Larotrectinib in patients with TRK fusion-positive solid tumours: a pooled analysis of three phase 1/2 clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: The selective TRK inhibitor larotrectinib was approved for paediatric and adult patients with advanced TRK fusion-positive solid tumours based on a primary analysis set of 55 patients. The aim of our analysis was to explore the efficacy and long-term safety of larotrectinib in a larger population of patients with TRK fusion-positive solid tumours. METHODS: Patients were enrolled and treated in a phase 1 adult, a phase 1/2 paediatric, or a phase 2 adolescent and adult trial. Some eligibility criteria differed between these studies. For this pooled analysis, eligible patients were aged 1 month or older, with a locally advanced or metastatic non-CNS primary, TRK fusion-positive solid tumour, who had received standard therapy previously if available. This analysis set includes the 55 patients on which approval of larotrectinib was based. Larotrectinib was administered orally (capsule or liquid formulation), on a continuous 28-day schedule, to adults mostly at a dose of 100 mg twice daily, and to paediatric patients mostly at a dose of 100 mg/m2 (maximum of 100 mg) twice daily. The primary endpoint was objective response as assessed by local investigators in an intention-to-treat analysis. Contributing trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02122913 (active not recruiting), NCT02637687 (recruiting), and NCT02576431 (recruiting). FINDINGS: Between May 1, 2014, and Feb 19, 2019, 159 patients with TRK fusion-positive cancer were enrolled and treated with larotrectinib. Ages ranged from less than 1 month to 84 years. The proportion of patients with an objective response according to investigator assessment was 121 (79%, 95% CI 72-85) of 153 evaluable patients, with 24 (16%) having complete responses. In a safety population of 260 patients treated regardless of TRK fusion status, the most common grade 3 or 4 larotrectinib-related adverse events were increased alanine aminotransferase (eight [3%] of 260 patients), anaemia (six, 2%), and decreased neutrophil count (five [2%]). The most common larotrectinib-related serious adverse events were increased alanine aminotransferase (two [<1%] of 260 patients), increased aspartate aminotransferase (two [<1%]), and nausea (two [<1%]). No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: These data confirm that TRK fusions define a unique molecular subgroup of advanced solid tumours for which larotrectinib is highly active. Safety data indicate that long-term administration of larotrectinib is feasible. FUNDING: Bayer and Loxo Oncology.

A phase 2 randomised study of veliparib plus FOLFIRI±bevacizumab versus placebo plus FOLFIRI±bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has low survival rates. We assessed if addition of veliparib, concurrent to FOLFIRI, improves survival in patients with previously untreated mCRC. METHODS: This study compared veliparib (200 mg BID for 7 days of each 14-day cycle) to placebo, each with FOLFIRI. Bevacizumab was allowed in both arms. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Patients were randomised to receive veliparib (n = 65) or placebo (n = 65) in combination with FOLFIRI. Median PFS was 12 vs 11 months (veliparib vs placebo) [HR = 0.94 (95% CI: 0.60, 1.48)]. Median OS was 25 vs 27 months [HR = 1.26 (95% CI: 0.74, 2.16)]. Response rate was 57% vs 62%. Median DOR was 11 vs 9 months [HR = 0.73 (95% CI: 0.38, 1.40)]. AEs with significantly higher frequency (p < 0.05) in the veliparib group were anaemia (39% vs 19%, p = 0.019) and neutropenia (66% vs 37%, p = 0.001) for common AEs (≥20%); neutropenia (59% vs 22%, p < 0.001) for common Grade 3/4 AEs (≥5%); none in serious AEs. Haematopoietic cytopenias were more common with veliparib (79% vs 52%, p = 0.003). Fourteen percent of patients on veliparib and 15% on placebo discontinued treatment due to AEs. CONCLUSION: Veliparib added to FOLFIRI ± bevacizumab demonstrated similar efficacy as FOLFIRI ± bevacizumab in frontline mCRC patients. No unexpected safety concerns occurred.

Correction: A phase 2 randomised study of veliparib plus FOLFIRI±bevacizumab versus placebo plus FOLFIRI±bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer.

The original version of this article contained an error in Figure 1a. The number of patients at risk listed in the Veliparib arm of Figure 1a should have read "65" instead of "35".An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

Phase I study combining the aurora kinase a inhibitor alisertib with mFOLFOX in gastrointestinal cancer.

