Nanoliposomal irinotecan and fluorouracil plus leucovorin versus fluorouracil plus leucovorin in patients with cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapies (AIO NALIRICC): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: There is an unmet need for effective therapies in pretreated advanced biliary tract cancer. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of nanoliposomal irinotecan and fluorouracil plus leucovorin compared with fluorouracil plus leucovorin as second-line treatment for biliary tract cancer. METHODS: NALIRICC was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial done in 17 German centres for patients aged 18 years or older, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, metastatic biliary tract cancer, and progression on gemcitabine-based therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous infusions of nanoliposomal irinotecan (70 mg/m2), fluorouracil (2400 mg/m2), and leucovorin (400 mg/m2) every 2 weeks (nanoliposomal irinotecan group) or fluorouracil (2400 mg/m2) plus leucovorin (400 mg/m2) every 2 weeks (control group). Randomisation was by permutated block randomisation in block sizes of four, stratified by primary tumour site. Investigator-assessed progression-free survival was the primary endpoint, which was evaluated in all randomly assigned patients. Secondary efficacy outcomes were overall survival, objective response rate, and quality of life. Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of the study treatment. Enrolment for this trial has been completed, and it is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03043547. FINDING: Between Dec 4, 2017, and Aug 2, 2021, 49 patients were randomly assigned to the nanoliposomal irinotecan group and 51 patients to the control group. Median age was 65 years (IQR 59-71); 45 (45%) of 100 patients were female. Median progression-free survival was 2·6 months (95% CI 1·7-3·6) in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group and 2·3 months (1·6-3·4) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·87 [0·56-1·35]). Median overall survival was 6·9 months (95% CI 5·3-10·6) in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group and 8·2 months (5·4-11·9) in the control group (HR 1·08 [0·68-1·72]). The objective response rate was 14% (95% CI 6-27; seven patients) in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group and 4% (1-14; two patients) in the control group. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group were neutropenia (eight [17%] of 48 vs none in the control group), diarrhoea (seven [15%] vs one [2%]), and nausea (four [8%] vs none). In the control group, the most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were cholangitis (four [8%] patients vs none in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group) and bile duct stenosis (four [8%] vs three [6%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 16 (33%) patients in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group (grade 2-3 diarrhoea in five patients; one case each of abdominal infection, acute kidney injury, pancytopenia, increased blood bilirubin, colitis, dehydration, dyspnoea, infectious enterocolitis, ileus, oral mucositis, and nausea). One (2%) treatment-related serious adverse event occurred in the control group (worsening of general condition). Median duration until deterioration of global health status, characterised by the time from randomisation to the initial observation of a score decline exceeding 10 points, was 4·0 months (95% CI 2·2-not reached) in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group and 3·7 months (2·7-not reached) in the control group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of nanoliposomal irinotecan to fluorouracil plus leucovorin did not improve progression-free survival or overall survival and was associated with higher toxicity compared with fluorouracil plus leucovorin. Further research is necessary to define the role of irinotecan-based combinations in second-line treatment of biliary tract cancer. FUNDING: Servier and AIO-Studien.

Adjuvant Treatment with S-1 in Patients after R0-Resection of Adenocarcinoma of the Stomach and Esophagogastric Junction: A Multicenter Phase I/II Feasibility Study (GMBH-STO-0114).

INTRODUCTION: S-1 has been shown to be an effective adjuvant treatment option for East Asian patients who underwent gastrectomy for stage II/III gastric cancer. We conducted a phase I/II study to evaluate the feasibility, tolerability, and efficacy of administering S-1 in the adjuvant setting after R0-resection of adenocarcinoma of the stomach and esophagogastric junction (EGJ) in Caucasian patients. METHODS: In this single-cohort, open-label, phase I/II trial, we enrolled patients with locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the stomach or EGJ having undergone R0-resection with or without neoadjuvant treatment. One treatment cycle consisted of oral S-1 (30 mg/m2 bid) for 14 days. Cycles were repeated every 3 weeks for 18 cycles (54 weeks). Primary endpoint was feasibility and tolerability. Safety was evaluated according to the Common Toxicity Criteria Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0. Secondary endpoints were 1-year relapse-free survival (RFS) rate, RFS, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Between October 2015 and February 2018, 32 patients were enrolled in 12 German centers, and 30 started adjuvant study treatment. Seventeen patients completed all 18 cycles. Two patients terminated study treatment early due to adverse events (AEs), 7 due to patient's or investigator's decision, and 4 due to recurrence or distant metastasis during adjuvant therapy. Dose levels were reduced to 25 mg/m2 in 9 patients and to 20 mg/m2 in 1 patient. Of patients completing all 18 cycles, 5 did so with reduced dosage of S-1. Documented grade ≥3 AEs were neutropenia, diarrhea, vomiting, polyneuropathy, palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia, and rash. Serious AEs were observed in 7 patients. Median RFS was 32.2 months. One-year RFS rate was 77%. Data on OS were still premature at the end of the study. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant treatment with S-1 for 1 year is a feasible and safe treatment option for Caucasian patients diagnosed with gastric adenocarcinoma or cancer of the EGJ after R0-resection.

