Circulating microRNAs in association with pancreatic cancer risk within 5 years.

Early detection is critical for improving pancreatic cancer prognosis. Our study aims to identify circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) associated with pancreatic cancer risk. The two-stage study used plasma samples collected ≤5 years prior to cancer diagnosis, from case-control studies nested in five prospective cohort studies. The discovery stage included 185 case-control pairs from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial. Replication stage samples comprised 277 pairs from Shanghai Women's Health Study/Shanghai Men's Health Study, Southern Community Cohort Study, and Multiethnic Cohort Study. Seven hundred and ninety-eight miRNAs were measured using the NanoString nCounter Analysis System. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for per 10% change in miRNAs in association with pancreatic cancer risk were derived from conditional logistic regression analysis in discovery and replication studies, separately, and then meta-analyzed. Stratified analysis was conducted by age at diagnosis (<65/≥65 years) and time interval between sample collection and diagnosis (≤2/>2 years). In the discovery stage, 120 risk associated miRNAs were identified at p < .05. Three were validated in the replication stage: hsa-miR-199a-3p/hsa-miR-199b-3p, hsa-miR-767-5p, and hsa-miR-191-5p, with respective ORs (95% CI) being 0.89 (0.84-0.95), 1.08 (1.02-1.13), and 0.90 (0.85-0.95). Five additional miRNAs, hsa-miR-640, hsa-miR-874-5p, hsa-miR-1299, hsa-miR-22-3p, and hsa-miR-449b-5p, were validated among patients diagnosed at ≥65 years, with OR (95% CI) of 1.23 (1.09-1.39), 1.33 (1.16-1.52), 1.25 (1.09-1.43), 1.28 (1.12-1.46), 0.76 (0.65-0.89), and 1.22 (1.07-1.39), respectively. The miRNA targets were enriched in pancreatic carcinogenesis/progression-related pathways. Our study suggests that circulating miRNAs may identify individuals at high risk for pancreatic cancer ≤5 years prior to diagnosis, indicating its potential utility in cancer screening and surveillance.

A phase I study of ATR inhibitor gartisertib (M4344) as a single agent and in combination with carboplatin in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: Gartisertib is an oral inhibitor of ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related protein (ATR), a key kinase of the DNA damage response. We aimed to determine the safety and tolerability of gartisertib ± carboplatin in patients with advanced solid tumours. METHODS: This phase I open-label, multicenter, first-in-human study comprised four gartisertib cohorts: A (dose escalation [DE]; Q2W); A2 (DE; QD/BID); B1 (DE+carboplatin); and C (biomarker-selected patients). RESULTS: Overall, 97 patients were enroled into cohorts A (n = 42), A2 (n = 26), B1 (n = 16) and C (n = 13). The maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) were not declared for cohorts A or B1. In cohort A2, the RP2D for gartisertib was determined as 250 mg QD. Gartisertib was generally well-tolerated; however, unexpected increased blood bilirubin in all study cohorts precluded further DE. Investigations showed that gartisertib and its metabolite M26 inhibit UGT1A1-mediated bilirubin glucuronidation in human but not dog or rat liver microsomes. Prolonged partial response (n = 1 [cohort B1]) and stable disease >6 months (n = 3) did not appear to be associated with biomarker status. Exposure generally increased dose-dependently without accumulation. CONCLUSION: Gartisertib was generally well-tolerated at lower doses; however, unexpected liver toxicity prevented further DE, potentially limiting antitumour activity. Gartisertib development was subsequently discontinued. CLINICALTRIALS: GOV: NCT02278250.

Evolving or immutable - phase I solid tumor trials in the era of precision oncology.

In the era of precision oncology (PO), systemic therapies for patients (pts) with solid tumors have shifted from chemotherapy (CT) to targeted therapy (TT) and immunotherapy (IO). This systematic survey describes features of trials enrolling between 2010 and 2020, focusing on inclusion criteria, type of dose escalation scheme (DES) utilized, and use of expansion cohorts (ECs). A literature search identified phase I studies in adults with solid tumors published January 1, 2000- December 31, 2020 from 12 journals. We included only studies enrolling between 2010 and 2020 to better capture the PO era. Two reviewers abstracted data; a third established concordance. Of 10,744 studies, 10,195 were non-topical or enrolled prior to 2010; 437 studies were included. The most common drug classes were TT (47.6%), IO (22%), and CT (6.9%). In studies which reported race, patients were predominantly white (61.7%) or Asian (25.7%), followed by black (6.5%) or other (6.1%). Heterogeneity was observed in the reporting and specification of study inclusion criteria. Only 40.1% of studies utilized ECs, and among the studies which used ECS, 46.6% were defined by genomic selection. Rule-based DES were used in 89% of trials; a 3+3 design was used in 80.5%. Of all drugs tested, 37.5% advanced to phase II, while 10.3% garnered regulatory licensure (for an indication tested in phase I). In the era of PO, TT and IO have emerged as the most studied agents in phase I trials. Rule-based DES, which are more relevant for escalating CT, are still chiefly utilized.

Evolving or Immutable - Phase I Solid Tumor Trials in the Era of Precision Oncology.

