Plain language summary of the FOENIX-CCA2 study: futibatinib for people with advanced bile duct cancer.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary describes the results from a phase 2 study called FOENIXCCA2. The study evaluated treatment with futibatinib in people with a rare form of advanced bile duct cancer called intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (or iCCA), where the tumors have changes in the structure of a gene called FGFR2. These changes include FGFR2 gene fusions. Bile duct cancer often returns after surgery or cannot be treated by surgery because the tumor has spread, so it requires treatment with chemotherapy. People live for a median of 1 year after their first chemotherapy treatment and 6 months after their second treatment. This study included people whose cancer had grown/spread after one or more chemotherapy treatments. The aims of the study were to see if futibatinib could shrink the size of tumors and stop the cancer from growing/spreading and to see how long people lived when treated with futibatinib. Clinicians also looked at side effects from taking futibatinib and at how it affected people's quality of life. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Futibatinib treatment shrank tumors in over 80% of people who received treatment. Tumors shrank by at least 30% in 42% of people. Futibatinib stopped tumors from growing/spreading for a median of 9.7 months. People who took the medicine lived for a median of 21.7 months, and 72% of people were still alive after 1 year. Side effects from taking futibatinib were like those reported for similar medicines, and clinicians considered the side effects to be manageable by adjusting the dose of futibatinib or treating the side effects. Most people reported that their quality of life stayed the same or improved during the first 9 months of taking futibatinib. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: The results support the use of futibatinib for treating people with advanced bile duct cancer. Based on the results of this study, futibatinib is now approved in the US, Europe, and Japan. Futibatinib is approved for treating adults with advanced bile duct cancer who have received previous treatment for their cancer, and whose tumors have a gene fusion or other change in the FGFR2 gene.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02052778 (FOENIX-CCA2).

Synergistic combination of cytotoxic chemotherapy and cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors in biliary tract cancers.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Biliary tract cancers (BTCs) are uncommon, but highly lethal, gastrointestinal malignancies. Gemcitabine/cisplatin is a standard-of-care systemic therapy, but has a modest impact on survival and harbors toxicities, including myelosuppression, nephropathy, neuropathy, and ototoxicity. Whereas BTCs are characterized by aberrations activating the cyclinD1/cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK)4/6/CDK inhibitor 2a/retinoblastoma pathway, clinical use of CDK4/6 inhibitors as monotherapy is limited by lack of validated biomarkers, diffident preclinical efficacy, and development of acquired drug resistance. Emerging studies have explored therapeutic strategies to enhance the antitumor efficacy of CDK4/6 inhibitors by the combination with chemotherapy regimens, but their mechanism of action remains elusive. APPROACH AND RESULTS: Here, we report in vitro and in vivo synergy in BTC models, showing enhanced efficacy, reduced toxicity, and better survival with a combination comprising gemcitabine/cisplatin and CDK4/6 inhibitors. Furthermore, we demonstrated that abemaciclib monotherapy had only modest efficacy attributable to autophagy-induced resistance. Notably, triplet therapy was able to potentiate efficacy through elimination of the autophagic flux. Correspondingly, abemaciclib potentiated ribonucleotide reductase catalytic subunit M1 reduction, resulting in sensitization to gemcitabine. CONCLUSIONS: As such, these data provide robust preclinical mechanistic evidence of synergy between gemcitabine/cisplatin and CDK4/6 inhibitors and delineate a path forward for translation of these findings to preliminary clinical studies in advanced BTC patients.