Efficacy of ramucirumab combination chemotherapy as second-line treatment in patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction after exposure to checkpoint inhibitors and chemotherapy as first-line therapy.

FOLFOX plus nivolumab represents a standard of care for first-line therapy of advanced gastroesophageal cancer (aGEC) with positive PD-L1 expression. The efficacy of second-line VEGFR-2 inhibition with ramucirumab (RAM) plus chemotherapy after progression to immunochemotherapy remains unclear. Medical records of patients with aGEC enrolled in the randomized phase II AIO-STO-0417 trial after treatment failure to first-line FOLFOX plus nivolumab and ipilimumab were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups based on second-line therapy: RAM plus chemotherapy (RAM group) or treatment without RAM (control group). Eighty three patients were included. In the overall population, progression-free survival (PFS) in the RAM group was superior to the control (4.5 vs 2.9 months). Responders (CR/PR) to first-line immunochemotherapy receiving RAM containing second-line therapy had prolonged OS from start of first-line therapy (28.9 vs 16.5 months), as well as second-line OS (9.6 vs 7.5 months), PFS (5.6 vs 2.9 months) and DCR (53% vs 29%) compared to the control. PD-L1 CPS ≥1 was 42% and 44% for the RAM and the control, respectively. Patients with CPS ≥1 in the RAM group showed better tumor control (ORR 25% vs 10%) and improved survival (total OS 11.5 vs 8.0 months; second-line OS 6.5 vs 3.9 months; PFS 4.5 vs 1.6 months) compared to the control. Prior exposure to first-line FOLFOX plus dual checkpoint inhibition followed by RAM plus chemotherapy shows favorable response and survival rates especially in patients with initial response and positive PD-L1 expression and has the potential to advance the treatment paradigm in aGEC.

Primary Tumor Resection Before Systemic Therapy in Patients With Colon Cancer and Unresectable Metastases: Combined Results of the SYNCHRONOUS and CCRe-IV Trials.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy is established as primary treatment in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer and unresectable metastases. Data from nonrandomized clinical trials have fueled persistent uncertainty if primary tumor resection (PTR) before chemotherapy prolongs survival. We investigated the prognostic value of PTR in patients with newly diagnosed stage IV colon cancer who were not amenable to curative treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients enrolled in the multicenter, randomized SYNCHRONOUS and CCRe-IV trials were included in the analysis. Patients with colon cancer with synchronous unresectable metastases were randomly assigned at 100 sites in Austria, Germany, and Spain to undergo PTR or up-front chemotherapy (No PTR group). The chemotherapy regimen was left at discretion of the local team. Patients with tumor-related symptoms, inability to tolerate surgery and/or systemic chemotherapy, and history of another cancer were excluded. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), and the analyses were performed with intention-to-treat. RESULTS: A total of 393 patients were randomly assigned to undergo PTR (n = 187) or no PTR (n = 206) between November 2011 and March 2017. Chemotherapy was not administered to 6.4% in the No PTR group and 24.1% in the PTR group. The median follow-up time was 36.7 months (95% CI, 36.6 to 37.3). The median OS was 16.7 months (95% CI, 13.2 to 19.2) in the PTR group and 18.6 months (95% CI, 16.2 to 22.3) in the No PTR group (P = .191). Comparable OS between the study groups was further confirmed on multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 0.944 [95% CI, 0.738 to 1.209], P = .65) and across all subgroups. Patients with serious adverse events were more common in the No PTR group (10.2% v 18.0%; P = .027). CONCLUSION: Among patients with colon cancer and synchronous unresectable metastases, PTR before systemic chemotherapy was not associated with prolonged OS.

