Chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic adenosquamous carcinoma: A retrospective multicenter AGEO study.

Pancreatic adenosquamous carcinoma (PASC) account for <5% of pancreatic malignancies. The efficacy of modern chemotherapy regimens in patients with advanced PASC is unknown. Patients with advanced PASC from 2008 to 2021 were consecutively included in this retrospective multicenter study. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier method. Ninety-four PASC from 16 French centers were included (median age, 67.3 years; males, 56.4%; metastatic disease, 85.1%). The first-line treatment was chemotherapy for 79 patients (84.0%) (37 FOLFIRINOX (FX), 7 Gemcitabine-nab paclitaxel (GN) and 35 for all other regimen) or best supportive care (BSC) alone for 15 patients (16.0%). No significant difference was observed between FX and GN in terms of PFS (P = .67) or OS (P = .5). Modern regimens pooled together (FX and GN) as compared to all others chemotherapy regimens showed an improvement of overall response rate (39.5% and 9.7%, P = .002), PFS (median, 7.8 vs 4.7 months, P = .02) and OS (median, 12.7 vs 9.2 months, P = .35). This large study evaluating first-line treatment regimens in advanced PASC suggests that modern regimens as FX or GN may be preferable to all other chemotherapy regimens. These results deserve confirmation in prospective studies.

Evaluation of the interest to combine a CD4 Th1-inducer cancer vaccine derived from telomerase and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomized non-comparative phase II study (TERTIO - PRODIGE 82).

BACKGROUND: Several cancer immunotherapies that target the PD-L1/PD-1 pathway show promising clinical activity in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the standard of care in first-line treatment with atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1 therapy) in combination with bevacizumab is associated with a limited objective response rate. Telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) activation meets the criteria of oncogenic addiction in HCC and could be actionable therapeutic target and a relevant tumor antigen. Therefore we hypothesized that combining anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy with an anti-telomerase vaccine might be an attractive therapy in HCC. UCPVax is a therapeutic cancer vaccine composed of two separate peptides derived from telomerase (human TERT). UCPVax has been evaluated in a multicenter phase I/II study in non-small cell lung cancers and has demonstrated to be safe and immunogenic, and is under evaluation in combination with atezolizumab in a phase II clinical trial in tumors where telomerase reactivation contributes to an oncogene addiction (HPV+ cancers). The aim of the TERTIO study is to determine the clinical interest and immunological efficacy of a treatment combining the CD4 helper T-inducer cancer anti-telomerase vaccine (UCPVax) with atezolizumab and bevacizumab in unresectable HCC in a multicenter randomized phase II study. METHODS: Patients with locally advanced, metastatic or unresectable HCC who have not previously received systemic anti-cancer treatment are eligible. The primary end point is the objective response rate at 6 months. Patients will be allocated to a treatment arm with a randomization 2:1. In both arms, patients will receive atezolizumab at fixed dose of 1200 mg IV infusion and bevacizumab at fixed dose of 15 mg/kg IV infusion, every 3 weeks, according to the standard of care. In the experimental arm, these treatments will be combined with the UCPVax vaccine at 0.5 mg subcutaneously. DISCUSSION: Combining anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy with an anti-telomerase vaccine gains serious consideration in HCC, in order to extend the clinical efficacy of anti-PD-1/PD-L1. Indeed, anti-cancer vaccines can induce tumor-specific T cell expansion and activation and therefore restore the cancer-immunity cycle in patients lacking pre-existing anti-tumor responses. Thus, there is a strong rational to combine immune checkpoint blockade therapy and anticancer vaccine (UCPVax) in order to activate antitumor T cell immunity and bypass the immunosuppression in the tumor microenvironment in HCC. This pivotal proof of concept study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of a CD4 Th1-inducer cancer vaccine derived from telomerase (UCPVax) and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in unresectable HCC, as well as confirming their synergic mechanism, and settling the basis for a new combination for future clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05528952.