Changes in Prescribing Patterns in Stage III Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: For patients with resected stage III colon cancer, 6 months of adjuvant fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy has been the standard of care. The IDEA collaboration aimed to evaluate whether 3 months of adjuvant chemotherapy was noninferior to 6 months. Despite failing to meet its primary endpoint, the subgroup analyses demonstrated noninferiority based on regimen and treatment duration when a risk-stratified approach was used. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To evaluate the impact of the results of the IDEA collaboration, we evaluated adjuvant chemotherapy prescribing practice patterns, including planned adjuvant treatment regimen and duration from January 1, 2016, to January 31, 2021. The time period was selected to evaluate chemotherapy prescribing patterns prior to the abstract presentation of the IDEA collaboration in June 2017 and after full manuscript publication in March 2018. RESULTS: A total of 399 patients with stage III colon cancer who received adjuvant chemotherapy were included in the analysis. A significant increasing trend for use of 3 months of adjuvant chemotherapy was observed after presentation of the IDEA abstract (P<.001). A significant change in CAPOX (capecitabine/oxaliplatin) prescribing was also observed, increasing from 14% of patients prior to presentation of the IDEA abstract to 48% after presentation (P<.001). Comparing 3 months of CAPOX with 6 months of FOLFOX (fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin), 3 months of CAPOX use also steadily increased over time (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.20-1.37; P<.001). Among subgroups of interest, no differences in adoption of CAPOX were observed. The adoption of 3 months of CAPOX was similar in patients with low-risk cancer (aOR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.17-1.37) and those with high-risk cancer (aOR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.16-1.47). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the IDEA collaboration failing to demonstrate noninferiority of 3 months' duration of adjuvant therapy compared with 6 months, the findings have influenced practice prescribing patterns, favoring CAPOX and a shorter duration of planned adjuvant treatment.

The Role of Systemic Therapy in Resectable Colorectal Liver Metastases: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite multiple randomized trials, the role of perioperative chemotherapy in colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM) is still under debate. In this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA), we aim to evaluate the efficacy of perioperative systemic therapies for patients with CRLM. METHODS: We searched various databases for abstracts and full-text articles published from database inception through May 2021.We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the addition of perioperative (post, pre, or both) systemic therapies to surgery alone in patients with CRLM. The outcomes were compared according to the chemotherapy regimen using a random effects model. Outcomes of interest included disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Seven RCTs with a total of 1504 patients with CRLM were included. Six studies included post-operative treatment and one evaluated perioperative (pre- and postoperative) therapy. Fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy was the most used systemic therapy. NMA showed benefit of adding perioperative therapy to surgery in terms of DFS (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.84). However, these findings did not translate into a statistically significant OS benefit (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.05). NMA did not show any advantage of one regimen over another including oxaliplatin or irinotecan. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and NMA of 7 RCTs found that the addition of perioperative systemic treatment for resectable CRLM could improve disease-free survival but not overall survival. Based on the findings, addition of perioperative treatment in resectable CRLM should be individualized weighing the risks and benefits.

A pilot study of Pan-FGFR inhibitor ponatinib in patients with FGFR-altered advanced cholangiocarcinoma.

Background Biliary tract cancers (BTC) are rare, chemo resistant and are associated with a poor prognosis. Preclinical and early clinical work had demonstrated interesting anti-tumor activity from targeting fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) pathway. We hypothesized that ponatinib, a multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor with activity against FGFR, would be active in BTC patients with FGFR alterations. Methods This was a multi-center, single institution pilot study of ponatinib in patients with advanced, refractory BTC with FGFR alterations. The primary end point was overall response rate, with secondary points of overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) assessment. Results Twelve patients were enrolled prior to early termination of the trial. Partial responses were observed in 1 from 12 patients. Median PFS was 2.4 months and median OS was 15.7 months. All observed toxicities were manageable and reversible. Toxicities were mild, with lymphopenia (75%), rash (63%) and fatigue (50%) being the most frequent. No significant detriment in global QoL was observed. Conclusions Ponatinib as a single agent in FGFR altered BTC is tolerable with limited clinical activity. This is the first report of prospective assessment of FGFR inhibition in BTC using ponatinib, and the first study to report its effect on HRQoL. Further development of ponatinib will involve correlative studies to better refine patient selection, focus on combinations with other molecular targeted agents, conventional cytotoxic chemotherapy, and studies to better understand mechanisms of treatment resistance.