Stratifying esophago-gastric cancer treatment using a patient-derived organoid-based threshold.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study sought to determine the value of patient-derived organoids (PDOs) from esophago-gastric adenocarcinoma (EGC) for response prediction to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (neoCTx). METHODS: Endoscopic biopsies of patients with locally advanced EGC (n = 120) were taken into culture and PDOs expanded. PDOs' response towards the single substances of the FLOT regimen and the combination treatment were correlated to patients' pathological response using tumor regression grading. A classifier based on FLOT response of PDOs was established in an exploratory cohort (n = 13) and subsequently confirmed in an independent validation cohort (n = 13). RESULTS: EGC PDOs reflected patients' diverse responses to single chemotherapeutics and the combination regimen FLOT. In the exploratory cohort, PDOs response to single 5-FU and FLOT combination treatment correlated with the patients' pathological response (5-FU: Kendall's τ = 0.411, P = 0.001; FLOT: Kendall's τ = 0.694, P = 2.541e-08). For FLOT testing, a high diagnostic precision in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was reached with an AUCROC of 0.994 (CI 0.980 to 1.000). The discriminative ability of PDO-based FLOT testing allowed the definition of a threshold, which classified in an independent validation cohort FLOT responders from non-responders with high sensitivity (90%), specificity (100%) and accuracy (92%). CONCLUSION: In vitro drug testing of EGC PDOs has a high predictive accuracy in classifying patients' histological response to neoadjuvant FLOT treatment. Taking into account the high rate of successful PDO expansion from biopsies, the definition of a threshold that allows treatment stratification paves the way for an interventional trial exploring PDO-guided treatment of EGC patients.

Successful Combination of Olaparib and 225Ac-Dotatate in a Patient with Neuroendocrine Tumor G3 and BRCA Mutation.

Based on the results of the NETTER-1 trial, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy with Lutetium-177 (177Lu) - DOTATATE is authorized for the treatment of neuroendocrine tumors (NET) grade 1 (G1) and grade 2 (G2) of the intestine. After the failure of 177Lu-DOTATATE therapy, targeted alpha-particle therapy (TAT) may be a possible treatment option. Here, we present a patient with cancer of unknown primary NET G2 later G3. The patient was referred to our hospital with urosepsis due to a second-degree urinary retention. After stent insertion, a contrast-enhanced computed tomography revealed a huge pelvic tumor without metastases. Initially, the patient had undergone surgical treatment. Later the patient developed liver metastasis and was treated by 177Lu-DOTATATE therapy and four lines of systemic therapy. A disease progression was observed and with the knowledge of a germline BRCA1 mutation, the patient was treated with TAT (Actinium-225 [225Ac]-DOTATATE) combined with olaparib. The patient achieved a significant treatment response for 12 months indicating that a combination therapy with an alpha emitter and olaparib demands further investigations in clinical trials.

Adverse Events Associated with Encorafenib Plus Cetuximab in Patients with BRAFV600E-mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: An in-depth Analysis of the BEACON CRC Study.

BACKGROUND: The BRAF inhibitor encorafenib in combination with cetuximab was recently approved for patients with BRAFV600E-mutated (BRAFV600Emut) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Approval was based on positive results from the phase 3 BEACON CRC study in BRAFV600Emut mCRC patients who had progressed after 1-2 previous regimens. This analysis provides a detailed examination of the adverse events (AEs) of interest (AEIs) with encorafenib+cetuximab in the BEACON study to aid gastrointestinal oncologists, given the limited experience with this combination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: AEIs, including dermatological AEs, arthralgia/myalgia, nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, fatigue/asthenia and nephrotoxicity, were examined in the doublet therapy group. Clinical characteristics associated with these AEs, AE grade, time to onset and time to resolution were also studied. RESULTS: Safety analysis included 216/220 patients randomized to doublet therapy. The most commonly occurring AEI was dermatological toxicity (75.5%), followed by arthralgia/myalgia (56.0%) and fatigue/asthenia (56.0%). Other than nephrotoxicity (7 patients; 5/7 with Grade 3 or 4), most AEs were Grade 1 or 2. Most AEs were more common in women than men (nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, dermatological AEs, and arthralgia/myalgia). Nausea/vomiting, abdominal pain and fatigue/asthenia were more common in patients aged ≥70 years. Most AEs developed early, within the first 1-2 months of treatment, and resolved within 1-2 weeks. In addition, survival outcomes were better in patients experiencing arthralgia/myalgia or dermatological toxicities. CONCLUSION: This analysis indicated that, except for rare cases of nephrotoxicity, encorafenib+cetuximab is well tolerated in most patients, with most AEIs being mild-to-moderate in severity, occurring early and resolving rapidly. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: the BEACON study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02928224; EudraCT, 2015-005805-35).