Overexpression and cellular mis-localization of aurora kinase A (AURKA) in gastrointestinal cancers results in chromosomal instability, activation of multiple oncogenic pathways, and inhibition of pro-apoptotic signaling. Inhibition of AURKA causes mitotic delays, severe chromosome congression, and activation of p53/p73 leading to cell death. Our preclinical data showed cooperative activity with the AURKA inhibitor alisertib and platinum agents in cell lines and xenografts, and suggested an optimal treatment window. Therefore, this study was designed to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of alisertib in combination with modified FOLFOX (mFOLFOX), as this is a standard platinum-based therapy for gastrointestinal cancers. Standard 3 + 3 dose escalation was used, where the starting dose of alisertib was 10 mg twice daily (Days 1-3), with leucovorin (400 mg/m2) and oxaliplatin (85 mg/m2) on Day 2 followed by continuous 46-h 5-FU (2400 mg/m2) infusion on Days 2-4 in 14-day cycles. Fourteen patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancers were enrolled and two doses explored; two patients were not evaluable for dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and replaced. Two patients experienced DLTs at 20 mg of alisertib (Grade 3 fatigue (n = 2); Grade 3 nausea, vomiting, dehydration with hospitalization (n = 1)). MTD was 10 mg alisertib with 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin and 2400 mg/m2 5-FU. Most frequent toxicities were nausea (57%), diarrhea, fatigue, neuropathy, and vomiting (43%), and anorexia and anemia (36%); most were Grade 1-2. One patient with colorectal cancer had a partial response of 12 evaluable patients, and four patients had stable disease. Alisertib in combination with mFOLFOX did not demonstrate unexpected side effects, but the regimen was only tolerable at the lowest dose investigated.

A Phase 1b/2 Study of the Bruton Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Ibrutinib and the PD-L1 Inhibitor Durvalumab in Patients with Pretreated Solid Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Ibrutinib, a first-in-class, once-daily inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase, is approved in the United States for the treatment of various B-cell malignancies. Preclinical data suggest synergistic antitumor activity of ibrutinib with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors in solid tumors. This study evaluated ibrutinib plus durvalumab, a PD-L1-targeting antibody, in patients with relapsed/refractory solid tumors. METHODS: This open-label, multicenter, phase 1b/2 study enrolled previously treated patients with stage III/IV pancreatic adenocarcinoma, breast cancer, or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Phase 1b determined the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). In phase 2, patients were treated at the RP2D to evaluate the safety and antitumor activity of ibrutinib plus durvalumab. RESULTS: The RP2D was identified as ibrutinib 560 mg p.o. daily and durvalumab 10 mg/kg i.v. every 2 weeks, with 122 patients treated at the RP2D. Median age was 61 years, and the majority of patients (94%) had stage IV disease. Overall response rates (complete or partial responses) were 2% for pancreatic cancer, 3% for breast cancer, and 0% for NSCLC. Median progression-free survival was 1.7, 1.7, and 2.0 months in the pancreatic cancer, breast cancer, and NSCLC cohorts, respectively. Median overall survival was 4.2, 4.2, and 7.9 months in the pancreatic cancer, breast cancer, and NSCLC cohorts, respectively. The safety profiles observed across tumor types were consistent with the known safety profiles for ibrutinib and durvalumab. Grade ≥3 adverse events in ≥5% of all patients were hyponatremia (10%), dyspnea (7%), maculopapular rash (7%), pneumonia (7%), anemia (6%), and diarrhea (6%). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of ibrutinib 560 mg daily and durvalumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks had an acceptable safety profile. The antitumor activity of the ibrutinib-durvalumab combination was limited in our study population.

Consensus statement on mandatory measurements in pancreatic cancer trials (COMM-PACT) for systemic treatment of unresectable disease.