FGFR2-IIIb Expression by Immunohistochemistry Has High Specificity in Cholangiocarcinoma with FGFR2 Genomic Alterations.

BACKGROUND: FGFR2 genomic alterations are observed in 10-20% of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). Although FGFR2 fusions are an important actionable target, FGFR2 protein expression has not been thoroughly characterized. AIMS: To evaluate FGFR2 protein expression in cholangiocarcinoma harboring FGFR2 genomic alterations. METHODS: FGFR2 protein expression was evaluated in 99 CCA cases with two different antibodies. FGFR2 genomic alterations were confirmed via next-generating sequencing (NGS) or FISH. Primary objective was to determine the specificity and sensitivity of FGFR2 immunohistochemistry staining for detecting FGFR2 genomic alterations. Secondary objectives included overall FGFR2 immunohistochemistry staining in CCA patients, and evaluation of whether FGFR2 expression correlates with clinical outcomes including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and time-to-tumor recurrence (TTR). RESULTS: Immunohistochemistry staining with two antibodies against FGFR2, FPR2-D, and clone 98706 showed high accuracy (78.7% and 91.9%) and specificity (82.9% and 97.7%), and moderate sensitivity (53.9% and 57.1%), respectively, when compared with the standard methods for detecting FGFR2 genomic alterations. In a median follow-up of 72 months, there were no statistically significant differences in OS, PFS, and TTR, for patients with positive or negative FGFR2 staining. CONCLUSION: FGFR2 protein expression by immunohistochemistry has high specificity and therefore could be used to imply the presence of FGFR2 genomic alterations in the context of a positive test. In the case of a negative test, NGS or FISH would be necessary to ascertain cases with FGFR2 genomic alterations.

Combination Immunotherapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Where Are We Currently?

The past decade has seen a rise in the availability of breakthrough therapeutic strategies for treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A tumor microenvironment in HCC is regulated by various immunotolerance mechanisms; therefore, therapeutic strategies aiming at disrupting tumor immune tolerance are becoming attractive curative options in HCC. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have demonstrated impressive effectiveness in HCC, including in sorafenib-unresponsive patients. Synergistic approaches with checkpoint inhibitors (anti-PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4) and antiangiogenic drugs are burgeoning as first-line treatment therapeutic modalities in HCC.

Circulating Tumor DNA-Based Testing and Actionable Findings in Patients with Advanced and Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Recent advances in molecular diagnostic technologies allow for the evaluation of solid tumor malignancies through noninvasive blood sampling, including circulating tumor DNA profiling (ctDNA). Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has a poor prognosis, often because of late presentation of disease. Diagnosis is often made using endoscopic ultrasound or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, which often does not yield enough tissue for next-generation sequencing. With this study, we sought to characterize the ctDNA genomic alteration landscape in patients with advanced PDAC with a focus on actionable findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From December 2014 through October 2019, 357 samples collected from 282 patients with PDAC at Mayo Clinic underwent ctDNA testing using a clinically available assay. The majority of samples were tested using the 73-gene panel which includes somatic genomic targets, including complete or critical exon coverage in 30 and 40 genes, respectively, and in some, amplifications, fusions, and indels. Clinical data and outcome variables were available for 165 patients; with 104 patients at initial presentation. RESULTS: All patients included in this study had locally advanced or metastatic PDAC. Samples having at least one alteration, when variants of unknown significance (VUS) were excluded, numbered 266 (75%). After excluding VUS, therapeutically relevant alterations were observed in 170 (48%) of the total 357 cohort, including KRAS (G12C), EGFR, ATM, MYC, BRCA, PIK3CA, and BRAF mutations. KRAS, SMAD, CCND2, or TP53 alterations were seen in higher frequency in patients with advanced disease. CONCLUSION: Our study is the largest cohort to date that demonstrates the feasibility of ctDNA testing in PDAC. We provide a benchmark landscape upon which the field can continue to grow. Future applications may include use of ctDNA to guide treatment and serial monitoring of ctDNA during disease course to identify novel therapeutic targets for improved prognosis. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has a poor prognosis often due to late presentation of disease. Biopsy tissue sampling is invasive and samples are often inadequate, requiring repeated invasive procedures and delays in treatment. Noninvasive methods to identify PDAC early in its course may improve prognosis in PDAC. Using ctDNA, targetable genes can be identified and used for treatment.

Preemptive Versus Reactive Topical Clobetasol for Regorafenib-Induced Hand-Foot Reactions: A Preplanned Analysis of the ReDOS Trial.

BACKGROUND: Hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) is the most common regorafenib-induced adverse event and is in need of effective prevention and palliation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Regorafenib Dose Optimization Study (ReDOS), a four-arm, previously published trial with a 1:1:1:1 randomization scheme, was analyzed in a manner in keeping with the original protocol to assess whether clobetasol 0.05% cream (a corticosteroid) applied to the palms and soles twice per day for 8 weeks was more effective when prescribed preemptively (before the development of HFSR) versus reactively (after the development of HFSR). Patients were assessed during the first two cycles of regorafenib. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients received preemptive clobetasol, and 55 received reactive clobetasol. Groups were balanced on demographics. Over the first two cycles, no evidence of HFSR occurred in 30% with preemptive clobetasol versus 13% with reactive clobetasol (p = .03). During the first cycle, 54% and 45% of patients had no HFSR with preemptive and reactive clobetasol, respectively (p = .35). During the second cycle, 33% and 15% had no HFSR with preemptive and reactive clobetasol, respectively (p = .02). During the second cycle, rates of grade 1, 2, and 3 HFSR were 30%, 8%, and 3%, respectively, with preemptive clobetasol and 43%, 18%, and 7%, respectively, with reactive clobetasol (p = .12). Patient-reported outcomes showed HFSR compromised nearly all activities of daily living with worse quality of life in patients who received reactive versus preemptive clobetasol. No clobetasol-induced adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Preemptive clobetasol might lessen regorafenib-induced hand-foot reactions compared with reactive therapy. Further confirmatory studies are needed in a larger patient cohort. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Regorafenib causes hand-foot skin reactions. Preemptive clobetasol, a high-potency topical corticosteroid, appears to lessen the severity of this adverse event. Although further study is needed, the favorable adverse event profile of this intervention might prompt clinicians to discuss this option with their patients.

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

LESSONS LEARNED: Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) shows promising antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with advanced biliary tract carcinoma, including patients with 5-fluorouracil refractory tumors. FTD/TPI has an acceptable safety profile and should be studied further in patients with advanced biliary tract carcinoma after progression on standard first-line therapy. BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced biliary tract carcinoma (BTC) refractory to first-line therapy lack an established second-line option. Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) has activity in both fluoropyrimidine-sensitive and -resistant tumors, which led us to conduct a single arm phase II trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of FTD/TPI for patients previously treated for advanced BTC. METHODS: Patients with advanced BTC previously treated with at least one line of chemotherapy were enrolled and treated with FTD/TPI until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint target was to have at least 6 patients who were progression free and alive at 16 weeks among 25 evaluable patients. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and toxicity. RESULTS: Of 27 evaluable patients, 59.3% received at least three prior lines of therapy, and 81.5% had previous exposure to fluoropyrimidine. Eight (32%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 14.9%-53.5%) patients were progression free at 16 weeks in the primary analysis population (n = 25), which met the predefined efficacy criteria. Median PFS and OS were 3.8 (95% CI, 2-5.8 months) and 6.1 (95% CI, 4.4-11.4 months) months, respectively. No objective responses were seen. There were no unexpected safety signals noted. CONCLUSION: FTD/TPI demonstrated promising antitumor activity, with acceptable toxicity, in heavily pretreated patients with advanced BTC.

