRPC were 0.55 for gemcitabine-based chemotherapy and 0.53 with FIO. In patients with LAPC, resection rates were 0.19 with Gemcitabine and 0.28 with FIO. In resected patients, OS for patients with BRPC was 32.9 months with FIO and not different compared to Gem/nab, (28.6 months, p = 0.285), GemX (38.8 months, p = 0.1), or Gem-mono (23.1 months, p = 0.083). A similar trend was observed in resected patients converted from LAPC. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with BRPC or LAPC, primary treatment with FOLFIRINOX compared with Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy appears to provide a survival benefit for patients that are ultimately unresectable. For patients that undergo surgical resection, outcomes are similar between GEM+ and FOLFIRINOX when delivered in the neoadjuvant setting.

Anal Carcinoma, Version 2.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

This discussion summarizes the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines for managing squamous cell anal carcinoma, which represents the most common histologic form of the disease. A multidisciplinary approach including physicians from gastroenterology, medical oncology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology, and radiology is necessary. Primary treatment of perianal cancer and anal canal cancer are similar and include chemoradiation in most cases. Follow-up clinical evaluations are recommended for all patients with anal carcinoma because additional curative-intent treatment is possible. Biopsy-proven evidence of locally recurrent or persistent disease after primary treatment may require surgical treatment. Systemic therapy is generally recommended for extrapelvic metastatic disease. Recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Anal Carcinoma include staging classification updates based on the 9th edition of the AJCC Staging System and updates to the systemic therapy recommendations based on new data that better define optimal treatment of patients with metastatic anal carcinoma.

Ablative 5-Fraction Stereotactic MRI-Guided Adaptive Radiotherapy for Oligometastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) carries a poor prognosis and significant morbidity from local tumor progression. We investigated outcomes among oligometastatic PDAC patients treated with stereotactic magnetic resonance image-guided ablative radiotherapy (SMART) to primary disease. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multi-institutional analysis of oligometastatic PDAC at diagnosis or with metachronous oligoprogression during induction chemotherapy treated with primary tumor SMART. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), freedom from locoregional failure (FFLRF), and freedom from distant failure (FFDF). Acute and late toxicity were reported and in exploratory analyses patients were stratified by the number of metastases, SMART indication, and addition of metastasis-directed therapy. RESULTS: From 2019 to 2021, 22 patients with oligometastatic PDAC (range: 1-6 metastases) received SMART to the primary tumor with a median follow-up of 11.2 months from SMART. Nineteen patients had de novo synchronous metastatic disease and three had metachronous oligoprogression. Metastasis location most commonly was liver only (40.9%), multiple organs (27.3%), lungs only (13.6%), or abdominal/pelvic nodes (13.6%). All patients received either FOLFIRINOX (64%) or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (36%) followed by SMART (median 50 Gy, 5 fractions) for local control (77%), pain control (14%), or local progression (9%). Additionally, 41% of patients received other metastasis-directed treatments. The median OS from diagnosis and SMART was 23.9 months and 11.6 months, respectively. Calculated from SMART, the median PFS was 2.4 months with 91% of patients having distant progression, and 1-year local control was 68. Two patients (9%) experienced grade 3 toxicities, gastric outlet obstruction, and gastrointestinal bleed without grade 4 or 5 toxicity. CONCLUSION: There was minimal morbidity of local disease progression after SMART in this cohort of oligometastatic PDAC. As systemic therapy options improve, additional strategies to identify patients who may derive benefits from local consolidation or metastasis-directed therapy are needed.

Multi-Institutional Outcomes of Patients Aged 75 years and Older With Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Treated With 5-Fraction Ablative Stereotactic Magnetic Resonance Image-Guided Adaptive Radiation Therapy (A-SMART).