Variations in the reporting of potentially confounding variables in studies investigating systemic treatments for unresectable pancreatic cancer pose challenges in drawing accurate comparisons between findings. In this Review, we establish the first international consensus on mandatory baseline and prognostic characteristics in future trials for the treatment of unresectable pancreatic cancer. We did a systematic literature search to find phase 3 trials investigating first-line systemic treatment for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer to identify baseline characteristics and prognostic variables. We created a structured overview showing the reporting frequencies of baseline characteristics and the prognostic relevance of identified variables. We used a modified Delphi panel of two rounds involving an international panel of 23 leading medical oncologists in the field of pancreatic cancer to develop a consensus on the various variables identified. In total, 39 randomised controlled trials that had data on 15 863 patients were included, of which 32 baseline characteristics and 26 prognostic characteristics were identified. After two consensus rounds, 23 baseline characteristics and 12 prognostic characteristics were designated as mandatory for future pancreatic cancer trials. The COnsensus statement on Mandatory Measurements in unresectable PAncreatic Cancer Trials (COMM-PACT) identifies a mandatory set of baseline and prognostic characteristics to allow adequate comparison of outcomes between pancreatic cancer studies.

First-in-human phase I dose escalation study of MK-8033 in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Background C-Met, which is frequently activated in multiple cancers, has been implicated in tumor formation, progression, metastasis, angiogenesis, and resistance to multiple therapies. MK-8033 is a small-molecule inhibitor of c-Met that binds preferentially to the activated conformation, and has demonstrated anti-tumor activity in preclinical models. This first-in-human trial was performed to establish the safety and maximum tolerated dose (MTD), as well as preliminary pharmacokinetics (PK) and clinical activity. Methods Forty-seven patients were enrolled in three parts. The primary objective of Parts A and B was safety, whereas Part C evaluated the effect of proton-pump inhibitors on MK-8033 absorption. Dose escalation used an accelerated continual reassessment method, and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were any treatment-related, first course non-hematologic grade ≥ 3 toxicity (except alopecia or inadequately treated nausea/vomiting/diarrhea), grade 4 hematologic toxicity (except grade 3 neutropenic fever and thrombocytopenia), or toxicity where treatment is held >3 weeks. Results Forty-six patients were treated across nine dose levels, and the MTD was 750 mg twice daily. DLTs were fatigue, nausea, vomiting, transaminitis, and hypokalemia. Most frequent toxicities were fatigue (28.3%), nausea (21.7%), and alopecia (19.6%), predominately grade ≤ 2. One patient with endometriod adenocarcinoma achieved a partial response and eight had stable disease. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 57 days. Strikingly, the PFS for the one responder was 846 days. PK results showed that proton-pump inhibitors have no effect on MK-8033 absorption. Conclusion MK-8033 was well tolerated with no significant toxicity issues, albeit with limited clinical activity. Unfortunately, the company decided to discontinue further clinical development of MK-8033.

Correction to: Phase I study combining the aurora kinase a inhibitor alisertib with mFOLFOX in gastrointestinal cancer.

The authors would like to note that the investigator affiliations have been corrected to reflect the actual affiliations of each author. The authors would also like to note an amendment to the first name of the second author. Nilo Azad was changed to reflect the full name of the author, which is Nilofer S. Azad as shown above. The original article has been corrected.

An Intergroup Randomized Phase II Study of Bevacizumab or Cetuximab in Combination with Gemcitabine and in Combination with Chemoradiation in Patients with Resected Pancreatic Carcinoma: A Trial of the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (E2204).

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate toxicity of two treatment arms, A (cetuximab) and B (bevacizumab), when combined with gemcitabine, and chemoradiation in patients with completely resected pancreatic carcinoma. Secondary objectives included overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). METHODS: Patients with R0/R1 resection were randomized 1:1 to cetuximab or bevacizumab administered in combination with gemcitabine for two treatment cycles. Next three cycles included concurrent cetuximab/bevacizumab plus chemoradiation, followed by one cycle of cetuximab/bevacizumab. Cycles 7-12 included cetuximab/bevacizumab with gemcitabine. Cycles were 2 weeks. Frequency of specific toxicities was summarized for each treatment arm at two times during the study, after chemotherapy but prior to chemoradiation and after all therapy. RESULTS: A total of 127 patients were randomized (A, n = 65; B, n = 62). Prior to chemoradiation, the overall rate for toxicities of interest was 10% for arm A and 2% for arm B. After all therapy, the overall rates for toxicities of interest were 30 and 25% for arms A and B, respectively. Overall median OS and DFS were 17 and 11 months, respectively, which is not a significant improvement over expected survival rates for historical controls. CONCLUSIONS: Both treatments were tolerable with manageable toxicities, and were safe enough for a phase III trial had this been indicated.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Neuroendocrine and Adrenal Tumors, Version 2.2018.