Regorafenib dose-optimisation in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (ReDOS): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Regorafenib confers an overall survival benefit in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer; however, the adverse event profile of regorafenib has limited its use. Despite no supportive evidence, various dosing schedules are used clinically to alleviate toxicities. This study evaluated the safety and activity of two regorafenib dosing schedules. METHODS: In this randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study done in 39 outpatient cancer centres in the USA, adults aged 18 years or older with histologically or cytologically confirmed advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum that was refractory to previous standard therapy, including EGFR inhibitors if KRAS wild-type, were enrolled. Eligible patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 and had no previous treatment with regorafenib. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) into four groups with two distinct regorafenib dosing strategies and two clobetasol usage plans, stratified by hospital. Regorafenib dosing strategies were a dose-escalation strategy (starting dose 80 mg/day orally with weekly escalation, per 40 mg increment, to 160 mg/day regorafenib) if no significant drug-related adverse events occurred and a standard-dose strategy (160 mg/day orally) for 21 days of a 28-day cycle. Clobetasol usage plans (0·05% clobetasol cream twice daily applied to palms and soles) were either pre-emptive or reactive. After randomisation to the four preplanned groups, using the Pocock and Simon dynamic allocation procedures stratified by the treating hospitals, we formally tested the interaction between the two interventions, dosing strategy and clobetasol usage. Given the absence of a significant interaction (p=0·74), we decided to pool the data for the pre-emptive and reactive treatment with clobetasol and compared the two dosing strategies (dose escalation vs standard dose). The primary endpoint was the proportion of evaluable patients (defined as those who were eligible, consented, and received any protocol treatment) initiating cycle 3 and was analysed per protocol. Superiority for dose escalation was declared if the one-sided p value with Fisher's exact test was less than 0·2. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02368886. This study is fully accrued but remains active. FINDINGS: Between June 2, 2015, and June 22, 2017, 123 patients were randomly assigned to treatment, of whom 116 (94%) were evaluable. The per-protocol population consisted of 54 patients in the dose-escalation group and 62 in the standard-dose group. At data cutoff on July 24, 2018, median follow-up was 1·18 years (IQR 0·98-1·57). The primary endpoint was met: 23 (43%, 95% CI 29-56) of 54 patients in the dose-escalation group initiated cycle 3 versus 16 (26%, 15-37) of 62 patients in the standard-dose group (one-sided p=0·043). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were fatigue (seven [13%] patients in the dose-escalation group vs 11 [18%] in the standard-dose group), hand-foot skin reaction (eight [15%] patients vs ten [16%] patients), abdominal pain (nine [17%] patients vs four [6%] patients), and hypertension (four [7%] patients vs nine [15%] patients). 14 patients had at least one drug-related serious adverse event: six patients in the dose-escalation group and eight patients in the standard-dose group. There was one probable treatment-related death in the standard-dose group (myocardial infarction). INTERPRETATION: The dose-escalation dosing strategy represents an alternative approach for optimising regorafenib dosing with comparable activity and lower incidence of adverse events and could be implemented in clinical practice on the basis of these data. FUNDING: Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.

A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Regorafenib and TAS-102 in Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Regorafenib at different dosing strategies and TAS-102 are treatment options for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We aimed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness evidence supporting these different strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched different databases for randomized controlled trials evaluating TAS-102 or regorafenib in patients with refractory mCRC who failed prior oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and fluoropyrimidine. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The overall effect was pooled using the DerSimonian random effects model. We conducted network meta-analysis based on White's multivariate meta-regression to pool evidence from direct and indirect comparisons. RESULTS: Six trials at low risk of bias (2,445 patients) were included. Direct comparisons showed that Rego 160 and TAS-102 as monotherapy were superior to best-supportive care (BSC) in terms of PFS (Rego 160: hazard ratio [HR], 0.4; 95% confidence ratio [CI], 0.26-0.63; TAS-102: HR, 0.46 CI, 0.40-0.52) and OS (Rego 160: HR, 0.67; CI, 0.48-0.93; TAS-102: HR, 0.67; CI, 0.57-0.80). Network analysis showed no statistically difference in PFS or OS between Rego 160 and TAS-102. Rego 80+ was superior to BSC in terms of OS (HR, 0.44; CI, 0.23-0.84) and PFS (HR, 0.37; CI, 0.21-0.66). Rego 80+ was associated with statistically nonsignificant improvement in OS and PFS compared with TAS-102 and Rego 160. CONCLUSION: Regorafenib 160 and TAS-102 appear to have similar efficacy. Rego 80+ is shown to be superior to BSC. A trend for improved OS was observed with Rego 80+ versus Rego 160 or TAS 102. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Regorafenib at a dose of 160 mg and TAS-102 appear to have similar efficacy in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Regorafenib with a dose escalation strategy is superior to best-supportive care. Given its tolerability and the observed trend in survival benefit compared with regorafenib 160, dose escalation strategy of regorafenib (80+) may be the preferred option in this setting.

CanStem111P trial: a Phase III study of napabucasin plus nab-paclitaxel with gemcitabine.

Napabucasin (also known as BBI-608 or BBI608) is an investigational, oral agent hypothesized to inhibit multiple oncogenic pathways. In this article, we describe the design and rationale for the CanStem111P clinical trial, a multicenter, randomized, open-label, Phase III study designed to determine the efficacy and safety of combining napabucasin with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine for first-line treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (NCT02993731). Patients were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to receive weekly gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel with or without napabucasin. The results of this study will help define the role of this novel agent in the management of advanced pancreatic cancer.

Biweekly cisplatin and gemcitabine in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer.

Treatment with cisplatin and gemcitabine demonstrates a survival benefit in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (ABTC). However, the weekly administration can add significant toxicities that may prohibit prolonged treatment. Based on previous studies, we implemented a modified biweekly regimen of GC in an attempt to optimize the prescribed regimen with an improved toxicity profile, added convenience to patients while maintaining efficacy. Patients with ABTC were treated with fixed dose rate (FDR) gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2 /min) and cisplatin 20 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15 of every 28-day cycle. Patients received treatment until time of progression, death, or discontinuation due to intolerance. Collected data included demographics, clinico-pathologic features, toxicities, and survival. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to calculate the median overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). The study included 107 evaluable pts with unresectable ABTC who received the biweekly regimen. Sites of tumor included gallbladder (21.5%), ampullary (3.7%), and bile duct (74.8%). Median number of cycles was 6 (1-27). Median PFS was 8.34 (6.74, 9.23) months and median OS was 10.32 (9.10, 11.43) months. Most common grade ≥3 adverse events included neutropenia (11%), fatigue (10%), and thrombocytopenia (6.4%). Biweekly FDR GC in ABTC is associated with a more favorable toxicity profile while maintaining efficacy similar to that observed in prior clinical trials. Minimal toxicities were observed despite a prolonged course for many patients. Further prospective trials should consider evaluating the role of biweekly GC regimen in ABTC, including a potentially more favorable platform in novel experimental strategies.

Novel targeted therapy strategies for biliary tract cancers and hepatocellular carcinoma.

Worldwide hepatobiliary cancers are the second leading cause of cancer related death. Despite their relevance, hepatobiliary cancers have a paucity of approved systemic therapy options. However, there are a number of emerging therapeutic biomarkers and therapeutic concepts that show promise. In hepatocellular carcinoma, nivolumab appears particularly promising and recently received US FDA approval. In intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, therapies targeting FGFR2 and IDH1 and immune checkpoint inhibitors are the furthest along and generating the most excitement. There are additional biomarkers that merit further exploration in hepatobiliary cancers including FGF19, ERRFI1, TERT, BAP1, BRAF, CDKN2A, tumor mutational burden and ERBB2 (HER2/neu). Development of new and innovative therapies would help address the unmet need for effective systemic therapies in advanced and metastatic hepatobiliary cancers.

