Spontaneous regression of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma following COVID-19 infection and vaccination: a case report and review of literature.

Background: Spontaneous regression (SR) of cancer remains a rare phenomenon, particularly in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), where limited literature exists. This case report emphasizes the significance of SR in advanced HCC, shedding light on the proposed mechanisms and addressing the scarcity of documented cases in current medical literature. Case Description: We present the case of a 67-year-old female with a history of localized HCC who underwent right hepatectomy. Surveillance imaging 4 months later revealed tumor recurrence with tumor thrombus in the main portal vein. Radioembolization was deemed unsuitable, leading to the recommendation of systemic therapy with atezolizumab and bevacizumab. Prior to receiving any treatment, the patient tested positive for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), having previously received both the messenger RNA (mRNA)-1273 vaccine series and a booster. Surprisingly, subsequent imaging 10 months after initial diagnosis showed SR of the previously identified lesions, suggesting a potential link between viral exposure, vaccination, and the observed regression. The patient eventually received treatment with atezolizumab and bevacizumab and has sustained disease control to date, 12 months after initiating treatment. Conclusions: This unique case highlights SR of advanced HCC following COVID-19 infection, raising intriguing questions about the interplay between viral infections, vaccinations, and cancer outcomes. The patient's response in the absence of systemic therapy further underscores the complexity of HCC management and prompts further investigation into the potential immunomodulatory effects of viral infections and vaccinations on cancer regression. Understanding these interactions could have implications for tailoring treatment approaches and improving outcomes in patients with advanced HCC.

Identifying Actionable Alterations in KRAS Wild-Type Pancreatic Cancer.

The 5-year relative survival rate for pancreatic cancer is currently the lowest among all cancer types with a dismal 13%. A Kirsten rat sarcoma virus (KRAS) gene mutation is present in approximately 90% of patients with pancreatic cancer; however, KRAS-specific drugs are not yet widely used in clinical practice for pancreatic cancer, specifically the KRASG12D variant. Advances in genomic testing revealed an opportunity to detect genetic alterations in a subset of patients with no KRAS mutation termed KRAS wild-type. Patients with KRAS wild-type tumors have a propensity to express driver alterations, hence paving the way for utilizing a targeted therapy approach either via clinical trials or standard-of-care drugs. These alterations include fusions, amplifications, translocations, rearrangements and microsatellite instability-high tumors and can be as high as 11% in some studies. Here, we discuss some of the most notable alterations in KRAS wild-type and highlight promising clinical trials.

Perspectives of primary care providers regarding multicancer early detection panels.

OBJECTIVE: Multicancer early detection panels have recently become available to patients with healthcare provider prescriptions and available funds. These tests utilize circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) to screen more than 50 cancers using a single blood sample. However, perspectives and data on how the deployment of these tests may impact the practices of primary care providers in terms of implementation, interpretation, documentation, and costs are limited. This study aimed to assess the perspectives of primary care providers regarding the integration of multicancer early detection panels into clinical practice. METHODS: We used a survey to assess the opinions and perspectives of primary care providers, including physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants, across a multistate, tertiary healthcare system. We used a single form consisting of novel questions on familiarity with multi-cancer early detection panels, cost, healthcare equity, documentation, medicolegal, and other concerns. The subgroup analysis was consistent with stratification based on familiarity with ctDNA-based tests and their roles in clinical practice. RESULTS: Most respondents were unfamiliar with multicancer early detection panels and had not used ctDNA-based tests. Most primary care providers suggested that they would reorder multicancer early detection panel testing at 1- to 5-year intervals and prefer subspecialists for both ordering multicancer early detection panels as well as interpreting their results. Relative concerns differed between physicians and nonphysicians. CONCLUSION: The integration of multicancer early detection panels into primary care practice requires careful planning and consideration for the management of increased clinical load, interpretation of results, and cost management.

Introducing the PLOS collection on rare cancer.