The NCCN Guidelines for Neuroendocrine and Adrenal Tumors provide recommendations for the management of adult patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), adrenal gland tumors, pheochromocytomas, and paragangliomas. Management of NETs relies heavily on the site of the primary NET. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the management options and the 2018 updates to the guidelines for locoregional advanced disease, and/or distant metastasis originating from gastrointestinal tract, bronchopulmonary, and thymus primary NETs.

Current Concepts in the Treatment of Resectable Pancreatic Cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The diagnosis of pancreatic cancer carries with it a high mortality rate. Despite advances in the field, this has remained relatively unchanged over the last few decades. Current options for the treatment of resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma will be reviewed here in conjunction with the historical data that support them. We will focus on updates in treatment guidelines and ongoing clinical trials of interest. RECENT FINDINGS: For localized disease, standard of care includes resection followed by adjuvant chemotherapy ± chemoradiation. Recently, a report was published supporting the use of doublet therapy with gemcitabine and capecitabine (as opposed to gemcitabine monotherapy), which prompted a practice-changing update to major treatment guidelines. Multiple trials using neoadjuvant treatment, novel therapies, and different forms of radiation are ongoing. Although pancreatic cancer is an active area of research, outcomes remain dismal. Clinical trials will need to be more robust and innovative to drastically improve survival statistics.

A Phase Ib Dose-Escalation Study of the Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Cobimetinib and Duligotuzumab in Patients with Previously Treated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Cancers with Mutant KRAS.

LESSONS LEARNED: Cobimetinib and duligotuzumab were well tolerated as single agents and in combination with other agents.The cobimetinib and duligotuzumab combination was associated with increased toxicity, most notably gastrointestinal, and limited efficacy in the patient population tested. BACKGROUND: KRAS-mutant tumors possess abnormal mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPK) pathway signaling, leading to dysregulated cell proliferation. Cobimetinib blocks MAPK signaling. The dual-action antibody duligotuzumab (MEHD7945A) inhibits ligand binding to both epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3). Blockade of EGFR/HER3 and inhibition of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MEK) in KRAS-mutant tumors may provide additive benefit. METHODS: Patients with KRAS-mutant solid tumors were eligible for this phase Ib dose-escalation study with a planned expansion phase. Duligotuzumab was given intravenously (IV) at 1,100 mg every 2 weeks (q2w), while cobimetinib was given orally in a standard 3 + 3 design to identify the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). The primary objective was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of this combination. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were enrolled. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) included grade 4 hypokalemia and grade 3 mucosal inflammation, asthenia, and dermatitis acneiform. Seventy percent of patients experienced grade 3 or worse adverse events (AEs). Five (22%) and 12 (52%) patients missed at least 1 dose of duligotuzumab and cobimetinib, respectively, and 9 (39%) patients required a cobimetinib dose reduction. Three (13%) patients discontinued due to an AE. Best response was limited to 9 patients with stable disease and 13 patients with progressive disease. CONCLUSION: Given the limited tolerability and efficacy of this combination, the study did not proceed to expansion stage and closed for enrollment.

Academic Cancer Center Phase I Program Development.

Multiple factors critical to the effectiveness of academic phase I cancer programs were assessed among 16 academic centers in the U.S. Successful cancer centers were defined as having broad phase I and I/II clinical trial portfolios, multiple investigator-initiated studies, and correlative science. The most significant elements were institutional philanthropic support, experienced clinical research managers, robust institutional basic research, institutional administrative efforts to reduce bureaucratic regulatory delays, phase I navigators to inform patients and physicians of new studies, and a large cancer center patient base. New programs may benefit from a separate stand-alone operation, but mature phase I programs work well when many of the activities are transferred to disease-oriented teams. The metrics may be useful as a rubric for new and established academic phase I programs. The Oncologist 2017;22:369-374.

Phase II study of the Multikinase inhibitor of angiogenesis, Linifanib, in patients with metastatic and refractory colorectal cancer expressing mutated KRAS.

