First-line gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel versus FOLFIRINOX for metastatic pancreatic cancer in a real-world population.

Aim: To compare the overall survival (OS) among patients who received first-line modified gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (G/nab-P) or 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan and oxaliplatin (mFOLFIRINOX) for metastatic pancreatic cancer. Methods: A single-center, retrospective, real-world study was conducted. Results: The median OS was 9.4 months versus 7.5 months in the mFOLFIRINOX and modified G/Nab-P groups, respectively (p = 0.16). An exploratory subgroup analysis excluding patients who received one infusion and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 2 demonstrated similar OS of 11.3 months and 8.9 months, respectively. Median progression-free survival and time-to-treatment failure were not significantly different. Higher rates of adverse events were noted with mFOLFIRINOX. Conclusion: mFOLFIRINOX did not significantly prolong OS compared with modified G/nab-P and was associated with increased toxicities.

Pancreatic cancer that has spread to other parts of the body cannot be cured and patients usually have a limited time to live after diagnosis. It is therefore important to choose an effective treatment while minimizing the side effects of chemotherapy and maintaining patients' quality of life. Initial chemotherapy regimens include a combination of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (G/nab-P) or 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX). While some studies have found that patients treated with FOLFIRINOX may live longer, they also experience more side effects. This single-center study showed that patients treated with modified G/nab-P and FOLFIRINOX regimens had similar survival outcomes but FOLFIRINOX was associated with increased toxicities.

Real-world outcomes associated with liposomal irinotecan dose reductions in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Aim: This study sought to understand the association between liposomal irinotecan dose reductions (DRs) and clinical outcomes among patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Materials & methods: A retrospective study of adult patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma treated with liposomal irinotecan in the Flatiron Health database was conducted to assess treatment and clinical outcomes. Results: DRs occurred in 28.4% of the 320 patients in the study. Patients with DRs had longer overall survival (7.7 [95% CI: 6.2-10.2]) vs 3.6 [3.2-4.1] months) and time to discontinuation (4.2 [3.0-4.9] vs 1.4 [1.0-1.5] months) than patients without DRs. Results were consistent in a validation analysis requiring three cycles of treatment. Conclusion: Liposomal irinotecan DRs were associated with improved clinical outcomes compared with patients without DRs.

Mainstreaming germline genetic testing for patients with pancreatic cancer increases uptake.

Germline genetic testing is recommended for all patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) but uptake rates are low. We implemented a mainstreaming program in oncology clinics to increase testing for PC patients. Genetic counselors trained oncology providers to offer a standardized multigene panel and obtain informed consent using an educational video. Pre-test genetic counseling was available upon request. Otherwise, patients with identified pathogenic variants, strong family history, or questions regarding their results were referred for post-test genetic counseling. We measured rates of testing and genetic counseling visits. From September 2019 to April 2021, 245 patients with PC underwent genetic testing. This represents a 6.5-fold increase in germline testing volume (95% confidence interval 5.2-8.1) compared to previous years. At least one pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant (PV/LPV) was found in 34 (13.9%) patients, including 17 (6.9%) PV/LPVs in high or moderate risk genes and 18 (7.3%) in low risk or recessive genes. Five (2.0%) PVs had implications on treatment selection. 22 of the positive patients (64.7%) and an additional 8 PC patients (1 negative, 3 VUS, and 4 pre-test) underwent genetic counseling during the study period. Genetic counselors saw 2.0 PC patients/month prior to this project, 1.6 PC patients/month during this project, and would have seen 2.2 PC patients/month if all patients with pathogenic variants attended post-test counseling. Conclusions Mainstreaming genetic testing expands access for PC patients without overwhelming genetic counseling resources.

Tumor treating fields: An emerging treatment modality for thoracic and abdominal cavity cancers.

