Management of biliary tract cancers in early-onset patients: A nested multicenter retrospective study of the ACABI GERCOR PRONOBIL cohort.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Accumulating data has shown the rising incidence and poor prognosis of early-onset gastrointestinal cancers, but few data exist on biliary tract cancers (BTC). We aimed to analyse the clinico-pathological, molecular, therapeutic characteristics and prognosis of patients with early onset BTC (EOBTC, age ≤50 years at diagnosis), versus olders. METHODS: We analysed patients diagnosed with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and gallbladder adenocarcinoma between 1 January 2003 and 30 June 2021. Baseline characteristics and treatment were described in each group and compared. Progression-free survival, overall survival and disease-free survival were estimated in each group using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Overall, 1256 patients were included, 188 (15%) with EOBTC. Patients with EOBTC demonstrated fewer comorbidities (63.5% vs. 84.5%, p < .0001), higher tumour stage (cT3-4: 50.0% vs. 32.3%, p = .0162), bilobar liver involvement (47.8% vs. 32.1%, p = .0002), and metastatic disease (67.6% vs. 57.5%, p = .0097) compared to older. Patients with EOBTC received second-line therapy more frequently (89.5% vs. 81.0% non-EOBTC, p = .0224). For unresectable patients with BTC, median overall survival was 17.0 vs. 16.2 months (p = .0876), and median progression-free survival was 5.8 vs. 6.0 months (p = .8293), in EOBTC vs. older. In advanced stages, fewer actionable alterations were found in EOBTC (e.g., IDH1 mutations [7.8% vs. 16.6%]; FGFR2-fusion [11.7% vs. 8.9%]; p = .029). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with EOBTC have a more advanced disease at diagnosis, are treated more heavily at an advanced stage but show similar survival. A distinctive molecular profile enriched for FGRF2 fusions was found.

CD3-CD8 immune score associated with a clinical score stratifies PDAC prognosis regardless of adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Stratification of the prognosis of pancreatic cancer (PDAC) patients treated by surgery is based solely on clinical variables, such as tumor stage and node status. The development of biomarkers of relapse is needed, especially to drive administration of adjuvant therapy in this at-risk population. Our study evaluates the prognostic performance of a CD3- and CD8-based immune score. CD3, CD8 and Foxp3 expression were evaluated on whole slides in two retrospective PDAC cohorts totaling 334 patients. For this study, we developed an immune score to estimate CD3 and CD8 infiltration in both tumor core and invasive margin using computer-guided analysis with QuPath software. Variables were combined in a dichotomous immune score. The association between immune and clinical scores, and both PFS and OS was investigated. We observed that a dichotomous immune score predicts both PFS and OS of localized PDAC. By univariate and multivariate analysis, immune score, tumor grade, adjuvant therapy, lymph node status, and adjuvant chemotherapy administration were associated with PFS and OS. We subsequently associated the PDAC immune score and clinical variables in a combined score. This combined score predicted patient outcomes independently of adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatment, and improved patient prognostic prediction compared to clinical variables or immune score alone.

Gemcitabine and Paclitaxel Versus Gemcitabine Alone After 5-Fluorouracil, Oxaliplatin, and Irinotecan in Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Randomized Phase III PRODIGE 65-UCGI 36-GEMPAX UNICANCER Study.

PURPOSE: GEMPAX was an open-label, randomized phase III clinical trial designed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of gemcitabine plus paclitaxel versus gemcitabine alone as second-line treatment for patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) who previously received 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan. METHODS: Patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed mPDAC were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive GEMPAX (paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 + gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2; IV; once at day (D) 1, D8, and D15/arm A) or gemcitabine (arm B) alone once at D1, D8, and D15 every 28 days until progression, toxicity, or patient's decision. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), quality of life, and safety. RESULTS: Overall, 211 patients (median age, 64 [30-86] years; 62% male) were included. After a median study follow-up for alive patients of 13.4 versus 13.8 months in arm A versus arm B, the median OS (95% CI) was 6.4 (5.2 to 7.4) versus 5.9 months (4.6 to 6.9; hazard ratio [HR], 0.87 [0.63 to 1.20]; P = 0.4095), the median PFS was 3.1 (2.2 to 4.3) versus 2.0 months (1.9 to 2.3; HR, 0.64 [0.47 to 0.89]; P = 0.0067), and the ORR was 17.1% (11.3 to 24.4) versus 4.2% (0.9 to 11.9; P = 0.008) in arm A versus arm B, respectively. Overall, 16.7% of patients in arm A and 2.9% in arm B discontinued their treatment because of adverse events (AEs). One grade 5 AE associated with both gemcitabine and paclitaxel was reported in arm A (acute respiratory distress), and 58.0% versus 27.1% of patients experienced grade ≥3 treatment-related AEs in arm A versus arm B, among which 15.2% versus 4.3% had anemia, 15.9% versus 15.7% had neutropenia, 19.6% versus 4.3% had thrombocytopenia, 10.1% versus 2.9% had asthenia and 12.3% versus 0.0% had neuropathy. CONCLUSION: While GEMPAX did not meet the primary end point of OS versus gemcitabine alone in patients with mPDAC in the second-line setting, both PFS and ORR were significantly improved.