Effect of Adapted Physical Activity in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: The APACaP GERCOR Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: The impact of adapted physical activity (APA) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (aPDAC) is unknown. This study evaluated whether APA in addition to standard care improved HRQoL in patients who have aPDAC who are receiving first-line chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced/metastatic PDAC and an ECOG performance status of 0 to 2 were randomized (1:1) to receive standard care (standard arm) or standard care plus a home-based 16-week APA program (APA arm). The primary objective was the effect of the APA program on 3 dimensions of the EORTC QLQ-C30: global health status, physical function, and fatigue at week 16 (W16), with a one-sided type I error of 0.017 for each dimension. The primary HRQoL analysis was performed in patients with available baseline and W16 scores for the dimensions (ie, the modified intention-to-treat population 1 [mITT1]), and secondary longitudinal HRQoL analyses using the mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) and time until definitive deterioration (TUDD) methods were performed in the mITT1 population and in patients with baseline and at least one follow-up questionnaire (mITT2 population). A difference of ≥5 points was considered to be clinically relevant. RESULTS: Of 326 included patients, 313 were randomized to the standard (n=157) or APA (n=156) arms. In the mITT1 population (n=172), the mean differences in global health status, physical function, and fatigue at W16 adjusted from baseline were -0.98 (SD, 23.9; P=.39), -2.08 (SD, 21.3; P=.26), and 4.16 (SD, 29.2; P=.17), respectively, showing a non-statistically significant benefit with APA. In the mITT2 population (n=259), APA was associated with statistically significant and clinically relevant improvement in 5 and 8 dimensions of the HRQoL in the longitudinal MMRM and TUDD analyses, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: APA improved several dimensions of HRQoL in patients with aPDAC receiving first-line chemotherapy and standard care.

FOLFIRI plus BEvacizumab or aFLIbercept after FOLFOX-bevacizumab failure for COlorectal cancer (BEFLICO): An AGEO multicenter study.

After failure of first line FOLFOX-bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), adding either bevacizumab or aflibercept to second-line FOLFIRI increases survival compared to FOLFIRI alone. In this French retrospective multicentre cohort, we included patients with a mCRC treated with either FOLFIRI-aflibercept or FOLFIRI-bevacizumab. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR: CR + PR + SD) and safety. We included 681 patients from 36 centers, 326 and 355 in the aflibercept and bevacizumab groups, respectively. Median age was 64.2 years and 45.2% of patients were men. Most patients had RAS-mutated tumors (80.8%) and synchronous metastases (85.7%). After a median follow up of 31.2 months, median OS was 13.0 months (95% CI: 11.3-14.7) and 10.4 months (95% CI: 8.8-11.4) in the bevacizumab and aflibercept groups, respectively (P < .0001). Median PFS was 6.0 months (95% CI: 5.4-6.5) and 5.1 months (95% CI: 4.3-5.6) (P < .0001). After adjustment on age, PS, PFS of first line, primary tumor resection, metastasis location and RAS/BRAF status, bevacizumab was still associated with better OS (HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.59-0.86, P = .0003). FOLFIRI-bevacizumab combination was associated with longer OS and PFS, and a better tolerability, as compared to FOLFIRI-aflibercept after progression on FOLFOX-bevacizumab.

Management recommendations for pancreatic manifestations of von Hippel-Lindau disease.

Von Hippel-Lindau disease (VHL) is a multineoplasm inherited disease manifesting with hemangioblastoma of the central nervous system and retina, adrenal pheochromocytoma, renal cell carcinoma, pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and cysts, and neoplasms/cysts of the ear, broad ligament, and testicles. During 2018-2020, the VHL Alliance gathered several committees of experts in the various clinical manifestations of VHL to review the literature, gather the available evidence on VHL, and develop recommendations for patient management. The current report details the results of the discussion of a group of experts in the pancreatic manifestations of VHL along with their proposed recommendations for the clinical surveillance and management of patients with VHL. The recommendations subcommittee performed a comprehensive systematic review of the literature and conducted panel discussions to reach the current recommendations. The level of evidence was defined according to the Shekelle variation of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation grading system. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network Categories of Evidence and Consensus defined the committee members' interpretation of the evidence and degree of consensus. The recommendations encompass the main aspects of VHL-related pancreatic manifestations and their clinical management. They are presented in a clinical orientation, including general planning of screening and surveillance for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, utility of biochemical biomarkers, the optimal choice for imaging modality, indirect risk stratification, indications for tissue sampling of VHL-related pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, and interventions. These recommendations are designed to serve as the reference for all aspects of the screening, surveillance, and management of VHL-related pancreatic manifestations.

Maintenance Olaparib for Germline BRCA-Mutated Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation make up a small subgroup of those with metastatic pancreatic cancer. The poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor olaparib has had antitumor activity in this population. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy of olaparib as maintenance therapy in patients who had a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation and metastatic pancreatic cancer and disease that had not progressed during first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 3:2 ratio, to receive maintenance olaparib tablets (300 mg twice daily) or placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival, which was assessed by blinded independent central review. RESULTS: Of the 3315 patients who underwent screening, 154 underwent randomization and were assigned to a trial intervention (92 to receive olaparib and 62 to receive placebo). The median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the olaparib group than in the placebo group (7.4 months vs. 3.8 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35 to 0.82; P = 0.004). An interim analysis of overall survival, at a data maturity of 46%, showed no difference between the olaparib and placebo groups (median, 18.9 months vs. 18.1 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.46; P = 0.68). There was no significant between-group difference in health-related quality of life, as indicated by the overall change from baseline in the global quality-of-life score (on a 100-point scale, with higher scores indicating better quality of life) based on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (between-group difference, -2.47 points; 95% CI, -7.27 to 2.33). The incidence of grade 3 or higher adverse events was 40% in the olaparib group and 23% in the placebo group (between-group difference, 16 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.02 to 31); 5% and 2% of the patients, respectively, discontinued the trial intervention because of an adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with a germline BRCA mutation and metastatic pancreatic cancer, progression-free survival was longer with maintenance olaparib than with placebo. (Funded by AstraZeneca and others; POLO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02184195.).

FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine as Adjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer, combination chemotherapy with fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) leads to longer overall survival than gemcitabine therapy. We compared the efficacy and safety of a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen with gemcitabine as adjuvant therapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We randomly assigned 493 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to receive a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen (oxaliplatin [85 mg per square meter of body-surface area], irinotecan [180 mg per square meter, reduced to 150 mg per square meter after a protocol-specified safety analysis], leucovorin [400 mg per square meter], and fluorouracil [2400 mg per square meter] every 2 weeks) or gemcitabine (1000 mg per square meter on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks) for 24 weeks. The primary end point was disease-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival and safety. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 33.6 months, the median disease-free survival was 21.6 months in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 12.8 months in the gemcitabine group (stratified hazard ratio for cancer-related event, second cancer, or death, 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46 to 0.73; P<0.001). The disease-free survival rate at 3 years was 39.7% in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 21.4% in the gemcitabine group. The median overall survival was 54.4 months in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 35.0 months in the gemcitabine group (stratified hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.86; P=0.003). The overall survival rate at 3 years was 63.4% in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 48.6% in the gemcitabine group. Adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 75.9% of the patients in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and in 52.9% of those in the gemcitabine group. One patient in the gemcitabine group died from toxic effects (interstitial pneumonitis). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant therapy with a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen led to significantly longer survival than gemcitabine among patients with resected pancreatic cancer, at the expense of a higher incidence of toxic effects. (Funded by R&D Unicancer and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01526135 ; EudraCT number, 2011-002026-52 .).

Efficacy and tolerance of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel in elderly patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (GnP) among elderly patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains poorly understood. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of GnP in this setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively included all consecutive patients aged ≥65 years with histologically proven PDAC who received at least one cycle of GnP (January 2014 to May 2018) in four academic centers. The primary endpoints were toxicity and overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate. We compared patients aged ≥ or <75 years. RESULTS: The study included 127 patients; among them 42 (33.1%) were aged ≥ 75 years. Fifty-seven and seventy patients received GnP as the first-line and the second-line treatment or beyond, respectively. Sixty-seven patients had at least one grade 3/4 adverse event, the most frequent being neutropenia and peripheral neuropathy. No deaths were related to toxicity. OS (median, 8.0 months; 95% confidence interval (CI), 5.8-10.2) and PFS (median, 5.5 months; 95% CI, 4.8-6.2) were similar for patients aged <75 or ≥75 years in the whole cohort and among patients receiving GnP as the first-line treatment. Cephalic PDAC, liver metastases, hypoalbuminemia, and GnP received beyond the first-line were associated with a significantly shorter OS on the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: GnP is well tolerated and effective in elderly patients with advanced PDAC, even patients aged ≥75 years. The data from daily clinical practice are consistent with the results reported with first-line treatment and highlight the relevance of GnP administration in elderly patients.

Management of BRCA Mutation Carriers With Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has a dismal prognosis, with a 5-year survival rate of ≤7% across all stages. Most patients are diagnosed with advanced disease and median overall survival is limited. The limited success of conventional therapies for PDAC is at least partially attributable to its genetic heterogeneity. Extensive genomic efforts have been made to subtype PDAC. The DNA damage repair (DDR) deficiency subtype, also known as unstable genome/DSBR (DNA double-strand break repair) subtype, is one of the most clinically relevant biologic abnormalities in PDAC. Increased PDAC risk was found to be associated with inherited syndromes, which are present in approximately 10% of patients with PDAC. Recent updates to the ASCO and NCCN guidelines recommend risk assessment for all individuals with PDAC, irrespective of personal or family history or ethnicity. Germline BRCA mutations associated with DNA repair dysfunction is one of the best illustrations of actionable biologic subtypes in PDAC. This genetic alteration can indeed be targeted by PARP inhibitors (PARPi). Treatment implications for germline BRCA carriers with PDAC include the use of platinum-based therapy and the validation of PARPi administration as a maintenance strategy in platinum-sensitive patients. In the era of precision medicine, this is the first convincing example of targeting identified germline hereditary mutations in PDAC.

FOLFIRINOX De-Escalation in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Multicenter Real-Life Study.

BACKGROUND: Our study describes the feasibility and efficacy of a first-line FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil [5FU], folinic acid, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) induction chemotherapy (CT) followed by de-escalation as a maintenance strategy for advanced pancreatic cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study was conducted from January 2011 to December 2018. FOLFIRINOX de-escalation was defined as stopping oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan after at least four cycles of FOLFIRINOX, without evidence of disease progression. Maintenance schedules were fluoropyrimidine monotherapy (intravenous or oral [capecitabine]), FOLFOX (5FU, oxaliplatin), or FOLFIRI (5FU, irinotecan). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were first progression-free survival (PFS1), second progression-free survival (PFS2), and toxicity. RESULTS: Among 321 patients treated with FOLFIRINOX, 147 (45.8%) were included. Median OS was 16.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.7-20.3) and median PFS1 was 9.4 months (95% CI, 8.5-10.4). The preferred maintenance regimen was FOLFIRI in 66 (45%) patients versus 5FU monotherapy in 52 (35%) and FOLFOX in 25 (17%) patients. Among 118 patients who received maintenance CT with FOLFIRI or 5FU, there was no difference in PFS1 (median, 9.0 vs. 10.1 months, respectively; p = .33) or OS (median, 16.6 vs. 18.7 months; p = .86) between the two maintenance regimens. Reintroduction of FOLFIRINOX was performed in 20.2% of patients, with a median PFS2 of 2.8 months (95% CI, 2.0-22.3). The rates of grade 3-4 toxicity were significantly higher with FOLFIRI maintenance CT than with 5FU (41% vs. 22%; p = .03), especially for neuropathy (73% vs. 9%). CONCLUSION: 5FU monotherapy maintenance appeared to be as effective as FOLFIRI, in a FOLFIRINOX de-escalation strategy, which is largely used in France. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: FOLFIRINOX de-escalation and maintenance is a feasible strategy in advanced pancreatic cancer that decreases chemotherapy toxicity to improve both survival and quality of life. Survivals in patients with maintenance therapy are clinically meaningful. Fluoropyrimidine monotherapy maintenance seems to be as efficient as FOLFIRI and should be a reference arm in future pancreatic cancer maintenance trials.

Temozolomide Alone or Combined with Capecitabine for the Treatment of Advanced Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor.

BACKGROUND: The combination of capecitabine (CAP) with temozolomide (TEM) chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNET) relies on limited evidence. We compared TEM-CAP to TEM alone in patients with advanced PanNET. METHODS: Consecutive patients with advanced PanNET treated with TEM or TEM-CAP between 2004 and 2017 in three expert centers were included. Progression-free survival (PFS), tolerance, tumor response, and overall survival were compared between the two groups. Propensity-based analyses were performed to reduce confounding bias due to the nonrandomized setting. RESULTS: TEM and TEM-CAP were administered to 38 patients and 100 patients, respectively, with a median age of 58 years. The patients in the TEM group more often had hormonal syndromes (p = 0.03), a longer median delay to diagnosis (p = 0.001), and a higher number of pretreatment lines (p < 0.001). The performance status was 0 in 58% versus 65% of the patients, and tumor's median Ki-67 index was 8% versus 11%, respectively. Tolerance was similar, except that there were more cases of asthenia in the TEM group (p = 0.017) and more cases of hand-foot syndrome in the TEM-CAP group (p = 0.025). The objective response rate was 34% versus 51% (p = 0.088). The raw median PFS was similar with TEM and with TEM-CAP (21.4 vs. 19.8 months, p = 0.84). Although CAP tended to decrease the risk of progression in Cox multivariate analysis (HR 0.65, p = 0.12), it had no effect after adjustment for the propensity score (HR 1.06, p = 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: TEM-CAP might not prolong PFS but might achieve a higher response rate than TEM alone. Hence, TEM-CAP might be preferred when tumor shrinkage is the main therapeutic objective. Otherwise, TEM might be adequate for patients with an impaired performance status or in case of extrahepatic metastases.

The Postoperative Occurrence or Worsening of Diabetes Mellitus May Increase the Risk of Recurrence in Resected Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

INTRODUCTION: The goal of this retrospective study was to investigate the potential link between diabetes mellitus (DM) and the recurrence of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNET) following curative intent surgery. METHODS: We included patients who underwent surgical resection of nonmetastatic well-differentiated PanNET. Exacerbation of DM was defined as the postoperative occurrence of DM or worsening of preexisting DM. We explored the variables associated with PanNET recurrence-free survival (RFS). RFS was compared in a subset of patients with and without DM operated on by anatomical resection, after matching for the main prognostic factors. The impact of antidiabetic therapy on RFS was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 268 patients (median age 54.7, 40% men) were included. Most PanNET were sporadic (85%), G1 (61%), pT1/pT2 (79%), and pN0 (76%). Postoperative DM exacerbation occurred in 38 patients (14%), including 27 with new-onset DM. On multivariable analysis, DM exacerbation was independently associated with an increased risk of PanNET recurrence (HR 2.35, 95% CI [1.24-4.47], p = 0.009) after adjustment for age, multiplicity of tumors, grade, pT, and pN stages. Similar results were found when 27 patients with and 48 patients without DM exacerbation, matched for grade, pT stage and pN stage, were compared (HR 3.03, 95% CI [1.05-8.77], p = 0.032). The postoperative use of metformin tended to decrease the risk of recurrence (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.24-1.47, p = 0.26). CONCLUSION: Patients with postoperative DM exacerbation may have an increased risk of PanNET recurrence. Closer follow-up might be beneficial in these patients. The protective role of metformin should be further explored.

Chemotherapy in Resected Neuroendocrine Carcinomas of the Digestive Tract: A National Study from the French Group of Endocrine Tumours.

BACKGROUND: Neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs) of the digestive tract are rare and aggressive tumours. In localised disease the treatment is surgery. Based on expert consensus, international guidelines recommend the administration of adjuvant chemotherapy combining etoposide and platinum derivatives, justified by the high risk of metastatic relapse. However, no clinical study has proven the benefit of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the effect of neoadjuvant +/- adjuvant and adjuvant therapy in this indication. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational French study to evaluate overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), prognostic factors for survival, and chemotherapy toxicity. RESULTS: Seventy-three patients had surgical resection of a localised digestive NEC between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2016. The majority of patients presented colorectal (35%) tumours and the median Ki-67 value was 70%. Forty-three patients received chemotherapy, either perioperative (neoadjuvant +/- adjuvant) or adjuvant. The median OS and DFS for the whole population was 24 and 9 months, respectively. The median OS and DFS for patients receiving chemotherapy was 62 and 13 months, respectively. Positive postoperative node status and Ki-67 ≥80% had a negative prognostic impact on OS and DFS. Administration of chemotherapy had a positive prognostic impact on OS and DFS. Sixteen grade 3/4 toxicities were reported without toxic death. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a positive effect on survival of chemotherapy in resected digestive NECs, but further studies are needed to confirm these results.

Inter- and intra-tumoural heterogeneity in cancer-associated fibroblasts of human pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAF) are orchestrators of the pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) microenvironment. Stromal heterogeneity may explain differential pathophysiological roles of the stroma (pro- versus anti-tumoural) in PDAC. We hypothesised that multiple CAF functional subtypes exist in PDAC, that contribute to stromal heterogeneity through interactions with cancer cells. Using molecular and functional analysis of patient-derived CAF primary cultures, we demonstrated that human PDAC-derived CAFs display a high level of inter- and intra-tumour heterogeneity. We identified at least four subtypes of CAFs based on transcriptomic analysis, and propose a classification for human PDAC-derived CAFs (pCAFassigner). Multiple CAF subtypes co-existed in individual patient samples. The presence of these CAF subtypes in bulk tumours was confirmed using publicly available gene expression profiles, and immunostainings of CAF subtype markers. Each subtype displayed specific phenotypic features (matrix- and immune-related signatures, vimentin and α-smooth muscle actin expression, proliferation rate), and was associated with an assessable prognostic impact. A prolonged exposure of non-tumoural pancreatic stellate cells to conditioned media from cancer cell lines (cancer education experiment) induced a CAF-like phenotype, including loss of capacity to revert to quiescence and an increase in the expression of genes related to CAF subtypes B and C. This classification demonstrates molecular and functional inter- and intra-tumoural heterogeneity of CAFs in human PDAC. Our subtypes overlap with those identified from single-cell analyses in other cancers, and pave the way for the development of therapies targeting specific CAF subpopulations in PDAC. © 2018 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

Can we classify ampullary tumours better? Clinical, pathological and molecular features. Results of an AGEO study.