Rare cancers are defined by low incidence rates, and may lack evidence that supports uniform standards of care and relevant clinical guidelines. Rare cancers may represent up to 24% of all cancers, yet remain understudied and underappreciated in terms of their clinical and ultimately societal impact. The PLOS Rare Cancer Collection brings together a broad range of research endeavors that are being undertaken in rare cancers research ranging from basic biological evaluations to therapeutic drug development. This Overview presents a brief background to the Collection and highlights the contributions of included articles.

Metabolome-wide association identifies altered metabolites and metabolic pathways in the serum of patients with cholangiocarcinoma.

Background & Aims: Metabolomic and lipidomic analyses provide an opportunity for novel biological insights. Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) remains a highly lethal cancer with limited response to systemic, targeted, and immunotherapeutic approaches. Using a global metabolomics and lipidomics platform, this study aimed to discover and characterize metabolomic variations and associated pathway derangements in patients with CCA. Methods: Leveraging a biospecimen collection, including samples from patients with digestive diseases and normal controls, global serum metabolomic and lipidomic profiling was performed on 213 patients with CCA and 98 healthy controls. The CCA cohort of patients included representation of intrahepatic, perihilar, and distal CCA tumours. Metabolome-wide association studies utilizing multivariable linear regression were used to perform case-control comparisons, followed by pathway enrichment analysis, CCA subtype analysis, and disease stage analysis. The impact of biliary obstruction was evaluated by repeating analyses in subsets of patients only with normal bilirubin levels. Results: Of the 420 metabolites that discriminated patients with CCA from controls, decreased abundance of cysteine-glutathione disulfide was most closely associated with CCA. Additional conjugated bile acid species were found in increased abundance even in the absence of clinically relevant biliary obstruction denoted by elevated serum bilirubin levels. Pathway enrichment analysis also revealed alterations in caffeine metabolism and mitochondrial redox-associated pathways in the serum of patients with CCA. Conclusions: The presented metabolomic and lipidomic profiling demonstrated multiple alterations in the serum of patients with CCA. These exploratory data highlight novel metabolic pathways in CCA and support future work in therapeutic targeting of these pathways and the development of a precision biomarker panel for diagnosis. Impact and implications: Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a highly lethal hepatobiliary cancer with limited treatment response, highlighting the need for a better understanding of the disease biology. Using a global metabolomics and lipidomics platform, we characterized distinct changes in the serum of 213 patients with CCA compared with healthy controls. The results of this study elucidate novel metabolic pathways in CCA. These findings benefit stakeholders in both the clinical and research realms by providing a foundation for improved disease diagnostics and identifying novel targets for therapeutic design.

Expression of tumor antigens within an oncolytic virus enhances the anti-tumor T cell response.

Although patients benefit from immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) therapy in a broad variety of tumors, resistance may arise from immune suppressive tumor microenvironments (TME), which is particularly true of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Since oncolytic viruses (OV) can generate a highly immune-infiltrated, inflammatory TME, OVs could potentially restore ICI responsiveness via recruitment, priming, and activation of anti-tumor T cells. Here we find that on the contrary, an oncolytic vesicular stomatitis virus, expressing interferon-ß (VSV-IFNß), antagonizes the effect of anti-PD-L1 therapy in a partially anti-PD-L1-responsive model of HCC. Cytometry by Time of Flight shows that VSV-IFNß expands dominant anti-viral effector CD8 T cells with concomitant relative disappearance of anti-tumor T cell populations, which are the target of anti-PD-L1. However, by expressing a range of HCC tumor antigens within VSV, combination OV and anti-PD-L1 therapeutic benefit could be restored. Our data provide a cautionary message for the use of highly immunogenic viruses as tumor-specific immune-therapeutics by showing that dominant anti-viral T cell responses can inhibit sub-dominant anti-tumor T cell responses. However, through encoding tumor antigens within the virus, oncolytic virotherapy can generate anti-tumor T cell populations upon which immune checkpoint blockade can effectively work.

PHOCUS: A Phase 3, Randomized, Open-Label Study of Sequential Treatment with Pexa-Vec (JX-594) and Sorafenib in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Introduction: Intratumoral administration of pexa-vec (pexastimogene devacirepvec), an oncolytic and immunotherapeutic vaccinia virus, given to patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), is associated with both local and distant tumor responses. We hypothesized subsequent treatment with sorafenib could demonstrate superior efficacy. Methods: This random phase III open-label study evaluated the sequential treatment with pexa-vec followed by sorafenib compared to sorafenib in patients with advanced HCC and no prior systemic treatment. The primary endpoint is overall survival (OS). Key secondary endpoints included time to progression (TTP), progression-free survival, overall response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR). Safety was assessed in all patients who received ≥1 dose of study treatment. Results: The study was conducted at 142 sites in 16 countries. From December 30, 2015, to the interim analysis on August 2, 2019, 459 patients were randomly assigned (pexa-vec plus sorafenib: 234, sorafenib: 225). At the interim analysis, the median OS was 12.7 months (95% CI: 9.89, 14.95) in the pexa-vec plus sorafenib arm and 14.0 months (95% CI: 11.01, 18.00) in the sorafenib arm. This led to the early termination of the study. The median TTP was 2.0 months (95% CI: 1.77, 2.96) and 4.2 months (95% CI: 2.92, 4.63); ORR was 19.2% (45 patients) and 20.9% (47 patients); and DCR was 50.0% (117 patients) and 57.3% (129 patients) in the pexa-vec plus sorafenib and sorafenib arms, respectively. Serious adverse events were reported in 117 (53.7%) patients in the pexa-vec plus sorafenib and 77 (35.5%) patients in the sorafenib arm. Liver failure was the most frequently reported in both groups. Conclusion: Sequential pexa-vec plus sorafenib treatment did not demonstrate increased clinical benefit in advanced HCC and fared worse compared to sorafenib alone. The advent of the added value of checkpoint inhibitors should direct any further development of oncolytic virus therapy strategies.

Second-Line Treatment of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Shedding Light on New Opportunities and Key Talking Points from Clinical Trials.

Despite improvements in overall cancer mortality, deaths related to pancreatic cancer continue to rise. Following first-line treatment, second-line options are significantly limited. Classically, first-line treatment consisted of either gemcitabine or 5-fluorouracil based systemic chemotherapy. Upon progression of disease or recurrence, subsequent second-line treatment is still gemcitabine or 5-fluorouracil based chemotherapy, depending on what was used in the first line and the timing of progression or recurrence. A better understanding of the molecular underpinnings of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has led to new treatment strategies including specifically targeting the desmoplastic stroma, cytokine signaling and actionable mutations. Furthermore, efforts are also directed to enhance the immunogenicity profile of PDAC's well-established immunologically "cold" tumor microenvironment. More recently, the outstanding response rates of chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cells in hematologic malignancies, have led to clinical trials to evaluate the treatment modality in PDAC. In this review, we summarize recently presented clinical trials for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma with novel treatment approaches in the second line and beyond.

A Phase I Study of KIN-3248, an Irreversible Small-molecule Pan-FGFR Inhibitor, in Patients with Advanced FGFR2/3-driven Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: Despite efficacy of approved FGFR inhibitors, emergence of polyclonal secondary mutations in the FGFR kinase domain leads to acquired resistance. KIN-3248 is a selective, irreversible, orally bioavailable, small-molecule inhibitor of FGFR1-4 that blocks both primary oncogenic and secondary kinase domain resistance FGFR alterations. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A first-in-human, phase I study of KIN-3248 was conducted in patients with advanced solid tumors harboring FGFR2 and/or FGFR3 gene alterations (NCT05242822). The primary objective was determination of MTD/recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Secondary and exploratory objectives included antitumor activity, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and molecular response by circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) clearance. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients received doses ranging from 5 to 50 mg orally daily across six cohorts. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (48.1%), gastric (9.3%), and urothelial (7.4%) were the most common tumors. Tumors harbored FGFR2 (68.5%) or FGFR3 (31.5%) alterations-23 (42.6%) received prior FGFR inhibitors. One dose-limiting toxicity (hypersensitivity) occurred in cohort 1 (5 mg). Treatment-related, adverse events included hyperphosphatemia, diarrhea, and stomatitis. The MTD/RP2D was not established. Exposure was dose proportional and concordant with hyperphosphatemia. Five partial responses were observed; 4 in FGFR inhibitor naïve and 1 in FGFR pretreated patients. Pretreatment ctDNA profiling confirmed FGFR2/3 alterations in 63.3% of cases and clearance at cycle 2 associated with radiographic response. CONCLUSION: The trial was terminated early for commercial considerations; therefore, RP2D was not established. Preliminary clinical data suggest that KIN-3248 is a safe, oral FGFR1-4 inhibitor with favorable pharmacokinetic parameters, though further dose escalation was required to nominate the MTD/RP2D. SIGNIFICANCE: KIN-3248 was a rationally designed, next generation selective FGFR inhibitor, that was effective in interfering with both FGFR wild-type and mutant signaling. Clinical data indicate that KIN-3248 is safe with a signal of antitumor activity. Translational science support the mechanism of action in that serum phosphate was proportional with exposure, paired biopsies suggested phospho-ERK inhibition (a downstream target of FGFR2/3), and ctDNA clearance may act as a RECIST response surrogate.

