Patterns of Failure and the Need for Biliary Intervention in Resected Biliary Tract Cancers After Chemoradiation.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed patterns of failure and rates of subsequent biliary intervention among patients with resected biliary tract cancers (BTCs) including gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) and extra- and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (eCCA and iCCA) treated with adjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT). METHODS: In this single-institution retrospective analysis of 80 patients who had GBC (n = 29), eCCA (n = 43), or iCCA (n = 8) treated with curative-intent resection and adjuvant CRT from 2007 to 2017, the median radiation dose was 50.4 Gy (range 36-65 Gy) with concurrent 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) chemotherapy. All but two of the patients received adjuvant chemotherapy. The 2-year locoregional failure (LRF), 2-year recurrence-free survival (RFS), and 2-year overall survival (OS), and univariate predictors of LRF, RFS, and OS were calculated for the entire cohort and for a subgroup excluding patients with iCCA (n = 72). The predictors of biliary interventions also were assessed. RESULTS: Of the 80 patients (median follow-up period, 30.5 months; median OS, 33.9 months), 54.4% had American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage 1 or 2 disease, 57.1% were lymph node-positive, and 66.3% underwent margin-negative resection. For the entire cohort, 2-year LRF was 23.8%, 2-year RFS was  43.7%, and 2-year OS was 62.1%.  When patients with iCCA were excluded, the 2-year LRF was 22.6%, the 2-year RFS was 43.9%, and the 2-year OS was 59.2%. In the overall and subgroup univariate analyses, lymph node positivity was associated with greater LRF, whereas resection margin was not. Biliary intervention was required for 12 (63.2%) of the 19 patients with LRF versus 11 (18%) of the 61 patients without LRF (P < 0.001). Of the 12 patients with LRF who required biliary intervention, 4 died of biliary complications. CONCLUSIONS: The LRF rates remained significant despite adjuvant CRT. Lymph node positivity may be associated with increased risk of LRF. Positive margins were not associated with greater LRF, suggesting that CRT may mitigate LRF risk for this group. An association between LRF and higher rates of subsequent biliary interventions was observed, which may yield significant morbidity. Novel strategies to decrease the rates of LRF should be considered.

Predictors of Resectability and Survival in Patients With Borderline and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer who Underwent Neoadjuvant Treatment With FOLFIRINOX.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine (1) whether preoperative factors can predict resectability of borderline resectable (BR) and locally advanced (LA) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) after neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX, (2) which patients might benefit from adjuvant therapy, and (3) survival differences between resected BR/LA patients who received neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and upfront resected patients. BACKGROUND: Patients with BR/LA PDAC are often treated with FOLFIRINOX to obtain a margin-negative resection, yet selection of patients for resection remains challenging. METHODS: Clinicopathologic data of PDAC patients surgically explored between 04/2011-11/2016 in a single institution were retrospectively collected. RESULTS: Following neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX, 141 patients were surgically explored (BR: 49%, LA: 51%) and 110 (78%) were resected. Resected patients had lower preoperative CA 19-9 levels (21 vs 40 U/mL, P = 0.03) and smaller tumors on preoperative computed tomography (CT) scan (2.3 vs 3.0 cm, P = 0.03), but no predictors of resectability were identified. Median overall survival (OS) was 34.2 months from diagnosis for all FOLFIRINOX patients and 37.7 months for resected patients. Among resected patients, preoperative CA 19-9 >100 U/mL and >8 months between diagnosis and surgery predicted a shorter postoperative disease-free survival (DFS); Charlson comorbidity index >1, preoperative CA 19-9 >100 U/mL and tumor size (>3.0 cm on CT or >2.5 cm on pathology) predicted decreased OS. DFS and OS were significantly better for BR/LA PDAC patients treated with neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX compared with upfront resected patients (DFS: 29.1 vs 13.7, P < 0.001; OS: 37.7 vs 25.1 months from diagnosis, P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: BR/LA PDAC patients with no progression on neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX should be offered surgical exploration. Except size, traditional pathological parameters fail to predict survival among resected FOLFIRINOX patients. Resected FOLFIRINOX patients have survival that appears to be superior than that of resectable patients who go directly to surgery.