Background Targeting angiogenesis in advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) has been one of the many factors prolonging survival. Bevacizumab was the first agent to demonstrate this, but even after progression on bevacizumab, continued VEGF-inhibition continues to improve survival. Combining epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies with standard frontline therapies have also improved clinical outcomes, yet the improved benefit is not observed in patients with mutant KRAS. Thus, an unmet medical need exists to develop additional therapeutic options for patients with KRAS mutant CRC. Methods Patients received the anti-angiogenic agent linifanib at the recommended phase II dose of 17.5 mg. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), with a goal of 10%. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Simon's optimal two-stage design was used to assess futility. Linifanib was considered inactive if two or fewer patients among the first 30 achieved an objective response. Results Thirty patients were enrolled on study. Grade 3 treatment-related toxicities occurring in at least two patients were fatigue, hypertension, proteinuria, diarrhea, nausea, oral pain, vomiting, thrombocytopenia, and arthralgia. Although no responses were observed, 63.5% of patients achieved stable disease. The median PFS and OS were 4.7 months and 9.5 months, respectively. Stopping rules for lack of clinical efficacy led to study closure. Conclusion Despite observing zero responses, a majority of patients had stable disease and eight patients had stable disease lasting longer than 5 months. These results suggest that linifanib has some anti-tumor activity in KRAS mutant metastatic and refractory CRC.

Neuroendocrine tumors, version 1.2015.

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) comprise a broad family of tumors that may or may not be associated with symptoms attributable to hormonal hypersecretion. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for Neuroendocrine Tumors discuss the diagnosis and management of both sporadic and hereditary NETs. This selection from the guidelines focuses on sporadic NETs of the pancreas, gastrointestinal tract, lung, and thymus.

Enabling a genetically informed approach to cancer medicine: a retrospective evaluation of the impact of comprehensive tumor profiling using a targeted next-generation sequencing panel.

BACKGROUND: Oncogenic genetic alterations "drive" neoplastic cell proliferation. Small molecule inhibitors and antibodies are being developed that target an increasing number of these altered gene products. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is a powerful tool to identify tumor-specific genetic changes. To determine the clinical impact of extensive genetic analysis, we reviewed our experience using a targeted NGS platform (FoundationOne) in advanced cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively assessed demographics, NGS results, and therapies received for patients undergoing targeted NGS (exonic sequencing of 236 genes and selective intronic sequencing from 19 genes) between April 2012 and August 2013. Coprimary endpoints were the percentage of patients with targeted therapy options uncovered by mutational profiling and the percentage who received genotype-directed therapy. RESULTS: Samples from 103 patients were tested, most frequently breast carcinoma (26%), head and neck cancers (23%), and melanoma (10%). Most patients (83%) were found to harbor potentially actionable genetic alterations, involving cell-cycle regulation (44%), phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase-AKT (31%), and mitogen-activated protein kinase (19%) pathways. With median follow-up of 4.1 months, 21% received genotype-directed treatments, most in clinical trials (61%), leading to significant benefit in several cases. The most common reasons for not receiving genotype-directed therapy were selection of standard therapy (35%) and clinical deterioration (13%). CONCLUSION: Mutational profiling using a targeted NGS panel identified potentially actionable alterations in a majority of advanced cancer patients. The assay identified additional therapeutic options and facilitated clinical trial enrollment. As time progresses, NGS results will be used to guide therapy in an increasing proportion of patients.

Phase 1/2 study of KRN330, a fully human anti-A33 monoclonal antibody, plus irinotecan as second-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

KRN330 is a recombinant, fully-human monoclonal antibody directed against A33, a surface differentiation antigen that is uniformly expressed in 95 % of colorectal cancers. A previous Phase 1 study of single-agent KRN330 identified a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of 3 mg/kg q2w and preliminary evidence of clinical activity among patients with advanced and metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This Phase 1/2 trial sought to assess the safety and activity of second-line KRN330 plus irinotecan in patients with mCRC. Patients with mCRC who showed disease progression after FOLFOX/CapOx received intravenous doses of KRN330 (0.5 or 1.0 mg/kg qw or q2w) plus irinotecan (180 mg/m(2)) in a standard 3 + 3 dose escalation. The MTD of KRN330 with irinotecan in 19 patients was 0.5 mg/kg qw in the Phase 1 study with gastrointestinal effects and neutropenia being the predominant dose-limiting toxicities. In the Phase 2 study, the most frequent treatment-related Grade ≥3 toxicities in 44 patients were fatigue (15.9 %), neutropenia (13.6 %), leukopenia (6.8 %), diarrhea (4.5 %), and dehydration (4.5 %). Objective response rate (ORR) was 4.5 % and disease control rate was 45.5 % for the intent-to-treat population. Median progression-free survival was 87 days (95 % CI, 43-136 days). The prespecified ORR of KRN330 plus irinotecan was not met. Further investigation of KRN330 plus other agents may be warranted.