Phase 1 trial of navitoclax and sorafenib in patients with relapsed or refractory solid tumors with hepatocellular carcinoma expansion cohort.

Navitoclax (ABT-263) is an oral BCL2 homology-3 mimetic that binds with high affinity to pro-survival BCL2 proteins, resulting in apoptosis. Sorafenib, an oral multi kinase inhibitor also promotes apoptosis and inhibits tumor angiogenesis. The efficacy of either agent alone is limited; however, preclinical studies demonstrate synergy with the combination of navitoclax and sorafenib. In this phase 1 study, we evaluated the combination of navitoclax and sorafenib in a dose escalation cohort of patients with refractory solid tumors, with an expansion cohort in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was determined using the continual reassessment method. Navitoclax and sorafenib were administered continuously on days 1 through 21 of 21-day cycles. Ten patients were enrolled in the dose escalation cohort and 15 HCC patients were enrolled in the expansion cohort. Two dose levels were tested, and the MTD was navitoclax 150 mg daily plus sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. Among all patients, the most common grade 3 toxicity was thrombocytopenia (5 patients, 20%): there were no grade 4 or 5 toxicities. Patients received a median of 2 cycles (range 1-36 cycles) and all patients were off study treatment at data cut off. Six patients in the expansion cohort had stable disease, and there were no partial or complete responses. Drug-drug interaction between navitoclax and sorafenib was not observed. The combination of navitoclax and sorafenib did not increase induction of apoptosis compared with navitoclax alone. Navitoclax plus sorafenib is tolerable but showed limited efficacy in the HCC expansion cohort. These findings do not support further development of this combination for the treatment of advanced HCC. This phase I trial was conducted under ClinicalTrials.gov registry number NCT01364051.

APRI score is not predictive of post-surgical outcomes in cholangiocarcinoma patients.

Background: Cholangiocarcinoma is an epithelial malignancy of the intrahepatic or extrahepatic biliary tree, primarily driven by chronic inflammation and fibrosis. Fibrosis has been shown to correlate with malignancy, and the aminotransferase-platelet ratio index (APRI) score, a marker for hepatic fibrosis, has proved useful in prognosticating hepatocellular carcinoma. This study aimed to assess the utility of APRI score in predicting post-surgical outcomes in cholangiocarcinoma patients. Methods: Clinical data from a total of 152 cholangiocarcinoma patients who underwent surgical resection at the Mayo Clinic were collected. The data were subsequently analyzed to determine if there was a relationship between APRI score and the demographic, laboratory, pathologic and outcome data, including overall survival. To determine the relationship between quantitative and qualitative data and the APRI score, a P-value <0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results: No relationship between APRI score and demographic factors was identified. There were correlations between APRI score and alanine transaminase, albumin and bilirubin, but the remaining laboratory parameters showed no correlation. APRI score did not prove to be useful as a prognostic tool, as it did not correlate with tumor pathology features (tumor grade t-test P=0.86, N stage ANOVA P=0.94, vascular invasion t-test P=0.59, and perineural invasion t-test P=0.14), or with post-surgical recurrence (t-test P=0.22) and mortality (t-test P=0.39). Conclusion: APRI score is not a prognostic tool for post-surgical outcomes in patients with cholangiocarcinoma.