Purpose: In the era of precision oncology (PO), systemic therapies for patients (pts) with solid tumors have shifted from chemotherapy (CT) to targeted therapy (TT) and immunotherapy (IO). This systematic survey describes features of trials enrolling between 2010-2020, focusing on inclusion criteria, type of dose escalation scheme (DES) utilized, and use of expansion cohorts (ECs). Methods: A literature search identified phase I studies in adults with solid tumors published January 1, 2000 - December 31, 2020 from 12 journals. We included only studies enrolling between 2010-2020 to better capture the PO era. Two reviewers abstracted data; a third established concordance. Results: Of 10,744 studies, 10,195 were non-topical or enrolled prior to 2010; 437 studies were included. The most common drug classes were TT (47.6%), IO (22%), and CT (6.9%). In studies which reported race, patients were predominantly white (61.7%) or Asian (25.7%), followed by black (6.5%) or other (6.1%). Heterogeneity was observed in the reporting and specification of study inclusion criteria. Only 40.1% of studies utilized ECs, and among the studies which used ECS, 46.6% were defined by genomic selection. Rule-based DES were used in 89% of trials; a 3+3 design was used in 80.5%. Of all drugs tested, 37.5% advanced to phase II, while 10.3% garnered regulatory licensure (for an indication tested in phase I). Conclusion: In the era of PO, TT and IO have emerged as the most studied agents in phase I trials. Rule-based DES, which are more relevant for escalating CT, are still chiefly utilized.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Neoadjuvant Therapy for Nonmetastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Systematic Review and Guidelines.

For patients with locoregionally confined pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), margin-negative surgical resection is the only known curative treatment; however, the majority of patients are not operable candidates at initial diagnosis. Among patients with resectable disease who undergo surgery alone, the 5-year survival remains poor. Adjuvant therapies, including systemic therapy or chemoradiation, are utilized as they improve locoregional control and overall survival. There has been increasing interest in the use of neoadjuvant therapy to obtain early control of occult metastatic disease, allow local tumor response to facilitate margin-negative resection, and provide a test of time and biology to assist with the selection of candidates most likely to benefit from radical surgical resection. However, limited guidance exists regarding the relative effectiveness of treatment options. In this systematic review, the American Radium Society multidisciplinary gastrointestinal expert panel convened to develop Appropriate Use Criteria evaluating the evidence regarding neoadjuvant treatment for patients with PDAC, including surgery, systemic therapy, and radiotherapy, in terms of oncologic outcomes and quality of life. The evidence was assessed using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Study (PICOS) design framework and "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses" 2020 methodology. Eligible studies included phases 2 to 3 trials, meta-analyses, and retrospective analyses published between January 1, 2012 and December 30, 2022 in the Ovid Medline database. A summary of recommendations based on the available literature is outlined to guide practitioners in the management of patients with PDAC.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society on Appropriate Use Criteria for Nonoperative Management of Rectal Adenocarcinoma: Systematic Review and Guidelines.

For patients with rectal cancer, the standard approach of chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgery (trimodality therapy) is associated with significant long-term toxicity and/or colostomy for most patients. Patient options focused on quality of life (QOL) have dramatically improved, but there remains limited guidance regarding comparative effectiveness. This systematic review and associated guidelines evaluate how various treatment strategies compare to each other in terms of oncologic outcomes and QOL. Cochrane and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology were used to search for prospective and retrospective trials and meta-analyses of adequate quality within the Ovid Medline database between January 1, 2012, and June 15, 2023. These studies informed the expert panel, which rated the appropriateness of various treatments in 6 clinical scenarios through a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi). The search process yielded 197 articles that advised voting. Increasing data have shown that nonoperative management (NOM) and primary surgery result in QOL benefits noted over trimodality therapy without detriment to oncologic outcomes. For patients with rectal cancer for whom total mesorectal excision would result in permanent colostomy or inadequate bowel continence, NOM was strongly recommended as usually appropriate. Restaging with tumor response assessment approximately 8 to 12 weeks after completion of radiation therapy/chemoradiation therapy was deemed a necessary component of NOM. The panel recommended active surveillance in the setting of a near-complete or complete response. In the setting of NOM, 54 to 56 Gy in 27 to 31 fractions concurrent with chemotherapy and followed by consolidation chemotherapy was recommended. The panel strongly recommends primary surgery as usually appropriate for a T3N0 high rectal tumor for which low anterior resection and adequate bowel function is possible, with adjuvant chemotherapy considered if N+. Recent data support NOM and primary surgery as important options that should be offered to eligible patients. Considering the complexity of multidisciplinary management, patients should be discussed in a multidisciplinary setting, and therapy should be tailored to individual patient goals/values.

Management of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: ASCO Guideline.

PURPOSE: To provide evidence-based guidance for clinicians who treat patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature published from 2013 to 2023 was conducted to identify relevant systematic reviews, phase II and III randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and observational studies where applicable. RESULTS: Twelve RCTs, two systematic reviews, and one nonrandomized study met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS: Following assessment with magnetic resonance imaging, for patients with microsatellite stable or proficient mismatch repair locally advanced rectal cancer, total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT; ie chemoradiation [CRT] and chemotherapy) should be offered as initial treatment for patients with tumors located in the lower rectum and/or patients who are at higher risk for local and/or distant metastases. Patients without higher-risk factors may discuss chemotherapy with selective CRT depending on extent of response, TNT, or neoadjuvant long-course CRT or short-course radiation. For patients who are candidates for TNT, the preferred timing for chemotherapy is after radiation, and neoadjuvant long-course CRT is preferred over short-course radiation therapy (RT), however short-course RT may also be a viable treatment option depending on circumstances. Nonoperative management may be discussed as an alternative to total mesorectal excision for patients who have a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy. For patients whose tumors are microsatellite instability-high or mismatch repair deficient, immunotherapy is recommended.Additional information is available at http://www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines.