Altered centriolar cohesion by CEP250 and appendages impact outcome of patients with pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the leading cause of cancer death worldwide. PDACs are characterized by centrosome aberrations, but whether centrosome-related genes influence patient outcomes has not been tested. METHODS: Publicly available RNA-sequencing data of patients diagnosed with PDAC were interrogated with unsupervised approaches to identify centrosome protein-encoding genes with prognostic relevance. Candidate genes were validated by immunohistochemistry and multiplex immunofluorescence in a set of clinical PDAC and normal pancreatic tissues. RESULTS: Results showed that two genes CEP250 and CEP170, involved in centrosome linker and centriolar subdistal appendages, were expressed at high levels in PDAC tissues and were correlated with prognosis of PDAC patients in independent databases. Large clustered γ-tubulin-labelled centrosomes were linked together by aberrant circular and planar-shaped CEP250 arrangements in CEP250-high expressing PDACs. Furthermore, PDACs displayed prominent centrosome separation and reduced CEP164-centrosomal labelling associated with acetylated-tubulin staining compared to normal pancreatic tissues. Interestingly, in a small validation cohort, CEP250-high expressing patients had shorter disease free- and overall-survival and almost none of those who received gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel first-line therapy achieved a clinical response. In contrast, weak CEP250 expression was associated with long-term survivors or responses to medical treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Alteration of the centriolar cohesion and appendages has effect on the survival of patients with PDAC.

Androgen receptor, PARP signaling, and tumor microenvironment: the 'perfect triad' in prostate cancer?

Aberrations in the homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway in prostate cancer (PCa) provide a unique opportunity to develop therapeutic strategies that take advantage of the reduced tumor ability to repair DNA damage. Poly-ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) have been shown to prolong the survival of PCa patients with HRR defects, particularly in those with Breast Cancer type 1 susceptibility protein/Breast Cancer type 2 susceptibility protein alterations. To expand the benefit of PARPi to patients without detectable HRR alterations, multiple preclinical and clinical studies are addressing potential synergies between PARPi and androgen receptor signaling inhibitors, and these strategies are also being evaluated in combination with other drugs such as immune checkpoint inhibitors. However, the effectiveness of these combining therapies could be hindered by multiple mechanisms of resistance, including also the role played by the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. In this review, we summarize the use of PARPi in PCa and the potential synergies with different molecular pathways. However, numerous unanswered questions remain, including the identification of the patient population that could benefit most from PARPi, determining whether to use PARPi as monotherapy or in combination, and finding the optimal timing of PARPi, expanding the use of genomic tests, and optimizing combination therapies.

Concomitant Administration of VEGFR Tyrosine Kinase and Proton Pump Inhibitors May Impair Clinical Outcome of Patients With Metastatic Renal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The administration of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) is a common practice to reduce gastro-esophageal adverse events associated with drug treatments but may impair absorption and exposure to oncology drugs. This study investigated the effect of concomitant administration of PPIs and pazopanib, sunitinib and cabozantinib on survival of patients with metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma (mRCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Total 451 patients receiving pazopanib, sunitinib and cabozantinib as first line treatment were enrolled in this retrospective study. Patients were defined as "no concomitant PPIs (PPI-)" if no PPIs were administered during TKIs, and as "concomitant PPIs (PPI+)" if the administration of PPIs was at least 75% of the time during which TKIs were given. RESULTS: Eighty patients administered pazopanib were PPI- and 86 PPI+; no difference in PFS was observed (10.7 vs. 11.9 months, P = .79). If patients were stratified as short (n = 89) and long (n = 77) responders, there was a significant difference in terms of PFS in PPI+ (n = 47) versus PPI- (n = 30) in long responders, being 24.7 versus 38 months (P = .04), respectively. In the sunitinib cohort, no significant difference of PFS in PPI+ (n = 102) versus PPI- (n = 131) was found, being 11.3 versus 18.1 months, respectively (P=0.15). In the cabozantinib cohort, there was a statistically significant difference in PFS of PPI+ versus PPI- (6 months vs. not reached, P = .04). No correlation with adverse events was found. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates an association between PPIs and impaired PFS in mRCC patients given pazopanib and cabozantinib and recommends caution on their concomitant use.

Initial management approach for localized/locally advanced disease is critical to guide metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Currently, several therapies are available for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) but no specific clinical factors to personalize treatment. We first sought the prognostic value of duration on androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC) in patients receiving androgen-receptor-signaling inhibitors (ARSI) for mCRPC. METHODS: A multicenter cohort of mCRPC patients who started ARSI between July 2011 and October 2021 was identified. Based on their initial disease burden and duration on ADT for HSPC, primary progressive (PP) men were classified into four groups: low/intermediate-risk localized disease (LOC) and high-risk localized/locally advanced disease (LAD) and short-term (ST) < 24 vs. long-term (LT) ADT ≥ 24 months, whereas de novo (DN) mHSPC were subdivided into short-time vs. long-time to CRPC. RESULTS: We included 919 mCRPC patients with a median age of 77 years [interquartile range (IQR) = 71-82)]. Median ADT duration in HSPC was 24 months (IQR = 14-40). Median follow-up was 91 months (IQR = 62-138), median OS and PFS from ARSI start were 20 (IQR 10-32) and 10 months (IQR = 5-19), respectively. In PP developing metastatic disease (n = 655, 71.3%), LOC and LAD with ST ADT had a greater than almost double-risk of death compared to LT ADT (LOC/ST: hazard ratio [HR] = 2.01; 95% CI 1.54-2.64; LAD/ST: HR = 1.73; 95% CI 1.34-2.24; p < 0.001). In the multivariate analysis including age, prognostic cohort, Gleason, ECOG, radical radiotherapy and prostatectomy, groups with ST ADT were associated with worse OS compared to LT ADT (LOC/ST: HR = 1.84; 95% CI 1.38-2.45; p < 0.001; LAD/ST: HR = 1.59; 95% CI 1.21-2.10; p < 0.001), along with ECOG > 2 (HR = 1.55; 95% CI 1.06-2.26; p = 0.03). There were also similar results of PFS. Moreover, long-time to CRPC in patients with history of DN mHSPC (n = 264, 28.7%) resulted in a better OS/PFS (HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.56-1.02, p = 0.064 and HR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.55-0.99, p = 0.042, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that duration on ADT for mHSPC was significantly associated with survival in mCRPC undergoing ARSI. These findings suggest a possible connection between initial management of prostate tumour and a better prognostication in mCRPC. Prospective trials are warranted.

Prognostic analysis and outcomes of metastatic pancreatic cancer patients receiving nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine as second or later-line treatment.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer (PC) first-line therapy often consists of polychemotherapy regimens, but choosing a second-line therapy after disease progression, especially following first-line FOLFIRINOX, remains a clinical challenge. This study presents results from a large, multicenter, retrospective analysis of Italian patients with metastatic PC (mPC) treated with Nab-paclitaxel/Gemcitabine (AG) as second or later line of treatment. Main objective of the study is to identify prognostic factors that could inform treatment decisions. METHODS: The study included 160 mPC patients treated with AG in 17 Italian institutions. AG was administered according to labelling dose, until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or patient refusal. Variations in schedules, dose modifications, supportive measures, and response evaluation were determined by individual clinicians' practice. RESULTS: AG was well-tolerated and exhibited promising clinical activity. The overall response rate (ORR) and the disease control rate (DCR) were 22.5% and 45.6%, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.9 and 6.8 months, respectively. Among the patients who received AG as a second-line therapy (n = 111, 66.9%), median PFS and OS were 4.2 and 7.4 months, respectively. Notably, in the 76 patients (68%) receiving AG after first-line FOLFIRINOX, an ORR of 19.7% and a DCR of 46.0% were observed, resulting in a median PFS of 3.5 and median OS of 5.7 months. The study identified specific clinical or laboratory parameters (LDH, NLR, fasting serum glucose, liver metastases, ECOG PS, and first-line PFS) as independent prognostic factors at multivariate level. These factors were used to create a prognostic nomogram that divided patients into three risk classes, helping to predict second-line OS and PFS. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the largest real-world population of mPC patients treated with AG as a second or later line of therapy. It supports the feasibility of this regimen following first-line FOLFIRINOX, particularly in patients with specific clinical and laboratory characteristics who derived prolonged benefit from first-line therapy.

Germline pathogenic variants of cancer predisposition genes in a multicentre Italian cohort of pancreatic cancer patients.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Germline BRCA1-2 test is routinely recommended in Pancreatic Cancer (PC) patients, due to its clinical-epidemiological relevance. Data on the prevalence of germline pathogenic variants (gPV) in other cancer predisposition and DNA Damage Repair (DDR) system-related genes in unselected PC cases are sparce in Italy. We assessed this prevalence in a multicentre cohort, to derive recommendations for PC patients. METHODS: Clinical data of 1200 consecutive PC patients, of any age and stage, tested with a multigene germline panel were collected. A descriptive analysis of gPV frequency and clinical variables was performed both in 1092 patients tested for an 18 genes core-panel (CP-18 cohort) and in 869 patients screened only for CDKN2A. RESULTS: 11.5 % (126/1092) of CP-18 cohort patients harbored a gPV in ≥ 1 gene. Highest gPV frequencies were detected in ATM (3.1 %), BRCA2 (2.9 %), BRCA1 (1.6 %), CHEK2 (1.1 %). Patients harboring any CP-18 gene and BRCA1-2 gPV were younger and with a higher rate of personal (PH) or family history (FH) of cancer when compared to no gPV patients. The risk of having a gPV was ≥ 7 % in all subgroups of patients, including those aged > 73, with tumor stage I-III and negative FH/PH. CDKN2A gPV were detected in 2.6 % (23/869) of patients. CONCLUSIONS: A remarkable prevalence of gPV in cancer predisposition and DDR genes is reported in this large multicentre cohort of consecutive and unselected PC patients. Therefore, we recommend multigene germline testing (at least including BRCA1-2, ATM, CDKN2A, PALB2) for all PC patients, irrespective of age, stage, PH/FH.

Durvalumab Plus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Biliary Tract Cancer: a Real-World Retrospective, Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: The TOPAZ-1 phase III trial reported a survival benefit with the anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (anti-PD-L1) durvalumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). OBJECTIVE: The present study investigated for the first time the impact on survival of adding durvalumab to cisplatin/gemcitabine compared with cisplatin/gemcitabine in a real-world setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The analyzed population included patients with unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic BTC treated with durvalumab in combination with cisplatin/gemcitabine or with cisplatin/gemcitabine alone. The impact of adding durvalumab to chemotherapy in terms of overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) was investigated with univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 563 patients were included in the analysis: 213 received cisplatin/gemcitabine alone, 350 received cisplatin/gemcitabine plus durvalumab. At the univariate analysis, the addition of durvalumab was found to have an impact on survival, with a median OS of 14.8 months versus 11.2 months [hazard ratio (HR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50-0.80, p = 0.0002] in patients who received cisplatin/gemcitabine plus durvalumab compared to those who received cisplatin/gemcitabine alone. At the univariate analysis for PFS, the addition of durvalumab to cisplatin/gemcitabine demonstrated a survival impact, with a median PFS of 8.3 months and 6.0 months (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.47-0.70, p < 0.0001) in patients who received cisplatin/gemcitabine plus durvalumab and cisplatin/gemcitabine alone, respectively. The multivariate analysis confirmed that adding durvalumab to cisplatin/gemcitabine is an independent prognostic factor for OS and PFS, with patients > 70 years old and those affected by locally advanced disease experiencing the highest survival benefit. Finally, an exploratory analysis of prognostic factors was performed in the cohort of patients who received durvalumab: neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and disease stage were to be independent prognostic factors in terms of OS. The interaction test highlighted NLR ≤ 3, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) = 0, and locally advanced disease as positive predictive factors for OS on cisplatin/gemcitabine plus durvalumab. CONCLUSION: In line with the results of the TOPAZ-1 trial, adding durvalumab to cisplatin/gemcitabine has been confirmed to confer a survival benefit in terms of OS and PFS in a real-world setting of patients with advanced BTC.