BACKGROUND: Ampullary adenocarcinoma (AA) originates from either intestinal (INT) or pancreaticobiliary (PB) epithelium. Different prognostic factors of recurrence have been identified in previous studies. METHODS: In 91 AA patients of the AGEO retrospective multicentre cohort, we evaluated the centrally reviewed morphological classification, panel markers of Ang et al. including CK7, CK20, MUC1, MUC2 and CDX2, the 50-gene panel mutational analysis, and the clinicopathological AGEO prognostic score. RESULTS: Forty-three (47%) of the 91 tumours were Ang-INT, 29 (32%) were Ang-PB, 18 (20%) were ambiguous (Ang-AMB) and one could not be classified. Among these 90 tumours, 68.7% of INT tumours were Ang-INT and 78.2% of PB tumours were Ang-PB. MUC5AC expression was detected in 32.5% of the 86 evaluable cases. Among 71 tumours, KRAS, TP53, APC and PIK3CA were the most frequently mutated genes. The KRAS mutation was significantly more frequent in the PB subtype. In multivariate analysis, only AGEO prognostic score and tumour subtype were associated with relapse-free survival. Only AGEO prognostic score was associated with overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Mutational analysis and MUC5AC expression provide no additional value in the prognostic evaluation of AA patients. Ang et al. classification and the AGEO prognostic score were confirmed as a strong prognosticator for disease recurrence.

Prevalence of Microsatellite Instability in Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms of the Pancreas.

Microsatellite instability (MSI) caused by mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) is detected in a small proportion of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs). dMMR and MSI have been associated with responses of metastatic tumors, including PDACs, to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. We performed immunohistochemical analyses of a 445 PDAC specimens, collected from consecutive patients at multiple centers, to identify those with dMMR, based on loss of mismatch repair proteins MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and/or PMS2. We detected dMMR in 1.6% of tumor samples; we found dMMR in a larger proportion of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms-related tumors (4/58, 6.9%) than non- intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms PDAC (5/385, 1.3%) (P = .02). PDACs with dMMR contained potentially immunogenic mutations because of MSI in coding repeat sequences. PDACs with dMMR or MSI had a higher density of CD8+ T cells at the invasive front than PDACs without dMMR or MSI (P = .08; Fisher exact test). A higher proportion of PDACs with dMMR or MSI expressed the CD274 molecule (PD-L1, 8/9) than PDACs without dMMR or MSI (4/10) (P = .05). Times of disease-free survival and overall survival did not differ significantly between patients with PDACs with dMMR or MSI vs without dMMR or MSI. Studies are needed to determine whether these features of PDACs with dMMR or MSI might serve as prognostic factors.

Familial pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A retrospective analysis of germline genetic testing in a French multicentre cohort.

The rate of genetic diagnosis of French patients with familial pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is not known. We report germline genetic testing data from 133 index cases meeting criteria for familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) as well as 87 'FPC-like' index cases who did not fulfilled strict FPC definition but were evocative for a PDAC predisposition. The overall rate of genetic diagnosis (in BRCA1, BRCA2, CDKN2A, and ATM genes) was 8.3% in FPC patients and 4.6% in FPC-like patients, consistent with the literature in other populations. Genetic variants were also identified in FANCA and BAP1 genes, as well as in the CDKN2A p12 transcript. This pancreas-specific transcript is a known key player in driving pancreatic oncogenesis. This might be the first described case of a PDAC genetic predisposition due to a variant in this specific transcript.

Comparison of Temozolomide-Capecitabine to 5-Fluorouracile-Dacarbazine in 247 Patients with Advanced Digestive Neuroendocrine Tumors Using Propensity Score Analyses.

INTRODUCTION: Although chemotherapy combining 5-fluorouracil (5FU)-dacarbazine (DTIC) or temozolomide (TEM)-capecitabine (CAP) is extensively used in patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NET), they were never compared. We compared their tolerance and efficacy in advanced NET. METHODS: We evaluated the records of consecutive patients with pancreatic or small-intestine advanced NET who received 5FU-DTIC or TEM-CAP between July 2004 and December 2017 in 5 French centers. Tolerance, tumor response and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared. Factors associated with PFS were analyzed using Cox multivariate regression model. To reduce the confounding bias of the nonrandomized design, PFS was compared using propensity score analyses. RESULTS: Ninety-four (5FU-DTIC) patients and 153 (TEM-CAP) patients were included. Pancreatic NET represented 82.3% of cases and 17.1, 61.8 and 10.9% of patients had G1, G2 or G3 NET respectively. Progression at baseline was reported in 92.7% of patients with available data. Grades 3-4 adverse events occurred in 24.7 and 8.5% of TEM-CAP and 5FU-DTIC patients respectively (p = 0.002). The overall response rate was 38.3 and 39.2% respectively (p = 0.596). Median PFS on raw analysis was similar to 5FU-DTIC and TEM-CAP (13.9 vs. 18.3 months, respectively p = 0.86). TEM-CAP was associated with an increased risk of progression on the raw multivariate analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 1.90, 95% CI [1.32-2.73], p = 0.001) and when adjusted on propensity score (HR 1.65, 95% CI [1.18-2.31], p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: PFS may be longer with 5FU-DTIC than TEM-CAP in patients with advanced NET. Although patients often prefer oral chemotherapy, 5FU-DTIC is a relevant alternative. A randomized comparison is needed to confirm these results.

Phase I/II trial of pimasertib plus gemcitabine in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

The selective MEK1/2 inhibitor pimasertib has shown anti-tumour activity in a pancreatic tumour model. This phase I/II, two-part trial was conducted in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPaCa) (NCT01016483). In the phase I part, oral pimasertib was given once daily discontinuously (5 days on/2 days off treatment) or twice daily continuously (n = 53) combined with weekly gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2 ) in 28-day cycles to identify the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of pimasertib. In the phase II part, patients were randomised to pimasertib (RP2D) or placebo plus weekly gemcitabine (n = 88) to investigate progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. The RP2D was determined to be 60 mg BID. PFS and OS outcomes did not indicate any treatment benefit for pimasertib over placebo in combination with gemcitabine (median PFS 3.7 and 2.8 months, respectively, HR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.58-1.42: median OS 7.3 vs. 7.6 months, respectively). KRAS status did not influence PFS or OS. The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events was 91.1% and 85.7% for pimasertib/gemcitabine and placebo/gemcitabine respectively, but there was a higher incidence of ocular events with pimasertib/gemcitabine (28.9% vs. 4.8% for placebo/gemcitabine). In conclusion, no clinical benefit was observed with first-line pimasertib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with mPaCa.

Comparison of adjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine with gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer (ESPAC-4): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The ESPAC-3 trial showed that adjuvant gemcitabine is the standard of care based on similar survival to and less toxicity than adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Other clinical trials have shown better survival and tumour response with gemcitabine and capecitabine than with gemcitabine alone in advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and capecitabine compared with gemcitabine monotherapy for resected pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We did a phase 3, two-group, open-label, multicentre, randomised clinical trial at 92 hospitals in England, Scotland, Wales, Germany, France, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had undergone complete macroscopic resection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (R0 or R1 resection). We randomly assigned patients (1:1) within 12 weeks of surgery to receive six cycles of either 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine alone administered once a week for three of every 4 weeks (one cycle) or with 1660 mg/m2 oral capecitabine administered for 21 days followed by 7 days' rest (one cycle). Randomisation was based on a minimisation routine, and country was used as a stratification factor. The primary endpoint was overall survival, measured as the time from randomisation until death from any cause, and assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Toxicity was analysed in all patients who received trial treatment. This trial was registered with the EudraCT, number 2007-004299-38, and ISRCTN, number ISRCTN96397434. FINDINGS: Of 732 patients enrolled, 730 were included in the final analysis. Of these, 366 were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine and 364 to gemcitabine plus capecitabine. The Independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee requested reporting of the results after there were 458 (95%) of a target of 480 deaths. The median overall survival for patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group was 28·0 months (95% CI 23·5-31·5) compared with 25·5 months (22·7-27·9) in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-0·98], p=0·032). 608 grade 3-4 adverse events were reported by 226 of 359 patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group compared with 481 grade 3-4 adverse events in 196 of 366 patients in the gemcitabine group. INTERPRETATION: The adjuvant combination of gemcitabine and capecitabine should be the new standard of care following resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.