Intraoperative Radiotherapy in the Era of Intensive Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Chemoradiotherapy for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: Improved outcomes with FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel in the treatment of metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) have prompted incorporation of these regimens into neoadjuvant treatment of locally advanced unresectable PDAC. Whereas some patients remain unresectable on surgical exploration, others are able to undergo resection after intensive neoadjuvant treatment. We evaluated outcomes and toxicity associated with use of intensive neoadjuvant treatment followed by intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) in combination with resection or exploratory laparotomy. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients with locally advanced unresectable or borderline-resectable PDAC who received intensive neoadjuvant treatment with induction chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy followed by exploratory laparotomy in an IORT-equipped operating suite between 2010 and 2015. Surgical outcomes and overall survival (OS) were compared. RESULTS: Of 68 patients, 41 (60.3%) underwent resection, 18 (26.5%) had unresectable disease, and 9 (13.2%) had distant metastases. Of 41 resectable patients, 22 received IORT for close/positive resection margins on intraoperative frozen section. There was no significant difference in operative times or morbidity with addition of IORT to resection. Median OS was 26.6 months for all patients who underwent resection, 35.1 months for patients who underwent resection and IORT, and 24.5 months for patients who underwent resection alone (P=NS). Of 18 patients with unresectable disease, all but 1 received IORT, with median OS of 24.8 months. IORT was associated with increased hospital stay (4 vs. 3.5 d), but no significant difference in operative times or morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: IORT in addition to intensive neoadjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy was not associated with increased toxicity when used with resection or exploratory laparotomy, and was associated with encouraging survival rates in patients with close/positive margins and patients with unresectable disease.

A phase 1/2 and biomarker study of preoperative short course chemoradiation with proton beam therapy and capecitabine followed by early surgery for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety, efficacy and biomarkers of short-course proton beam radiation and capecitabine, followed by pancreaticoduodenectomy in a phase 1/2 study in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with radiographically resectable, biopsy-proven PDAC were treated with neoadjuvant short-course (2-week) proton-based radiation with capecitabine, followed by surgery and adjuvant gemcitabine. The primary objective was to demonstrate a rate of toxicity grade ≥ 3 of <20%. Exploratory biomarker studies were performed using surgical specimen tissues and peripheral blood. RESULTS: The phase 2 dose was established at 5 daily doses of 5 GyE. Fifty patients were enrolled, of whom 35 patients were treated in the phase 2 portion. There were no grade 4 or 5 toxicities, and only 2 of 35 patients (4.1%) experienced a grade 3 toxicity event (chest wall pain grade 1, colitis grade 1). Of 48 patients eligible for analysis, 37 underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy. Thirty of 37 (81%) had positive nodes. Locoregional failure occurred in 6 of 37 resected patients (16.2%), and distant recurrence occurred in 35 of 48 patients (72.9%). With median follow-up of 38 months, the median progression-free survival for the entire group was 10 months, and overall survival was 17 months. Biomarker studies showed significant associations between worse survival outcomes and the KRAS point mutation change from glycine to aspartic acid at position 12, stromal CXCR7 expression, and circulating biomarkers CEA, CA19-9, and HGF (all, P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study met the primary endpoint by showing a rate of 4.1% grade 3 toxicity for neoadjuvant short-course proton-based chemoradiation. Treatment was associated with favorable local control. In exploratory analyses, KRAS(G12D) status and high CXCR7 expression and circulating CEA, CA19-9, and HGF levels were associated with poor survival.