Clinical Utility of Ivosidenib in the Treatment of IDH1-Mutant Cholangiocarcinoma: Evidence To Date.

Ivosidenib is an isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) inhibitor that is FDA approved for patients with IDH1 mutation and acute myeloid leukemia and previously treated locally advanced or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma. In the Phase III trial ClarIDHy ivosidenib improved progression-free survival, 2.7 months versus 1.4 months (p < 0.0001) and overall survival (OS), median OS was 10.8 months for ivosidenib and 9.7 months for the placebo arm (p = 0.06) for patients with previously treated and IDH1 mutated cholangiocarcinoma. In this review article, we will address the mechanism of action of ivosidenib and data from early trials and safety from the randomized trial in cholangiocarcinoma. As a conclusion, future perspectives of IDH1 inhibition in IDH1 mutated tumors and possible strategies of sequencing and combinations will be reviewed and discussed.

The Cholangiocarcinoma in the Young (CITY) Study: Tumor Biology, Treatment Patterns, and Survival Outcomes in Adolescent Young Adults With Cholangiocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Increased awareness of the distinct tumor biology for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer has led to improvement in outcomes for this population. However, in cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), a paucity of data exist on the AYA population. To our knowledge, we present the largest study to date on AYA disease biology, treatment patterns, and survival outcomes in CCA. METHODS: A multi-institutional cohort of patients with CCA diagnosed with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) or extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC) was used for analysis. Retrospective chart review was conducted on patients who were 50 years old and younger (young; n = 124) and older than 50 years (older; n = 723). RESULTS: Among 1,039 patients screened, 847 patients met eligibility (72% ICC, 28% ECC). Young patients had a larger median tumor size at resection compared with older patients (4.2 v 3.6 cm; P = .048), more commonly had N1 disease (65% v 43%; P = .040), and were more likely to receive adjuvant therapy (odds ratio, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.64 to 9.74). Tumors of young patients were more likely to harbor an FGFR2 fusion, BRAF mutation, or ATM mutation (P < .05 for each). Young patients were more likely to receive palliative systemic therapy (96% v 69%; P < .001), targeted therapy (23% v 8%; P < .001), and treatment on a clinical trial (31% v 19%; P = .004). Among patients who presented with advanced disease, young patients had a higher median overall survival compared with their older counterparts (17.7 v 13.5 months; 95% CI, 12.6 to 22.6 v 11.4 to 14.8; P = .049). CONCLUSION: Young patients with CCA had more advanced disease at resection, more commonly received both adjuvant and palliative therapies, and demonstrated improved survival compared with older patients. Given the low clinical trial enrollment and poor outcomes among some AYA cancer populations, data to the contrary in CCA are highly encouraging.

Futibatinib, an Irreversible FGFR1-4 Inhibitor for the Treatment of FGFR-Aberrant Tumors.

Fibroblast growth factor receptors (FGFR) are emerging as an important therapeutic target for patients with advanced, refractory cancers. Most selective FGFR inhibitors under investigation show reversible binding, and their activity is limited by acquired drug resistance. This review summarizes the preclinical and clinical development of futibatinib, an irreversible FGFR1-4 inhibitor. Futibatinib stands out among FGFR inhibitors because of its covalent binding mechanism and low susceptibility to acquired resistance. Preclinical data indicated robust activity of futibatinib against acquired resistance mutations in the FGFR kinase domain. In early-phase studies, futibatinib showed activity in cholangiocarcinoma, and gastric, urothelial, breast, central nervous system, and head and neck cancers harboring various FGFR aberrations. Exploratory analyses indicated clinical benefit with futibatinib after prior FGFR inhibitor use. In a pivotal phase II trial, futibatinib demonstrated durable objective responses (42% objective response rate) and tolerability in previously treated patients with advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma harboring FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements. A manageable safety profile was observed across studies, and patient quality of life was maintained with futibatinib treatment in patients with cholangiocarcinoma. Hyperphosphatemia, the most common adverse event with futibatinib, was well managed and did not lead to treatment discontinuation. These data show clinically meaningful benefit with futibatinib in FGFR2-rearrangement-positive cholangiocarcinoma and provide support for further investigation of futibatinib across other indications. Future directions for this agent include elucidating mechanisms of resistance and exploration of combination therapy approaches.