Treatment of metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a review.

Gemcitabine monotherapy has been the standard of care for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer for several decades. Despite recent advances in various chemotherapeutic regimens and in the development of targeted therapies, metastatic pancreatic cancer remains highly resistant to chemotherapy. Previous studies of several combination regimens showed minimal or no significant change in overall survival compared with gemcitabine alone. Secreted protein acidic and rich in cysteine (SPARC) overexpression in pancreatic stromal fibroblasts is considered one of the major causes of chemotherapy resistance. The nanoparticle albumin-bound formulation of paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) has been found to be superior to other formulations of paclitaxel because of its favorable pharmacokinetic properties. Initial preclinical studies showed its synergistic effect with gemcitabine in pancreatic cancer, in which nab-paclitaxel is sequestered by SPARC to cause stromal depletion and increasing microvasculature, resulting in higher gemcitabine concentration within the tumor. In the recent phase III multinational Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Clinical Trial (MPACT), the combination of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel was shown to be superior to gemcitabine monotherapy, with an increase in median survival of 1.8 months. Combination therapy with gemcitabine plus erlotinib, or with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel, or the multidrug regimen of leucovorin, fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) can be considered as first-line chemotherapy for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. In this review we will discuss details of the recently approved combination of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel for first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma and compare it with other therapeutic options.

Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: need for standardization and methods for optimal clinical trial design.

BACKGROUND: Methodological limitations of prior studies have prevented progress in the treatment of patients with borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Shortcomings have included an absence of staging and treatment standards and pre-existing biases with regard to the use of neoadjuvant therapy and the role of vascular resection at pancreatectomy. METHODS: In this manuscript, we review limitations of studies of borderline resectable PDAC reported to date, highlight important controversies related to this disease stage, emphasize the research infrastructure necessary for its future study, and present a recently-approved Intergroup pilot study (Alliance A021101) that will provide a foundation upon which subsequent well-designed clinical trials can be performed. RESULTS: We identified twenty-three studies published since 2001 which report outcomes of patients with tumors labeled as borderline resectable and who were treated with neoadjuvant therapy prior to planned pancreatectomy. These studies were heterogeneous in terms of the populations studied, the metrics used to characterize therapeutic response, and the indications used to select patients for surgery. Mechanisms used to standardize these and other issues that are incorporated into Alliance A021101 are reviewed. CONCLUSIONS: Rigorous standards of clinical trial design incorporated into trials of other disease stages must be adopted in all future studies of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. The Intergroup trial should serve as a paradigm for such investigations.

Systemic cytotoxic and biological therapies of colorectal liver metastases: expert consensus statement.

Systemic therapy for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) has undergone significant development in the past 15 years. Therapy regimens consisting of combinations of cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents have demonstrated greater efficacy and contributed to a significant survival improvement. As the majority of patients who undergo resection for liver-only CRLM are at risk of disease recurrence and cancer-related death, combining resection with systemic therapy appears sensible. However, trial-based evidence is sparse to support this concept. Peri-operative FOLFOX has demonstrated a progression-free survival benefit in a single Phase III trial; the safety of chemotherapy and subsequent operations was acceptable and only a few patients showed initial progression. Chemotherapy-associated liver injury (CALI), including sinusoidal obstruction syndrome and steatohepatitis, has been observed after cytotoxic therapy, and should have implications for chemotherapy plans prior to hepatectomy. In general, pre-operative chemotherapy should not extend beyond 3 months. For patients with unresectable liver-only CRLM, a response to chemotherapy could establish resectability and should be considered an initial treatment goal. In patients with unresectable CRLM, oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-containing combinations represent the standard options, although single-agent choices may be appropriate for individual patients. The addition of bevacizumab carries the potential for a greater response and possibly for reduced CALI risks. In tumours without K-ras mutations, anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) agents are also reasonable choices for a greater response and improved survival outcomes. It is crucial that all systemic CRLM treatment decisions include proper definitions of treatment goals and endpoints, and are derived based on appropriate multidisciplinary considerations for other potentially applicable local or regional modalities.