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors with involved surgical margins: prognostic factors and the role of adjuvant radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNET) are rare neoplasms associated with poor outcomes without resection, and involved surgical margins are associated with a worse prognosis. The role of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) in these patients has not been characterized. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We retrospectively evaluated 46 consecutive patients with positive or close (<1 mm) margins after pNET resection, treated from 1983 to 2010, 16 of whom received adjuvant RT. Median RT dose was 50.4 Gy in 1.8-Gy fractions; half the patients received concurrent chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine. No patients received adjuvant chemotherapy. Cox multivariate analysis (MVA) was used to analyze factors associated with overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Median age at diagnosis was 56 years, and 52% of patients were female. Median tumor size was 38 mm, 57% of patients were node-positive, and 11% had a resected solitary liver metastasis. Patients who received RT were more likely to have larger tumors (median, 54 mm vs. 30 mm, respectively, p = 0.002) and node positivity (81% vs. 33%, respectively, p = 0.002) than those not receiving RT. Median follow-up was 39 months. Actuarial 5-year OS was 62% (95% confidence interval [CI], 41%-77%). In the group that did not receive RT, 3 patients (10%) experienced local recurrence (LR) and 5 patients (18%) developed new distant metastases, while in the RT group, 1 patient (6%) experienced LR and 5 patients (38%) developed distant metastases. Of all recurrences, 29% were LR. On MVA, male gender (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] = 3.81; 95% CI, 1.21-11.92; p = 0.02) and increasing tumor size (AHR = 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04; p = 0.007) were associated with decreased OS. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term survival is common among patients with involved-margin pNET. Despite significantly worse pathologic features among patients receiving adjuvant RT, rates of LR between groups were similar, suggesting that RT might aid local control, and merits further evaluation.

A safety and survival analysis of neoadjuvant bevacizumab with standard chemoradiation in a phase I/II study compared with standard chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Bevacizumab is increasingly being tested with neoadjuvant regimens in patients with localized cancer, but its effects on metastasis and survival remain unknown. This study examines the long-term outcome of clinical stage II/III rectal cancer patients treated in a prospective phase II study of bevacizumab with chemoradiation and surgery. As a benchmark, we used data from an analysis of 42 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with a contemporary approach of preoperative fluoropyrimidine-based radiation therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Outcome analyses were performed on 32 patients treated prospectively with neoadjuvant bevacizumab, 5-fluorouracil, radiation therapy, and surgery as well as 42 patients treated with standard fluoropyrimidine-based chemoradiation. RESULTS: Overall survival, disease-free survival, and local control showed favorable trends in patients treated with bevacizumab with chemoradiation followed by surgery. Acute and postoperative toxicity appeared acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant bevacizumab with standard chemoradiation and surgery shows promising long-term efficacy and safety profiles in locally advanced rectal cancer patients.

Phase II study of pemetrexed in patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumors.

PURPOSE: In some reports, 5-fluorouracil has been associated with modest activity in patients with neuroendocrine tumors. Pemetrexed is a multitargeted antifolate with activity in tumor types not significantly responsive to other antifolates. We evaluated the efficacy of pemetrexed in a phase II study of patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumors. METHODS: Patients with metastatic neuroendocrine tumors (excluding small-cell carcinoma) were treated with pemetrexed administered intravenously at a dose of 500 mg/m(2) every 21 days. To reduce potential toxicity, patients also received folic acid, vitamin B12 supplementation, and peri-infusional treatment with dexamethasone. Patients were followed for response, toxicity, and survival. RESULTS: The study was designed with a total accrual goal of 32 patients. Due to lack of radiographic responses in patients during the study period, accrual was terminated at 17. However, one patient achieved a delayed partial response following discontinuation of pemetrexed. Ten patients were evaluable for biochemical response; five (50%) experienced >50% decrease in plasma chromogranin A. Among the 17 patients, 5 (29%) discontinued therapy due to treatment-related toxicity. The median overall survival was 12.1 months. CONCLUSION: Pemetrexed does not appear to have significant antitumor activity in patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumors. The limited antitumor activity and potential toxicity associated with pemetrexed mirrors experience with the majority of other cytotoxic agents in patients with neuroendocrine tumors. Investigation of novel, molecularly targeted agents may offer more promise in this disease.

Safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor activity of sorafenib: a review of four phase I trials in patients with advanced refractory solid tumors.

Sorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor that inhibits Raf serine/threonine kinases and receptor tyrosine kinases involved in tumor growth and angiogenesis. It has demonstrated preclinical and clinical activity in several tumor types. Sorafenib 400 mg twice daily (bid) has been approved in several countries worldwide for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma. This review summarizes key safety, pharmacokinetic, and efficacy data from four phase I, single-agent, dose-escalation studies with sorafenib in patients with advanced refractory solid tumors (n = 173). These trials followed different treatment regimens (7 days on/7 days off, n = 19; 21 days on/7 days off, n = 44; 28 days on/7 days off, n = 41; or continuous dosing, n = 69) to establish the optimum dosing schedule. Sorafenib was generally well tolerated; most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity up to the defined maximum-tolerated dose of 400 mg twice daily (bid). The most frequently reported drug-related adverse events at any grade included fatigue (40%), anorexia (35%), diarrhea (34%), rash/desquamation (27%), and hand-foot skin reaction (25%). Sorafenib demonstrated preliminary antitumor activity, particularly among patients with renal cell carcinoma or hepatocellular carcinoma: overall, two of 137 evaluable patients achieved partial responses and 38 (28%) had stable disease. Although there was high interpatient variability in plasma pharmacokinetics across these studies, this was not associated with an increased incidence or severity of toxicity. Preliminary studies suggest that phosphorylated extracellular signal-related kinase in tumor cells or peripheral blood lymphocytes may be a useful biomarker for measuring and, ultimately, predicting the effects of sorafenib. Based on these findings, continuous daily 400 mg bid sorafenib was chosen as the optimal regimen for phase II/III studies. Trials are ongoing in renal cell carcinoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, melanoma, and non-small cell lung cancer.

Phase II study of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and erlotinib in previously treated patients with metastastic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: To investigate the combination of erlotinib, capecitabine, and oxaliplatin in patients who were previously treated for metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were eligible if they had metastatic colorectal cancer that progressed, were intolerant to first-line chemotherapy, or had disease recurrence within 1 year of adjuvant therapy for early-stage disease. Each 21-day cycle consisted of daily oral erlotinib at 150 mg, oral capecitabine at 1,000 mg/m2 (reduced to 750 mg/m2 after the first 13 patients) twice a day on days 1 to 14, and intravenous oxaliplatin at 130 mg/m2 on day 1. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were enrolled onto this phase II study. By intention-to-treat analyses, eight patients (25%) experienced a partial response and 14 patients (44%) had stable disease for at least 12 weeks. The median progression-free survival was 5.4 months and the median overall survival was 14.7 months. These results were essentially unchanged when limited to the cohort of patients (78%) who received prior irinotecan for metastatic colorectal cancer. Most common grade 3 to 4 toxicities included diarrhea (38%), nausea/emesis (19%), fatigue (16%), dehydration (16%), and dermatitis (13%); grade 3 or 4 toxicities were reduced with a lower starting dose of capecitabine. CONCLUSION: The combination of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and erlotinib seems to have promising activity against metastatic colorectal cancer in patients who received prior chemotherapy, with a relatively higher response rate and progression-free survival compared with previous reports of either infusional FU, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin or capecitabine and oxaliplatin in similar patient populations.

Rubitecan.

The only approved camptothecins for use in patients to date (topotecan and irinotecan) are delivered intravenously. Thus, an oral camptothecin analogue that would provide the convenience of oral delivery with the flexibility for a variety of prolonged treatment schedules would be advantageous. Rubitecan is an orally available camptothecin analogue that also has potential for delivery transdermally or by inhalation. Like all of the camptothecins, its antitumour activity is mediated through the inhibition of DNA topoisomerase I, which is involved in relaxing supercoiled DNA, which is important for the process of DNA replication and RNA transcription. Rubitecan exists in equilibrium as 9-nitro-camptothecin (9-NC) and 9-amino-camptothecin (9-AC), a metabolite that is thought to be active although it failed in clinical trials. Both 9-NC and 9-AC contain a lactone ring that is required for optimal activity with the carboxylic acid (open ring) forms being significantly less active or inactive. A more acidic environment favours the lactone ring structure, whereas neutral or basic conditions favour the conversion to the carboxylic acid form. In addition to issues of lactone ring stability at physiological pH (true for all of the camptothecin analogues), there is pharmacokinetic variability that has had to be dealt with during the development of rubitecan. Preclinically, rubitecan has shown activity against a broad spectrum of tumour types in in vitro and in vivo human tumour xenograft models. Frustratingly, the level of activity of an agent in preclinical models has not always translated into similar activity against human tumours in clinical trials. To date, with the exception of pancreatic and possibly ovarian cancer, rubitecan has had disappointing activity against a number of other solid tumours in relatively small Phase I/II trials; however, it has shown sufficient activity against pancreatic cancer, a malignancy that remains difficult to treat, to continue to be evaluated in clinical trials for this indication. Results of clinical trials in the next few years should determine whether rubitecan can find a role in cancer therapy.