Tumor treating fields (TTFields)-an intermediate-frequency, electric field therapy-has emerged as a promising alternative therapy for the treatment of solid cancers. Since the first publication describing the anticancer effects of TTFields in 2004 there have been numerous follow-up studies by other groups, either to confirm the efficacy of TTFields or to study the primary mechanism of interaction. The overwhelming conclusion from these in vitro studies is that TTFields reduce the viability of aggressively replicating cell lines. However, there is still speculation as to the primary mechanism for this effect; moreover, observations both in vitro and in vivo of inhibited migration and metastases have been made, which may be unrelated to the originally proposed hypothesis of replication stress. Adding to this, the in vivo environment is much more complex spatially, structurally, and involves intricate networks of cell signaling, all of which could change the efficacy of TTFields in the same way pharmaceutical interventions often struggle transitioning in vivo. Despite this, TTFields have shown promise in clinical practice on multiple cancer types, which begs the question: has the primary mechanism carried over from in vitro to in vivo or are there new mechanisms at play? The goal of this review is to highlight the current proposed mechanism of action of TTFields based primarily on in vitro experiments and animal models, provide a summary of the clinical efficacy of TTFields, and finally, propose future directions of research to identify all possible mechanisms in vivo utilizing novel tumor-on-a-chip platforms.

Risk Factors and Biomarkers for Immune-Related Adverse Events: A Practical Guide to Identifying High-Risk Patients and Rechallenging Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are a range of complications associated with the use of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Two major classes of ICIs widely used are Cytotoxic T-Lymphocyte Antigen 4 (CTLA4) and Programmed Cell death-1 (PD-1)/Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors. High-grade irAEs are life-threatening and often cause a severe decline in performance status in such that patients do not qualify for any further anticancer treatments. It is difficult to generalize the evidence in the current literature on risk factors or biomarkers for the entire class of ICIs as the studies so far are either disease-specific (e.g., lung cancer or melanoma) or ICI agent-specific (e.g., pembrolizumab, ipilimumab) or irAE-specific (e.g., pneumonitis or gastritis). In this review, risk factors and biomarkers to consider before initiating or monitoring ICI are listed with a practical purpose in day-to-day practice. Risk factors are grouped into demographics and social history, medical history, and medication history, tumor-specific and agent-specific risk factors. A higher risk of irAE is associated with age <60 years, high body mass index, women on CTLA4 and men on PD-1/PD-L1 agents, and chronic smokers. Patients with significant kidney (Stage IV-V), cardiac (heart failure, coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, hypertension), and lung (asthma, pulmonary fibrosis, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) are at a higher risk of respective organ-specific irAEs. Pre-existing autoimmune disease and chronic use of certain drugs (proton pump inhibitors, diuretics, anti-inflammatory drugs) also increase the irAE-risk. Biomarkers are categorized into circulating blood counts, cytokines, autoantibodies, HLA genotypes, microRNA, gene expression profiling, and serum proteins. The blood counts and certain protein markers (albumin and thyroid-stimulating hormone) are readily accessible in current practice. High neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, eosinophil/monocyte/lymphocyte counts; TSH and troponins at diagnosis and drop in the white count and lymphocyte count can predict irAE. Other biomarkers with limited evidence are cytokines, autoantibodies, HLA genotypes, microRNA, and gene expression profiling. With fast-expanding approvals for ICIs in various cancer types, knowledge on risk factors and biomarkers can help providers assess the irAE-risk of their patients. Prospective disease and agent-specific studies are needed to provide further insight on this essential aspect of ICI therapy.

Surgical treatment of hepatic oligometastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: An analysis of the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Patients with liver-only metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma have traditionally been offered palliative chemotherapy alone. Recent studies have explored the role of surgical resection among patients with limited metastatic disease. National practice patterns and the impact of surgery among these patients remains unknown. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for all patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2015. The primary outcome was overall survival from the time of diagnosis. Patients with liver-only metastatic disease were included. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to determine the association of patient, hospital, and regional factors with receipt of surgical resection. A propensity score-matched cohort (1:1) was generated by matching patient- and tumor-related factors (age, sex, race, comorbidity burden, primary tumor site, primary tumor size) among patients with liver-only stage IV pancreatic adenocarcinoma who received chemotherapy alone compared to those who received chemotherapy and underwent pancreatectomy and liver metastatectomy. RESULTS: Among 312,426 patients who met the study criteria, one half (n = 140,043, 50.4%) had stage IV disease; metastatic sites included bone (n = 5493, 3.1%), brain (n = 620, 0.4%), lung (n = 16,580, 9.5%), and liver (n = 62,444, 35.7%). Patients with stage IV disease were more likely to be younger (odds ratio: 1.10, 95% confidence interval: 1.0-1.2; P = .03) and have poorly (odds ratio: 2.1, 95% confidence interval: 1.8-2.5; P < .001) or undifferentiated (odds ratio: 3.1, 95% confidence interval: 2.3-4.1; P < .001) tumors. Among stage IV patients with liver-only disease (n = 47,785, 14.9%), 891 patients (1.9%) underwent pancreatic resection. Patients who underwent resection were more likely to be younger (odds ratio 1.4, 95% confidence interval: 1.0-1.8; P = .03) and treated at an academic/research center (odds ratio 2.1, 95% confidence interval: 1.2-3.5; P = .006). Median overall survival among patients who underwent resection was 10.74 months versus 3.4 months among patients who did not undergo resection. After controlling for patient and disease-related factors, patients who underwent surgical resection had a lower risk of death versus patients who did not undergo surgery (hazard ratio: 0.5, 95% confidence interval: 0.4-0.6; P < .001). After propensity score matching, patients who received multimodality treatment for liver-only metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (surgery, chemotherapy) had a longer median overall survival (15.6 months vs 8.1 months) compared to those who received chemotherapy alone (P < .001). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that pancreatic resection in patients with liver metastases, in combination with chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation, may be associated with improved survival in well-selected patients. However, attempts at an aggressive surgical approach for patients with liver-only stage IV pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients should only be performed only under a well-designed prospective clinical trial.

Understanding the Clinical Impact of MUC5AC Expression on Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

Mucin-5AC (MUC5AC) is a heavily glycosylated gel-forming secreted mucin with a reliable prognostic value when detected in multiple malignancies. It is highly prevalent (70%) in PDA and is nonexistent in normal pancreatic tissues. Retrospective studies on PDA tumor tissue (detected by immunohistochemistry or IHC)) have investigated the prognostic value of MUC5AC expression but were equivocal. Some studies associated it with poor outcomes (survival or pathological features such as lymph node disease, vascular/neural invasion in resected tumors), while others have concluded that it is a good prognostic marker. The examination of expression level threshold (5%, 10%, or 25%) and the detected region (apical vs. cytoplasmic) were variable among the studies. The maturation stage and glycoform of MUC5AC detected also differed with the Monoclonal antibody (Mab) employed for IHC. CLH2 detects less mature/less glycosylated versions while 45M1 or 21-1 detect mature/more glycosylated forms. Interestingly, aberrantly glycosylated variants of MUC5AC were detected using lectin assays (Wheat Germ Agglutinin-MUC5AC), and Mabs such as NPC-1C and PAM4 have are more specific to malignant pancreatic tissues. NPC-1C and PAM4 antibody reactive epitopes on MUC5AC are immunogenic and could represent specific changes on the native MUC5AC glycoprotein linked to carcinogenesis. It was never studied to predict treatment response.

A Phase II Trial of Adjuvant Durvalumab Following Trimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: A Big Ten Cancer Research Consortium Study.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with resectable locally advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma (AC) receive concurrent chemoradiation (CRT) followed by esophagectomy. The majority of patients do not achieve pathologic complete response (pCR) with neoadjuvant CRT, and the relapse rate is high among these patients. METHODS: We conducted a phase II study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02639065) evaluating the efficacy and safety of PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab in patients with locally advanced esophageal and GEJ AC who have undergone neoadjuvant CRT followed by R0 resection with evidence of persistent residual disease in the surgical specimen. Patients received durvalumab 1500 mg IV every 4 weeks for up to 1 year. The primary endpoint was 1-year relapse free survival (RFS). Secondary endpoint was safety and tolerability of durvalumab following trimodality therapy. Exploratory endpoints included correlation of RFS with PD-L1 expression, HER-2 expression, and tumor immune cell population. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients were enrolled. The majority (64.9%) had pathologically positive lymph nodes. The most common treatment related adverse events were fatigue (27%), diarrhea (18.9%), arthralgia (16.2%), nausea (16.2%), pruritus (16.2%), cough (10.8%), and increase in AST/ALT/bilirubin (10.8%). Three (8.1%) patients developed grade 3 immune mediated adverse events. One-year RFS was 73% (95% CI, 56-84%) with median RFS of 21 months (95% CI, 14-40.4 months). Patients with GEJ AC had a trend toward superior 1-year RFS compared to those with esophageal AC (83% vs. 63%, p = 0.1534). There was a numerical trend toward superior 1-year RFS among patients with PD-L1 positive disease compared to those with PD-L1 negative disease, using CPS of ≥10 (100% vs. 66.7%, p = 0.1551) and ≥1 (84.2% vs. 61.1%, p = 0.1510) cutoffs. A higher relative proportion of M2 macrophages and CD4 memory activated T cells was associated with improved RFS (HR = 0.16; 95% CI, 0.05-0.59; p = 0.0053; and HR = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.15-0.93, p = 0.0351, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant durvalumab in patients with residual disease in the surgical specimen following trimodality therapy for locally advanced esophageal and GEJ AC led to clinically meaningful improvement in 1-year RFS compared to historical control rate. Higher PD-L1 expression may have a correlation with the efficacy of durvalumab in this setting. Higher proportion of M2 macrophages and CD4 memory activated T cells was associated with superior RFS.

Altered Gemcitabine and Nab-paclitaxel Scheduling Improves Therapeutic Efficacy Compared with Standard Concurrent Treatment in Preclinical Models of Pancreatic Cancer.

PURPOSE: Concurrent gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel treatment is one of the preferred chemotherapy regimens for metastatic and locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Previous studies demonstrate that caveolin-1 (Cav-1) expression is critical for nab-paclitaxel uptake into tumors and correlates with response. Gemcitabine increases nab-paclitaxel uptake by increasing Cav-1 expression. Thus, we hypothesized that pretreatment with gemcitabine would further enhance the sensitivity of PDAC to nab-paclitaxel by increasing Cav-1 expression and nab-paclitaxel uptake. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We investigated the sensitivity of different gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel treatment regimens in a panel of PDAC cell lines and orthotopic xenograft models. The sensitivity of different treatment regimens was compared with the standard concurrent treatment. RESULTS: Pretreatment with gemcitabine before nab-paclitaxel increased Cav-1 and albumin uptake and significantly decreased proliferation and clonogenicity compared with concurrent treatment, which correlated with increased levels of apoptosis. Cav-1 silencing reduced the uptake of albumin, and therapeutic advantage was observed when cells were pretreated with gemcitabine prior to nab-paclitaxel. In addition, we observed that pretreatment with gemcitabine resulted in partial synchronization of cells in the G2-M-phase at the time of nab-paclitaxel treatment, providing another mechanism for the benefit of altered scheduling. In heterotopic and orthotopic xenograft models, the altered schedule of gemcitabine prior to nab-paclitaxel significantly delayed tumor growth compared with concurrent delivery without added toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment with gemcitabine significantly increased nab-paclitaxel uptake and correlated with an increased treatment efficacy and survival benefit in preclinical models, compared with standard concurrent treatment. These results justify preclinical and clinical testing of this altered scheduling combination.

Development of a MicroRNA Signature Predictive of Recurrence and Survival in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Optimal patient selection for radiotherapy in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is unestablished. Molecular profiling may select patients at high risk for locoregional recurrence (LRR) who would benefit from radiation. METHODS: We included resectable pancreatic cancer (R-PDAC) patients, divided into training and validation cohorts, treated among three institutions with surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy, and borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer (BR/LA-PDAC) patients treated with chemotherapy with or without radiation at the primary study institution. We isolated RNA from R-PDAC surgical specimens. Using NanoString, we identified miRNAs differentially expressed between normal and malignant pancreatic tissue. ElasticNet regression identified two miRNAs most predictive of LRR in the training cohort, miR-181b/d and miR-575, which were used to generate a risk score (RS). We evaluated the association of the median-dichotomized RS with recurrence and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: We identified 183 R-PDAC and 77 BR/LA-PDAC patients with median follow up of 37 months treated between 2001 and 2014. On multivariable analysis of the R-PDAC training cohort (n = 90), RS was associated with worse LRR (HR = 1.34; 95%CI 1.27-11.38; p = 0.017) and OS (HR = 2.89; 95%CI 1.10-4.76; p = 0.027). In the R-PDAC validation cohort, RS was associated with worse LRR (HR = 2.39; 95%CI 1.03-5.54; p = 0.042), but not OS (p = 0.087). For BR/LA-PDAC, RS was associated with worse LRR (HR = 2.71; 95%CI 1.14-6.48; p = 0.025), DR (HR = 1.93; 95%CI 1.10-3.38; p = 0.022), and OS (HR = 1.97; 95%CI 1.17-3.34; p = 0.011). Additionally, after stratifying by RS and receipt of radiation in BR/LA-PDAC patients, high RS patients who did not receive radiation had worse LRR (p = 0.018), DR (p = 0.006), and OS (p < 0.001) compared to patients with either low RS or patients who received radiation, irrespective of RS. CONCLUSIONS: RS predicted worse LRR and OS in R-PDAC and worse LRR, DR, and OS in BR/LA-PDAC. This may select patients who would benefit from radiation and should be validated prospectively.

Stage I Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Anus: Is Radiation Therapy Alone Sufficient Treatment?

The optimal treatment for stage I squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) remains undefined. Recently, wide local excision alone was found to have comparable survival to those treated with chemoradiation (CRT). Given that local excision may be sufficient for the treatment of stage I SCCA, we hypothesized that radiation therapy (RT) alone, compared to CRT would result in equivalent overall survival (OS) in this population. We identified non-surgically treated patients with stage I SCCA from the National Cancer Database from 2004-2015. We included only patients treated either with CRT (45-59.4 Gy with chemotherapy initiated within 14 days of RT) or RT alone (45-59.4 Gy with no chemotherapy). The primary endpoint was OS between CRT and RT patients. Propensity-score matched (PSM) analysis was performed to determine the effect of concurrent chemotherapy on OS using a Cox proportional hazards model with robust standard error to account for clustering in matched pairs. We identified 3552 stage I patients treated with CRT and 287 treated with RT. Compared to patients treated with CRT, those that received RT were more likely to be ≥70 years old (33.1% vs. 19.7%, p < 0.001) and less likely to be female (63.1% vs. 71.0%, p < 0.001). The proportion of patients with a Charlson-Deyo score of 0 was similar in both groups (80.8% RT vs. 82.7% CRT, p = 0.164). The PSM cohort consisted of 287 pairs of patients with median follow-up 48.3 months (interquartile range, 24.4-85.1 months) and 151 deaths (86 RT, 65 CRT). CRT was associated with a 31% reduction in the risk of death (HR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.50-0.95, p = 0.023). We found that CRT was associated with improved OS, compared to RT alone, in patients with non-surgically treated stage I SCCA. These data suggest that de-intensification of therapy in stage I SCCA must be used with caution. However, given the retrospective nature of the data, prospective trials are required.

Epidermal growth factor receptor-activating mutation(E746_T751>VP) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma responds to erlotinib, followed by epidermal growth factor receptor resistance-mediating mutation (A647T): A case report and literature review.

Despite recent advances in treatment with multidrug chemotherapy regimens, outcomes of patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remain very poor. Treatment with targeted therapies has shown marginal benefits due to intrinsic or acquired resistance. Actionable mutations, while detected infrequently in patients with PDAC, are becoming increasingly used in personalized medicine. Here, we describe an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-activating mutation (E746_T751>VP) to erlotinib, a first-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), in a patient with metastatic PDAC. After an initial partial response to erlotinib for 12 months, the patient's disease progressed with emergence of the EGFR A647T mutation. Certainly, the patient also progressed after switching therapy to a third-generation EGFR TKI (osimertinib). This case illustrates the posttreatment evolution of EGFR A647T-mediated resistance to the first- and third-generation TKIs. To our knowledge, this is the first case to report the aforementioned activating and resistance-mediated mutations. In summary, genomic analysis performed in this patient with PDAC on the tumor biopsy and peripheral blood provided tools to understand mechanisms of response and resistance to targeted therapy with EFGR TKIs.

Neoadjuvant Therapy for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

The efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy (NT) versus surgery first (SF) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains controversial. A random-effects meta-analysis of only prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing NT versus SF for potentially resectable (PR) or borderline resectable (BR) PDAC was performed. Among six RCTs including 850 patients, 411 (48.3%) received NT and 439 (51.6%) SF. In all included trials, NT was gemcitabine-based: four using chemoradiation and two chemotherapy alone. Based on an intention-to-treat analysis, NT resulted in improved overall survival (OS) compared to SF (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.61-0.86). This effect was independent of anatomic classification (PR: hazard ratio (HR) 0.73, 95% CI 0.59-0.91; BR: HR 0.51 95% CI 0.28-0.93) or NT type (chemoradiation: HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.98; chemotherapy alone: HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54-0.87). Overall resection rate was similar (risk ratio (RR) 0.93, 95% CI 0.82-1.04, I2 = 39.0%) but NT increased the likelihood of a margin-negative (R0) resection (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.18-1.93, I2 = 0%) and having negative lymph nodes (RR 2.07, 95% CI 1.47-2.91, I2 = 12.3%). In this meta-analysis of prospective RCTs, NT significantly improved OS in an intention-to-treat fashion, compared with SF for localized PDAC. Randomized controlled trials using contemporary multi-agent chemotherapy will be needed to confirm these findings and to define the optimal NT regimen.

Neoadjuvant-modified FOLFIRINOX vs nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine for borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients who achieved surgical resection.

We conducted an institutional study to compare the clinical and pathological efficacy between the neoadjuvant therapy (NAT)-modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLF) vs nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (nab-P/G) for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) patients who completed resection. The study retrospectively enrolled patients with pathologically confirmed BRPC or LAPC from 2010 to 2018 at our institution. The survival rates were determined by the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test was used to test differences. Cox's proportional hazard model was used to assess survival with respect to covariates. Seventy-two patients who completed at least two cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgical resection were included, with 52 (72.2%) patients receiving mFOLF and 20 (27.8%) receiving nab-P/G. Patients treated with mFOLF had statistically higher rates of RECIST 1.1 partial or complete response (16/52 vs 1/20, P = .028). Additionally, mFOLF patients had greater pathological tumor size reduction, fewer positive lymph nodes, and higher treatment response grade compared to the nab-P/G patients (all P < .05). The median overall survival was 33.3 months vs 27.1 months (P = .105), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) was 21.3 months vs 14.6 months (P = .042) in the mFOLF vs nab-P/G groups, respectively. On multivariate analysis, mFOLF (hazard ratio, 0.428; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.186-0.987) and abnormal postoperative CA 19-9 (hazard ratio, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.06-5.76) were associated with DMFS. Among patients with BRPC and LAPC who complete surgical resection, neoadjuvant mFOLF was associated with improved pathological and clinical outcomes compared with nab-P/G.

Safety and Efficacy of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Locoregional Recurrences After Prior Chemoradiation for Advanced Esophageal Carcinoma.