Bcl-xL as prognostic marker and potential therapeutic target in cholangiocarcinoma.

Intrahepatic, perihilar, and distal cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA, pCCA, dCCA) are highly malignant tumours with increasing mortality rates due to therapy resistances. Among the mechanisms mediating resistance, overexpression of anti-apoptotic Bcl-2 proteins (Bcl-2, Bcl-xL , Mcl-1) is particularly important. In this study, we investigated whether antiapoptotic protein patterns are prognostically relevant and potential therapeutic targets in CCA. Bcl-2 proteins were analysed in a pan-cancer cohort from the NCT/DKFZ/DKTK MASTER registry trial (n = 1140, CCA n = 72) via RNA-sequencing and transcriptome-based protein activity interference revealing high ranks of CCA for Bcl-xL and Mcl-1. Expression of Bcl-xL , Mcl-1, and Bcl-2 was assessed in human CCA tissue and cell lines compared with cholangiocytes by immunohistochemistry, immunoblotting, and quantitative-RT-PCR. Immunohistochemistry confirmed the upregulation of Bcl-xL and Mcl-1 in iCCA tissues. Cell death of CCA cell lines upon treatment with specific small molecule inhibitors of Bcl-xL (Wehi-539), of Mcl-1 (S63845), and Bcl-2 (ABT-199), either alone, in combination with each other or together with chemotherapeutics was assessed by flow cytometry. Targeting Bcl-xL induced cell death and augmented the effect of chemotherapy in CCA cells. Combined inhibition of Bcl-xL and Mcl-1 led to a synergistic increase in cell death in CCA cell lines. Correlation between Bcl-2 protein expression and survival was analysed within three independent patient cohorts from cancer centers in Germany comprising 656 CCA cases indicating a prognostic value of Bcl-xL in CCA depending on the CCA subtype. Collectively, these observations identify Bcl-xL as a key protein in cell death resistance of CCA and may pave the way for clinical application.

Comprehensive genomic and epigenomic analysis in cancer of unknown primary guides molecularly-informed therapies despite heterogeneity.

The benefit of molecularly-informed therapies in cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is unclear. Here, we use comprehensive molecular characterization by whole genome/exome, transcriptome and methylome analysis in 70 CUP patients to reveal substantial mutational heterogeneity with TP53, MUC16, KRAS, LRP1B and CSMD3 being the most frequently mutated known cancer-related genes. The most common fusion partner is FGFR2, the most common focal homozygous deletion affects CDKN2A. 56/70 (80%) patients receive genomics-based treatment recommendations which are applied in 20/56 (36%) cases. Transcriptome and methylome data provide evidence for the underlying entity in 62/70 (89%) cases. Germline analysis reveals five (likely) pathogenic mutations in five patients. Recommended off-label therapies translate into a mean PFS ratio of 3.6 with a median PFS1 of 2.9 months (17 patients) and a median PFS2 of 7.8 months (20 patients). Our data emphasize the clinical value of molecular analysis and underline the need for innovative, mechanism-based clinical trials.

Gene expression-based prediction of pazopanib efficacy in sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: The multi-receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor pazopanib is approved for the treatment of advanced soft-tissue sarcoma and has also shown activity in other sarcoma subtypes. However, its clinical efficacy is highly variable, and no reliable predictors exist to select patients who are likely to benefit from this drug. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analysed the molecular profiles and clinical outcomes of patients with pazopanib-treated sarcoma enrolled in a prospective observational study by the German Cancer Consortium, DKTK MASTER, that employs whole-genome/exome sequencing and transcriptome sequencing to inform the care of young adults with advanced cancer across histology and patients with rare cancers. RESULTS: Among 109 patients with available whole-genome/exome sequencing data, there was no correlation between clinical parameters, specific genetic alterations or mutational signatures and clinical outcome. In contrast, the analysis of a subcohort of 62 patients who underwent molecular analysis before pazopanib treatment and had transcriptome sequencing data available showed that mRNA levels of NTRK3 (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.53, p = 0.021), IGF1R (HR = 1.82, p = 0.027) and KDR (HR = 0.50, p = 0.011) were independently associated with progression-free survival (PFS). Based on the expression of these receptor tyrosine kinase genes, i.e. the features NTRK3-high, IGF1R-low and KDR-high, we developed a pazopanib efficacy predictor that stratified patients into three groups with significantly different PFS (p < 0.0001). Application of the pazopanib efficacy predictor to an independent cohort of patients with pazopanib-treated sarcoma from DKTK MASTER (n = 43) confirmed its potential to separate patient groups with significantly different PFS (p = 0.02), whereas no such association was observed in patients with sarcoma from DKTK MASTER (n = 97) or The Cancer Genome Atlas sarcoma cohort (n = 256) who were not treated with pazopanib. CONCLUSION: A score based on the combined expression of NTRK3, IGF1R and KDR allows the identification of patients with sarcoma and with good, intermediate and poor outcome following pazopanib therapy and warrants prospective investigation as a predictive tool to optimise the use of this drug in the clinic.