PURPOSE: Treatment options for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are commonly limited for patients with advanced age due to medical comorbidities and/or poor performance status. These patients may not be candidates for more aggressive chemotherapy regimens and/or surgical resection leaving few, if any, other effective treatments. Ablative stereotactic MRI-guided adaptive radiation therapy (A-SMART) is both efficacious and safe for PDAC and can achieve excellent long-term local control, however, the appropriateness of A-SMART for elderly patients with inoperable PDAC is not well understood. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of inoperable non-metastatic PDAC patients aged 75 years or older treated on the MRIdian Linac at 2 institutions. Clinical outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and locoregional (LRC). Toxicity was graded according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE, v5). RESULTS: A total of 49 patients were evaluated with a median age of 81 years (range, 75-91) and a median follow-up of 14 months from diagnosis. PDAC was classified as locally advanced (46.9%), borderline resectable (36.7%), or medically inoperable (16.3%). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was delivered to 84% of patients and all received A-SMART to a median 50 Gy (range, 40-50 Gy) in 5 fractions. 1 Year LRC, PFS, and OS were 88.9%, 53.8%, and 78.9%, respectively. Nine patients (18%) had resection after A-SMART and benefited from PFS improvement (26 vs 6 months, P = .01). ECOG PS <2 was the only predictor of improved OS on multivariate analysis. Acute and late grade 3 + toxicity rates were 8.2% and 4.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A-SMART is associated with encouraging LRC and OS in elderly patients with initially inoperable PDAC. This novel non-invasive treatment strategy appears to be well-tolerated in patients with advanced age and should be considered in this population that has limited treatment options.

Radioembolization with Yttrium-90 Glass Microspheres as a First-Line Treatment for Unresectable Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma-A Prospective Feasibility Study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of yttrium-90 (90Y) radioembolization as first-line treatment for unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study enrolled patients who had never received chemotherapy, liver embolization, and radiation therapy. The tumors were solitary in 16 patients, multiple in 8 patients, unilobar in 14 patients, and bilobar in 10 patients. Patients underwent transarterial radioembolization with 90Y-labeled glass microspheres. The primary end point was hepatic progression-free survival (HPFS). Secondary end points were overall survival (OS), tumor response, and toxicity. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients (age, 72.3 years ± 9.3; 12 women) were included in the study. The median delivered radiation dose was 135.5 Gy (interquartile range, 77.6 Gy). The median HPFS was 5.5 months (95% CI, 3.9-7.0 months). Analysis failed to identify any prognostic factor associated with HPFS. Imaging response at 3 months showed 56% disease control, and the best radiographic response was 71% disease control. The median OS from the radioembolization treatment was 19.4 months (95% CI, 5.0-33.7). Patients with solitary ICC had significantly longer median OS than patients with multifocal ICC: 25.9 months (95% CI, 20.8-31.0 months) versus 10.7 months (95% CI, 8.0-13.4 months) (P = .02). Patients with progression on the 3-month imaging follow-up had significantly shorter median OS than patients who had stable disease at 3 months: 10.7 months (95% CI, 0.7-20.7 months) versus 37.3 months (95% CI, 16.5-58.1 months) (P = .003). Two (8%) Grade 3 toxicities were reported. CONCLUSIONS: First-line treatment of ICC with radioembolization showed promising OS and minimal toxicity, especially in patients with solitary tumor. Radioembolization may be considered as a first-line treatment option for unresectable ICC.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and stereotactic body radiation therapy for borderline resectable pancreas adenocarcinoma: influence of vascular margin status and type of chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The influence of chemotherapy type and vascular margin status after sequential chemotherapy and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) is unknown. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on BRPC patients treated with chemotherapy and 5-fraction SBRT from 2009 to 2021. Surgical outcomes and SBRT-related toxicity were reported. Clinical outcomes were estimated by Kaplan-Meier with log rank comparisons. RESULTS: A total of 303 patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and SBRT to a median dose of 40 Gy prescribed to the tumor-vessel interface and median dose of 32.4 Gyto 95% of the gross tumor volume. One hundred and sixty-nine patients (56%) were resected and benefited from improved median OS (41.1 vs 15.5 months, P < 0.001). Close/positive vascular margins were not associated with worse OS or FFLRF. Type of neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not influence OS for resected patients, but FOLFIRINOX was associated with improved median OS in unresected patients (18.2 vs 13.1 months, P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: For BRPC, the effect of a positive or close vascular margin may be mitigated by neoadjuvant therapy. Shorter duration neoadjuvant chemotherapy as well as the optimal biological effective dose of radiotherapy should be prospectively explored.

Outcomes of 350 Robotic-assisted Esophagectomies at a High-volume Cancer Center: A Contemporary Propensity-score Matched Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate perioperative and oncologic outcomes in our RAMIE cohort and compare outcomes with contemporary OE controls. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: RAMIE has emerged as an alternative to traditional open or laparoscopic approaches. Described in all esophagectomy techniques, rapid adoption has been attributed to both enhanced visualization and technical dexterity. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent RAMIE for malignancy. Patient characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and survival were evaluated. For perioperative and oncologic outcome comparison, contemporary OE controls were propensity-score matched from NSQIP and NCDB databases. RESULTS: We identified 350 patients who underwent RAMIE between 2010 and 2019. Median body mass index was 27.4, 32% demonstrated a Charlson Comorbidity Index >4. Nodal disease was identified in 50% of patients and 74% received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Mean operative time and blood loss were 425 minutes and 232 mL, respectively. Anastomotic leak occurred in 16% of patients, 2% required reoperation. Median LOS was 9 days, and 30-day mortality was 3%. A median of 21 nodes were dissected with 96% achieving an R0 resection. Median survival was 67.4 months. 222 RAMIE were matched 1:1 to the NSQIP OE control. RAMIE demonstrated decreased LOS (9 vs 10 days, P = 0.010) and reoperative rates (2.3 vs 12.2%, P = 0.001), longer operative time (427 vs 311 minutes, P = 0.001), and increased rate of pulmonary embolism (5.4% vs 0.9%, P = 0.007) in comparison to NSQIP cohort. There was no difference in leak rate or mortality. Three hundred forty-three RAMIE were matched to OE cohort from NCDB with no difference in median overall survival (63 vs 53 months; P = 0.130). CONCLUSION: In this largest reported institutional series, we demonstrate that RAMIE can be performed safely with excellent oncologic outcomes and decreased hospital stay when compared to the open approach.

Evaluation of Tumor DNA Sequencing Results in Patients with Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma Stratified by TP53 Mutation Status.

BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer (GC) and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas (GEJ) are molecularly diverse. TP53 is the most frequently altered gene with approximately 50% of patients harboring mutations. This qualitative study describes the distinct genomic alterations in GCs and GEJs stratified by TP53 mutation status. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Tumor DNA sequencing results of 324 genes from 3741 patients with GC and GEJ were obtained from Foundation Medicine. Association between gene mutation frequency and TP53 mutation status was examined using Fisher's exact test. Functional gene groupings representing molecular pathways suggested to be differentially mutated in TP53 wild-type (TP53WT) and TP53 mutant (TP53MUT) tumors were identified. The association of the frequency of tumors containing a gene mutation in the molecular pathways of interest and TP53 mutation status was assessed using Fisher's exact test with a P-value of <.01 deemed statistically significant for all analyses. RESULTS: TP53 mutations were noted in 61.6% of 2946 GCs and 81.4% of 795 GEJs (P < .001). Forty-nine genes had statistically different mutation frequencies in TP53WT vs. TP53MUT patients. TP53WT tumors more likely had mutations related to DNA mismatch repair, homologous recombination repair, DNA and histone methylation, Wnt/B-catenin, PI3K/Akt/mTOR, and chromatin remodeling complexes. TP53MUT tumors more likely had mutations related to fibroblast growth factor, epidermal growth factor receptor, other receptor tyrosine kinases, and cyclin and cyclin-dependent kinases. CONCLUSION: The mutational profiles of GCs and GEJs varied according to TP53 mutation status. These mutational differences can be used when designing future studies assessing the predictive ability of TP53 mutation status when targeting differentially affected molecular pathways.

Phase I Study of Lenvatinib and Capecitabine with External Radiation Therapy in Locally Advanced Rectal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation with fluoropyrimidine followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy has been the standard treatment of locally advanced stages II and III rectal cancer for many years. There is a high risk for disease recurrence; therefore, optimizing chemoradiation strategies remains an unmet need. Based on a few studies, there is evidence of the synergistic effect of VEGF/PDGFR blockade with radiation. METHODS: In this phase I, dose-escalation and dose-expansion study, we studied 3 different dose levels of lenvatinib in combination with capecitabine-based chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal cancer. RESULTS: A total of 20 patients were enrolled, and 19 were eligible for assessment of efficacy. The combination was well tolerated, with an MTD of 24 mg lenvatinib. The downstaging rate for the cohort and the pCR was 84.2% and 37.8%, respectively. Blood-based protein biomarkers TSP-2, VEGF-R3, and VEGF correlated with NAR score and were also differentially expressed between response categories. The NAR, or neoadjuvant rectal score, encompasses cT clinical tumor stage, pT pathological tumor stage, and pN pathological nodal stage and provides a continuous variable for evaluating clinical trial outcomes. CONCLUSION: The combination of lenvatinib with capecitabine and radiation in locally advanced rectal cancer was found to be safe and tolerable, and potential blood-based biomarkers were identified. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02935309.

Rectal Cancer, Version 2.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer focuses on management of malignant polyps and resectable nonmetastatic rectal cancer because important updates have been made to these guidelines. These recent updates include redrawing the algorithms for stage II and III disease to reflect new data supporting the increasingly prominent role of total neoadjuvant therapy, expanded recommendations for short-course radiation therapy techniques, and new recommendations for a "watch-and-wait" nonoperative management technique for patients with cancer that shows a complete response to neoadjuvant therapy. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer, available online at NCCN.org, covers additional topics including risk assessment, pathology and staging, management of metastatic disease, posttreatment surveillance, treatment of recurrent disease, and survivorship.

Yttrium-90 Radioembolization for Liver-Dominant Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Case Series.

Transarterial radioembolization (TARE) with yttrium-90 glass microspheres is widely used to treat primary and secondary malignancies in the liver. However, the safety and efficacy of TARE in patients with liver-dominant metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is unknown. A proof-of-concept, retrospective analysis of 7 consecutive patients with liver-dominant mCRPC who were treated with TARE was performed. The median overall survival was 27.2, 32.1, and 108.1 months from the time of TARE, the diagnosis of liver metastases, and initial cancer diagnosis, respectively. The median liver progression-free survival was 7.3 months. No grade 3 or higher adverse effects were noted. TARE was found to be a safe and effective tool for treating patients with liver-dominant mCRPC in this limited cohort.

Neoadjuvant rectal score is prognostic for survival: A population-based propensity-matched analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Neoadjuvant rectal (NAR) score may serve as a surrogate short-term endpoint for overall survival (OS) in clinical trials. This study aims to test the NAR score using a large, national cancer registry. METHODS: National Cancer Database patients with clinical stage II/III rectal adenocarcinoma (RAC) treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) followed by surgery were selected and divided into low-, intermediate-, and high-NAR subgroups. OS outcomes were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 12 452 patients were selected, of which 5071 (40.7%) were in clinical stage II and 7381 (59.3%) were in clinical stage III; 15.2% had pathologic complete response. The mean NAR score was 10.01 ± 10.61. Six thousand nine hundred and forty-one (55.7%) did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) and were propensity-matched across NAR subgroups (966 in each group). A significant difference in 5-year OS between low-, intermediate-, and high-NAR groups was observed (85% vs. 76% vs. 68%; p < 0.001). Five thousand five hundred and eleven (44.3%) received AC and 1045 triplets were propensity-matched per NAR groups. A significant difference was again observed for 5-year OS (93% vs. 88% vs. 75%; p < 0.001). Logistic regression confirmed NAR strata as a significant predictor of 5-year OS. CONCLUSION: NAR score, as a neoadjuvant response measure, is a strong predictor of 5-year OS, regardless of AC receipt in a heterogenous population of locally advanced RAC patients.

The effect of histologic grade on neoadjuvant treatment outcomes in esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The gold standard for locoregional esophageal cancer (LEC) treatment includes preoperative chemoradiation and surgical resection, with possible perioperative or adjuvant systemic therapy. With few data associating histologic grade and prognosis in LEC patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by resection, we seek to evaluate this association. METHODS: Our institutional esophagectomy database between 1999 and 2019 was queried, selecting esophageal adenocarcinoma patients who completed neoadjuvant therapy (NAT), followed by esophagectomy. Propensity-score matching of low- and high-histologic grade groups was performed to assess survival metrics using initial clinical grade (cG) and final pathologic grade (pG). We performed a multivariable logistic regression to study predictors of pathologic complete response as a secondary objective. RESULTS: A total of 518 patients met the inclusion criteria. Kaplan-Meier analysis of the matched dataset showed no difference in initial or 5-year recurrence-free survival or overall survival (OS) between cG1 and cG2 versus cG3 based on original grade. When matched according to pG, cG1-2 had improved median survival parameters compared to cG3, with 5-year OS for cG1-2 of 45% versus 27% (p = 0.001). Higher pG, pathologic N stage, and poor response to NAT are predictors of poor survival. CONCLUSION: Patients with post-NAT pG1-2 demonstrated improved survival. Integrating histologic grade into postneoadjuvant staging may be warranted.