Phase II Trial of Trifluridine/Tipiracil Plus Irinotecan in Patients with Advanced, Refractory Biliary Tract Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the safety and efficacy of trifluridine/tipiracil in combination with irinotecan in a phase II trial setting for refractory, advanced unresectable biliary tract carcinoma (BTC). METHODS: A total of 28 patients (27 were evaluable) with advanced BTCs who progressed on at least one prior systemic therapy were enrolled and were treated with trifluridine/tipiracil 25 mg/m2 (days 1-5 of 14-day cycle) and irinotecan 180 mg/m2 (day 1 of the 14-day cycle). The primary endpoint for the study was 16-week progression-free survival (PFS16) rate. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and safety were pre-specified secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Of 27 patients, PFS16 rate was 37% (10/27; 95% CI: 19%-58%), thereby meeting the criteria for success for the primary endpoint. The median PFS and OS of the entire cohort were 3.9 months (95% CI: 2.5-7.4) and 9.1 months (95% CI: 8.0-14.3), respectively. In the patients evaluable for tumor response (n = 20), the ORR and DCR were 10% and 50%, respectively. Twenty patients (74.1%) had at least one grade 3 or worse adverse event (AE), and 4 patients (14.8%) had grade 4 AEs. A total of 37% (n = 10/27) and 51.9% (n = 14/27) experienced dose reductions in trifluridine/tipiracil and irinotecan, respectively. Delay in therapy was noted in 56% of the patients while 1 patient discontinued the therapy, primarily due to hematologic AEs. CONCLUSION: The combination of trifluridine/tipiracil plus irinotecan is a potential treatment option for patients with advanced, refractory BTCs with good functional status and no targetable mutations. A larger randomized trial is needed to confirm these results. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04072445).

Dynamics and survival associations of T cell receptor clusters in patients with pleural mesothelioma treated with immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are now a first-line treatment option for patients with pleural mesothelioma with the recent approval of ipilimumab and nivolumab. Mesothelioma has a low tumor mutation burden and no robust predictors of survival with ICI. Since ICIs enable adaptive antitumor immune responses, we investigated T-cell receptor (TCR) associations with survival in participants from two clinical trials treated with ICI. METHODS: We included patients with pleural mesothelioma who were treated with nivolumab (NivoMes, NCT02497508) or nivolumab and ipilimumab (INITIATE, NCT03048474) after first-line therapy. TCR sequencing was performed with the ImmunoSEQ assay in 49 and 39 pretreatment and post-treatment patient peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) samples. These data were integrated with TCR sequences found in bulk RNAseq data by TRUST4 program in 45 and 35 pretreatment and post-treatment tumor biopsy samples and TCR sequences from over 600 healthy controls. The TCR sequences were clustered into groups of shared antigen specificity using GIANA. Associations of TCR clusters with overall survival were determined by cox proportional hazard analysis. RESULTS: We identified 4.2 million and 12 thousand complementarity-determining region 3 (CDR3) sequences from PBMCs and tumors, respectively, in patients treated with ICI. These CDR3 sequences were integrated with 2.1 million publically available CDR3 sequences from healthy controls and clustered. ICI-enhanced T-cell infiltration and expanded T cell diversity in tumors. Cases with TCR clones in the top tertile in the pretreatment tissue or in circulation had significantly better survival than the bottom two tertiles (p<0.04). Furthermore, a high number of shared TCR clones between pretreatment tissue and in circulation was associated with improved survival (p=0.01). To potentially select antitumor clusters, we filtered for clusters that were (1) not found in healthy controls, (2) recurrent in multiple patients with mesothelioma, and (3) more prevalent in post-treatment than pretreatment samples. The detection of two-specific TCR clusters provided significant survival benefit compared with detection of 1 cluster (HR<0.001, p=0.026) or the detection of no TCR clusters (HR=0.10, p=0.002). These two clusters were not found in bulk tissue RNA-seq data and have not been reported in public CDR3 databases. CONCLUSIONS: We identified two unique TCR clusters that were associated with survival on treatment with ICI in patients with pleural mesothelioma. These clusters may enable approaches for antigen discovery and inform future targets for design of adoptive T cell therapies.