Detecting drug resistance in pancreatic cancer organoids guides optimized chemotherapy treatment.

Drug combination therapies for cancer treatment show high efficacy but often induce severe side effects, resulting in dose or cycle number reduction. We investigated the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (neoCTx) adaptions on treatment outcome in 59 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Resections with tumor-free margins were significantly more frequent when full-dose neoCTx was applied. We determined if patient-derived organoids (PDOs) can be used to personalize poly-chemotherapy regimens by pharmacotyping of treatment-naïve and post-neoCTx PDAC PDOs. Five out of ten CTx-naïve PDO lines exhibited a differential response to either the FOLFIRINOX or the Gem/Pac regimen. NeoCTx PDOs showed a poor response to the neoadjuvant regimen that had been administered to the respective patient in 30% of cases. No significant difference in PDO response was noted when comparing modified treatments in which the least effective single drug was removed from the complete regimen. Drug testing of CTx-naïve PDAC PDOs and neoCTx PDOs may be useful to guide neoadjuvant and adjuvant regimen selection, respectively. Personalizing poly-chemotherapy regimens by omitting substances with low efficacy could potentially result in less severe side effects, thereby increasing the fraction of patients receiving a full course of neoadjuvant treatment. © 2022 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

Triplet chemotherapy in combination with anti-EGFR agents for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: Current evidence, advances, and future perspectives.

Doublet or triplet chemotherapy regimens in combination with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) monoclonal antibodies (mAb), such as cetuximab or panitumumab, or the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor mAb bevacizumab, are the current recommended standard of care therapies for unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). While the recommended dosing schedule for the triplet chemotherapy regimen with 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) in combination with bevacizumab is well established, the optimal dosing of FOLFOXIRI in combination with anti-EGFR agents is unknown. Several randomized, phase 3 clinical trials of patients with mCRC have demonstrated improved survival and response rates with FOLFOXIRI, alone or when combined with bevacizumab, compared with doublet chemotherapy regimens. Trials of anti-EGFR agents in combination with FOLFOXIRI have also shown promising results. In this review, we summarize the emerging evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of anti-EGFR agents in combination with triplet chemotherapy regimens and discuss the potential for this combination as a future treatment option for patients with RAS-wild-type mCRC.

The CIRCULATE Trial: Circulating Tumor DNA Based Decision for Adjuvant Treatment in Colon Cancer Stage II Evaluation (AIO-KRK-0217).

BACKGROUND: Guidance regarding adjuvant treatment decisions in stage II colorectal cancer (CRC) remains uncertain due to lack of predictive clinical or molecular markers. Recently, postoperative circulating tumour (ct)DNA has been demonstrated to be a strong prognostic marker in early colon cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CIRCULATE enrols patients with stage II microsatellite stable CRC in Germany (AIO) and Austria (ABCSG). Within the AIO, screening is supported by ColoPredict Plus 2.0, a molecular registry, and screening platform for interventional trials. Patient-specific mutations are centrally analysed by next generation sequencing in the resected primary tumour. A postoperative plasma sample is subsequently screened for the specific mutation(s). ctDNA positive (ctDNApos) patients are randomised (2:1) chemotherapy (capecitabine, oxaliplatin added an investigator's choice) or to follow-up (control group). ctDNA negative (ctDNAneg) patients are randomised (1:4) to be followed-up within CIRCULATE (control group) or outside the trial. Patients in the control group remain blinded to the ctDNA results. The primary objective is to compare disease free survival (DFS) of ctDNApos patients with chemotherapy or control. To demonstrate a treatment effect with a hazard ratio of 0.617 (3-year DFS rates 42.5% vs. 25%), 231 ctDNApos and estimated 2079 ctDNAneg patients are randomised. Secondary aims include to compare overall survival and DFS in the ctDNApos and ctDNAneg patient cohorts and ctDNA kinetics. CONCLUSION: The CIRCULATE trial may establish ctDNA for adjuvant treatment decision in stage II colon cancer - and with the secondary objectives - support a ctDNA guided follow up in colon cancer stage II and beyond.

Survival after secondary liver resection in metastatic colorectal cancer: Comparing data of three prospective randomized European trials (LICC, CELIM, FIRE-3).

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients with liver-limited disease (LLD) have a chance of long-term survival and potential cure after hepatic metastasectomy. However, the appropriate postoperative treatment strategy is still controversial. The CELIM and FIRE-3 studies demonstrated that secondary hepatic resection significantly improved overall survival (OS). The objective of this analysis was to compare these favorable outcome data with recent results from the LICC trial investigating the antigen-specific cancer vaccine tecemotide (L-BLP25) as adjuvant therapy in mCRC patients with LLD after R0/R1 resection. Data from mCRC patients with LLD and secondary hepatic resection from each study were analyzed for efficacy outcomes based on patient characteristics, treatment and surveillance after surgery. In LICC, 40/121 (33%) patients, in CELIM 36/111 (32%) and in FIRE-3-LLD 29/133 (22%) patients were secondarily resected, respectively. Of those, 31 (77.5%) patients in LICC and all patients in CELIM were R0 resected. Median disease-free survival after resection was 8.9 months in LICC, 9.9 months in CELIM. Median OS in secondarily resected patients was 66.1 months in LICC, 53.9 months in CELIM and 56.2 months in FIRE-3-LLD. Median age was about 5 years less in LICC compared to CELIM and FIRE-3. Secondarily resected patients of LICC, CELIM and FIRE-3 showed an impressive median survival with a tendency for improved survival for patients in the LICC trial. A younger patient cohort but also more selective surgery, improved resection techniques, deep responses and a close surveillance program after surgery in the LICC trial may have had a positive impact on survival.

Influence of the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Cancer Care in a German Comprehensive Cancer Center.

Introduction: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the German government implemented legal restrictions to avoid the overloading of intensive care units by patients with COVID-19. The influence of these effects on diagnosis and treatment of cancer in Germany is largely unknown. Methods: To evaluate the effect of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on tumor board presentations in a high-volume tertiary referral center (the German Comprehensive Cancer Center NCT/UCC Dresden), we compared the number of presentations of gastrointestinal tumors stratified by tumor entity, tumor stage, and treatment intention during the pandemic to the respective data from previous years. Results: The number of presentations decreased by 3.2% (95% CI -8.8, 2.7) during the COVID year 2020 compared with the pre-COVID year 2019. During the first shutdown, March-May 2020, the total number of presentations was 9.4% (-18.7, 1) less than during March-May 2019. This decrease was significant for curable cases of esophageal cancer [N = 37, 25.5% (-41.8, -4.4)] and colon cancer [N = 36, 17.5% (-32.6, 1.1)] as well as for all cases of biliary tract cancer [N = 26, 50% (-69.9, -15)] during the first shutdown from March 2020 to May 2020. Conclusion: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the presentation of oncological patients in a CCC in Germany was considerable and should be taken into account when making decisions regarding future pandemics.

Comprehensive Genomic and Transcriptomic Analysis for Guiding Therapeutic Decisions in Patients with Rare Cancers.

The clinical relevance of comprehensive molecular analysis in rare cancers is not established. We analyzed the molecular profiles and clinical outcomes of 1,310 patients (rare cancers, 75.5%) enrolled in a prospective observational study by the German Cancer Consortium that applies whole-genome/exome and RNA sequencing to inform the care of adults with incurable cancers. On the basis of 472 single and six composite biomarkers, a cross-institutional molecular tumor board provided evidence-based management recommendations, including diagnostic reevaluation, genetic counseling, and experimental treatment, in 88% of cases. Recommended therapies were administered in 362 of 1,138 patients (31.8%) and resulted in significantly improved overall response and disease control rates (23.9% and 55.3%) compared with previous therapies, translating into a progression-free survival ratio >1.3 in 35.7% of patients. These data demonstrate the benefit of molecular stratification in rare cancers and represent a resource that may promote clinical trial access and drug approvals in this underserved patient population. SIGNIFICANCE: Rare cancers are difficult to treat; in particular, molecular pathogenesis-oriented medical therapies are often lacking. This study shows that whole-genome/exome and RNA sequencing enables molecularly informed treatments that lead to clinical benefit in a substantial proportion of patients with advanced rare cancers and paves the way for future clinical trials.See related commentary by Eggermont et al., p. 2677.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 2659.