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) as salvage therapy for locally recurrent esophageal cancer. We hypothesized that SBRT would provide durable treated tumor control with minimal associated toxicity in patients with progressive disease after definitive radiation, chemotherapy, and surgical resection. Methods: This single-institution retrospective study assessed outcomes in patients who received SBRT for locoregional failure of esophageal cancer after initial curative-intent treatment. Only patients who had received neoadjuvant chemoradiation (≥41.4 Gy) for esophageal cancer were selected. Subsequent surgical resection was optional but institutional follow-up by an oncologist was required. The primary endpoints of this study were gastrointestinal and constitutional toxicity, scored with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. A secondary outcome, treated-tumor control, was assessed with RECIST v1.1. Results: Nine patients (11 locoregional recurrences) treated with SBRT were reviewed, with a median follow-up time of 10.5 months. Most patients initially presented with T3 (88.9%), N1 (55.6%), moderately differentiated (66.7%) adenocarcinoma (88.9%), and had received a median 50.4 Gy delivered over 28 fractions with concurrent carboplatin/paclitaxel chemotherapy followed by surgical resection. Median time to recurrence was 16.3 months. Median total dose delivered by SBRT was 27.5 Gy (delivered in five fractions). Two patients experienced acute grade 1 fatigue and vomiting. No patient experienced grade 3 or higher toxicity. One patient experienced failure in the SBRT treatment field at 5.8 months after treatment and six patients developed distant failure. The median progression-free survival time for SBRT-treated tumors was 5.0 months, and median overall survival time was 12.9 months. Conclusions: This single-institution study demonstrated the feasibility of SBRT for locoregional recurrence of esophageal cancer with minimal treatment-related toxicity and high rates of treated tumor control. Prospective studies identifying ideal salvage SBRT candidates for locoregional failure as well as validating its safety are needed.

Screening Patients with Esophageal Cancer to Determine Eligibility for Adjuvant Treatment Trials.

BACKGROUND: The tolerability of adjuvant chemotherapy in esophageal cancer is unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a phase II trial of adjuvant paclitaxel in patients with esophageal cancer after trimodality treatment. Patients with residual viable tumor after resection were eligible for study inclusion. Treatment was 80 mg/m2 paclitaxel intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days for total of two cycles. The primary objective was to determine whether 75% or more of the patients would tolerate 240 mg/m2 or more of paclitaxel, which corresponded to 50% or more of the total planned dose. RESULTS: Eleven out of the 12 enrolled patients (92%, 95% confidence interval (CI)=62-100%) were able to complete at least 50% of the planned paclitaxel dose. Median progression-free survival was 7 months (95% CI=2-28 months). Median overall survival was 28 months (95% CI=12-36 months). Only one patient experienced a grade 4 adverse event. CONCLUSION: Screening patients with esophageal cancer after trimodality treatment might improve completion of adjuvant trials.

Results of an educational program to promote the use of pooled instead of single-donor platelet transfusions.

Transfusion of platelets is commonly indicated in the inpatient oncology setting. These platelets are obtained either through apheresis from a single donor or pooled from the whole blood of several donors. The amount of transfused platelets, infection risk, incidence of alloimmunization, and increases in posttransfusion platelet count are similar for these two platelet products. Although single-donor platelets are preferred over pooled platelets in some instances, single-donor platelets are often given regularly, despite a higher cost and more limited donor supply. Oncology fellows at Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas initiated an education campaign regarding the indications for pooled and single-donor platelet transfusions. The quality improvement campaign included seminars led by oncology fellows for nursing personnel and resident housestaff on the two oncology floors, as well as electronic correspondence to attending physicians. The number of pooled and single-donor platelet transfusions on the two floors was recorded for the 3 months after the education campaign (July-September 2011) and compared with the corresponding data from the previous year. Over the 3-month study period after the education campaign, the average percentage of pooled platelets transfused increased to 34.1% from 13.1% for the prior year. Given this increase, the estimated cost benefit over the 3-month study period was $45,000.