Second-line treatment in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are limited therapeutic options for treatment-refractory pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), with a paucity of data to support the best option after progression on gemcitabine-based regimens. The authors performed a meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness of adding oxaliplatin (OX) or various irinotecan formulations to a fluoropyrimidine (FP) after first-line treatment progression in patients with PDAC. METHODS: Different databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane, were searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing FP monotherapy versus FP combination therapy that included either oxaliplatin (FPOX) or various irinotecan formulations (FPIRI) in patients with PDAC who progressed after first-line treatment. Secondary analyses were planned to assess the effectiveness of FPOX and FPIRI compared with FP. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Five studies with 895 patients were identified. Patients randomized to receive FPIRI/FPOX had a significantly improved PFS and a trend toward improved OS compared with those who received FP monotherapy. When comparing FPIRI with FP, there was an improvement in both PFS (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.87; P = .005) and OS (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-0.89; P = .004) in patients who received the combination. Conversely, FPOX produced only a modest improvement in PFS with no improvement in OS. CONCLUSIONS: Combination chemotherapy with OX or various IRI formulations appears to improve PFS compared with single-agent FP. FPIRI, but not FPOX, appears to confer an OS advantage. The combination of FP with irinotecan formulations appears to be the appropriate next line of treatment upon progression after gemcitabine-based chemotherapy regimens. Cancer 2017;123:4680-4686. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Overall Survival and Clinical Characteristics of BRCA-Associated Cholangiocarcinoma: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Biliary tract malignancies, in particular cholangiocarcinomas (CCA), are rare tumors that carry a poor prognosis. BRCA2 mutation carriers have an increased risk of developing CCA with a reported relative risk of ∼5 according to the Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium. In addition to this risk, there are potential therapeutic implications in those harboring somatic and/or germline (GL) BRCA mutations. Therefore, it is important to define the clinical characteristics of GL/somatic BRCA1/2 variants in CCA patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a multicenter retrospective analysis of CCA patients diagnosed between January 2000 and December 2013 with GL or somatic variants in BRCA1/2 genes detected by GL mutations testing and/or by tumor next generation sequencing. Cases were identified from clinical databases at participating institutions. Data including demographics, clinical history, surgical procedures, and systemic chemotherapy or radiation were extracted from patients' records. RESULTS: Overall, 18 cases were identified: 5 carriers of GL BRCA1/2 mutations (4 BRCA2; 1 BRCA1) and 13 harboring somatic variations (7 BRCA1; 6 BRCA2). Mean age at diagnosis was 60, SD ± 10 years (range 36-75 years), with male and female prevalence rates of 61.2% and 38.8%, respectively. Stage at diagnosis was I (n = 4), II (n = 3), III (n = 3), and IV (n = 8). Six patients had extrahepatic CCA and the rest intrahepatic CCA. Thirteen patients received platinum-based therapy and four were treated with poly ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors, of whom one experienced sustained disease response with a progression-free survival of 42.6 months. Median overall survival from diagnosis for patients with stage I/II in this study was 40.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.73-108.15) and with stages III/IV was 25 months (95% CI, 15.23-40.57). CONCLUSION: BRCA-associated CCA is uncommon. This multicenter retrospective study provides a thorough clinical analysis of a BRCA-associated CCA cohort, which can serve as a benchmark for future development and design of expanded analyses and clinical trials. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: BRCA-associated CCA is uncommon but a very important subtype of hepatic malignancies, due to its rising prevalence. Better clinical characterization of this subtype might allow application of targeted therapy for CCA patients with germline or somatic mutations in BRCA1/2 genes, especially due to previously reported success of such therapies in other BRCA-associated malignancies. Thus this study, first of its kind, provides a basis for future multi-centered analyses in larger cohorts, as well as clinical trials. Additionally, this study emphasizes the importance of both germline and somatic genotyping for all CCA patients.

Next-generation sequencing survey of biliary tract cancer reveals the association between tumor somatic variants and chemotherapy resistance.