Epigenomics may begin to explain in vitro differential response to hypomethylating agents in MMR-D hypermethylated endometrial cancer.

This work examines differences in chromatin accessibility, methylation, and response to DNA hypomethylating agents between mismatch repair-deficient and non-mismatch repair-deficient endometrial cancer. Next-generation sequencing of a stage 1B, grade 2 endometrioid endometrial cancer tumor revealed microsatellite instability and a variant of unknown significance in POLE along with global and MLH1 hypermethylation. Inhibition of viability by decitabine in the study and comparison tumors was minimal, as shown by an inhibitory effect of 0 and 17.9, respectively. Conversely, the inhibitory effect of azacitidine on the study tumor was more pronounced, at 72.8 versus 41.2. In vitro, mismatch repair-deficient endometrial cancer with MLH1 hypermethylation respond better to DNA methyltransferase inhibition by azacytidine (DNA/RNA inhibition), than to decitabine (DNA-only inhibition). Additional large studies are needed to substantiate our findings.

Targeting leukemia inhibitory factor in pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: The Leukemia Inhibitory Factor (LIF) is a member of the interleukin-6 (IL-6) cytokine family. Known to induce differentiation of myeloid leukemia cells, evidence has accumulated supporting its role in cancer evolution through regulating cell differentiation, renewal, and survival. LIF has recently emerged as a biomarker and therapeutic target for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The first in-human clinical trial has shown promising safety profile and has suggested a potential role for LIF inhibitor in combination regimen. AREAS COVERED: Herein, we summarize, discuss, and give an expert opinion on the role of LIF in PDAC promotion, and its potential role as a biomarker and target of anti-cancer therapy. We conducted an exhaustive PubMed search for English-language articles published from 1 January 1970, to 1 August 2022. EXPERT OPINION: PDAC carries a devastating prognosis for patients, highlighting the need for advancing drug development. The results of the phase 1 trial with MSC-1 demonstrated tolerability and safety but modest efficacy. Future research should focus on investigating LIF targets in combination with current standard-of-care chemotherapy, and immunotherapy can be a promising approach. Further, larger multicenter clinical trials are needed to define the use of LIF as a new biomarker in PDAC patients.

Molecular profiling and treatment pattern differences between intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Treatment patterns for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC) differ, but limited studies exist comparing them. This study examines differences in molecular profiling rates and treatment patterns in these populations, focusing on use of adjuvant, liver-directed, targeted, and investigational therapies. METHODS: This multicenter collaboration included patients with ICC or ECC treated at 1 of 8 participating institutions. Retrospective data were collected on risk factors, pathology, treatments, and survival. Comparative statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Among 1039 patients screened, 847 patients met eligibility (ICC = 611, ECC = 236). Patients with ECC were more likely than those with ICC to present with early stage disease (53.8% vs 28.0%), undergo surgical resection (55.1% vs 29.8%), and receive adjuvant chemoradiation (36.5% vs 4.2%) (all P < .00001). However, they were less likely to undergo molecular profiling (50.3% vs 64.3%) or receive liver-directed therapy (17.9% vs 35.7%), targeted therapy (4.7% vs 18.9%), and clinical trial therapy (10.6% vs 24.8%) (all P < .001). In patients with recurrent ECC after surgery, the molecular profiling rate was 64.5%. Patients with advanced ECC had a shorter median overall survival than those with advanced ICC (11.8 vs 15.1 months; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with advanced ECC have low rates of molecular profiling, possibly in part because of insufficient tissue. They also have low rates of targeted therapy use and clinical trial enrollment. While these rates are higher in advanced ICC, the prognosis for both subtypes of cholangiocarcinoma remains poor, and a pressing need exists for new effective targeted therapies and broader access to clinical trials.