BACKGROUND: Biliary tract cancers (BTCs) are uncommon and are associated with a dismal prognosis. Combinations of gemcitabine and platinum chemotherapy (gemcitabine and platinum-based therapy [GP]) form the standard approach for treating advanced BTC. To characterize the spectrum of mutations and to identify potential biomarkers for a GP response in BTC, this study evaluated the genomic landscape and assessed whether mutations affecting DNA repair were associated with GP resistance. METHODS: Pretreatment, formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded samples from 183 BTC patients treated with GP were analyzed. Cox regression models were used to determine the association between mutations, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: When genes with an incidence > 10% were considered, no individual gene was independently predictive of a GP response. In patients with unresectable BTC who received GP as their first-line therapy, the joint status of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (CDKN2A), tumor protein 53 (TP53), and AT-rich interaction domain 1A (ARID1A) was associated with PFS (P = .0004) and OS (P ≤ .0001). Patients with mutations in CDKN2A and TP53 were identified as a poor-prognosis cohort with a median PFS of 2.63 months and a median OS of 5.22 months. Patients with mutant ARID1A, regardless of the single-mutation status of TP53 or CDKN2A, had similar outcomes. A patient who exhibited mutations in all 3 genes had a median PFS of 20.37 months, and OS was not reached. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest exploratory analysis of this kind for BTC, 3 prevalent, mutually exclusive mutations represent distinct patient cohorts. These mutations are prognostic and may represent a predictive biomarker for a GP response. Prospective studies to validate these findings are needed, and they should include the incorporation of therapies that exploit the genomic instability observed with these mutations in BTC. Cancer 2016;122:3657-66. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Colorectal clinical trials: what is on the horizon?

Substantial progress has been made in the treatment of colorectal cancer, where more effective therapies have led to improved outcomes in patients with advanced disease. However, the 5-year overall survival rate remains poor. Genomic sequencing has allowed us to understand that colorectal cancer is a heterogeneous disease, where tumor-specific variants affect the prognosis and outcomes in patients. This has shaped the future directions of treatment and the development of clinical trials, including the incorporation of novel targeted therapies and investigations into the role of immunotherapy in colorectal cancer.

Onvansertib in Combination with FOLFIRI and Bevacizumab in Second-Line Treatment of KRAS-Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Phase Ib Clinical Study.

PURPOSE: Onvansertib is a highly specific inhibitor of polo-like kinase 1 (PLK1), with demonstrated safety in solid tumors. We evaluated, preclinically and clinically, the potential of onvansertib in combination with chemotherapy as a therapeutic option for KRAS-mutant colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Preclinical activity of onvansertib was assessed (i) in vitro in KRAS wild-type and -mutant isogenic colorectal cancer cells and (ii) in vivo, in combination with irinotecan, in a KRAS-mutant xenograft model. Clinically, a phase Ib trial was conducted to investigate onvansertib at doses 12, 15, and 18 mg/m2 (days 1-5 and 14-19 of a 28-day cycle) in combination with FOLFIRI/bevacizumab (days 1 and 15) in patients with KRAS-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer who had prior oxaliplatin exposure. Safety, efficacy, and changes in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) were assessed. RESULTS: In preclinical models, onvansertib displayed superior activity in KRAS-mutant than wild-type isogenic colorectal cancer cells and demonstrated potent antitumor activity in combination with irinotecan in vivo. Eighteen patients enrolled in the phase Ib study. Onvansertib recommended phase II dose was established at 15 mg/m2. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events (AE) represented 15% of all treatment-related AEs, with neutropenia being the most common. Partial responses were observed in 44% of patients, with a median duration of response of 9.5 months. Early ctDNA dynamics were predictive of treatment efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Onvansertib combined with FOLIFRI/bevacizumab exhibited manageable safety and promising efficacy in second-line treatment of patients with KRAS-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer. Further exploration of this combination therapy is ongoing. See related commentary by Stebbing and Bullock, p. 2005.