Conventional cytotoxic chemotherapy for gastrointestinal cancer in patients with cirrhosis: A multicentre case-control study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Progresses in management make a higher proportion of cirrhotic patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancer candidates to chemotherapy. Data are needed on the safety and liver-related events associated with the use of chemotherapy in these patients. METHODS: Forty-nine patients with cirrhosis receiving chemotherapy against GI cancer from 2013 to 2018 were identified in the French Health Insurance Database using ICD-10 codes K70-K74, and matched 1:2 to non-cirrhotic controls (n = 98) on age, tumour type and type of treatment. Adverse events (AE), dose tapering, discontinuation rate, liver-related events and survival rate were compared. RESULTS: Patients with cirrhosis (Child-Pugh A 91%) more often received lower doses (38.8% vs 7.1%, p < .001), without significant differences in terms of grade 3/4 AE or dose tapering rates (29.6% vs. 36.7%; 22.3% vs 24.4%, respectively). Treatment discontinuation rate was higher in patients with cirrhosis (23.3% vs. 11.3%, p = .005). Child-Pugh (p = .007) and MELD (p = .025) scores increased under chemotherapy. Five patients with cirrhosis (10.2%) had liver decompensation within 12 months, and 17.2% of deaths in the cirrhosis group were liver-related versus 0% in matched controls. WHO-PS stage > 1 (HR 3.74, CI95%: 2.13-6.57, p < .001), TNM-stage M1 (HR 3.61, CI 95%: 1.82-7.16, p < .001), non-colorectal cancer (HR 1.73, CI 95%: 1.05-2.86, p = .032) and bilirubin higher than 5 mg/dL (HR 2.26, CI 95%: 1.39-3.70, p < .001) were independent prognostic factors of 2-year mortality, whereas cirrhosis was not. CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy should be proposed only in patients with compensated cirrhosis with close monitoring of liver function. Dose management remains challenging. Multidisciplinary management is warranted to improve these patients' outcomes.

MSH2 c.1022T>C, p.Leu341Pro is a founder pathogenic variation and a major cause of Lynch syndrome in the North of France.

Interpretation of missense variants remains a major challenge for genetic diagnosis, even in well-known genes such as the DNA-mismatch repair (MMR) genes involved in Lynch syndrome. We report the characterization of a variant in MSH2: c.1022T>C, which was identified in 20 apparently unrelated families living in the North of France. A total of 150 patients from 20 families were included in this study. Family segregation studies, tumor analyses and functional analyses at both the RNA and protein levels were performed. Founder effect was evaluated by haplotype analysis.We show that MSH2 c.1022T>C is a missense variant (p.Leu341Pro) that affects protein stability. This variant is frequent in the North of France (7.7% of pathogenic variations identified in MMR genes), and is located on an ancestral haplotype. It is associated with a high risk of a broad tumor spectrum including brain and cutaneous cancers. The MSH2 c.1022T>C variant is a pathogenic founder variation associated with a high risk of cancer. These findings have important implications for genetic counseling and management of variant carriers.

Pembrolizumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma previously treated with sorafenib (KEYNOTE-224): a non-randomised, open-label phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint blockade therapy has shown promising results in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab in this patient population. METHODS: KEYNOTE-224 is a non-randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial that is set in 47 medical centres and hospitals across ten countries. Eligible patients had pathologically confirmed hepatocellular carcinoma; had previously been treated with sorafenib and were either intolerant to this treatment or showed radiographic progression of their disease after treatment; an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1; adequate organ function, and were Child-Pugh class A. Participants received 200 mg pembrolizumab intravenously every 3 weeks for about 2 years or until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, patient withdrawal, or investigator decision. The primary endpoint was objective response, defined as the proportion of patients with complete or partial response in all patients who received at least one dose of pembrolizumab, which was radiologically confirmed by use of the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 by central review. Safety was also assessed in all treated patients. This trial is ongoing but closed to enrolment and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT02702414. FINDINGS: Between June 7, 2016, and Feb 9, 2017, we screened 169 patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, of whom 104 eligible patients were enrolled and treated. As of data cutoff on Feb 13, 2018, 17 (16%) patients were still receiving pembrolizumab. We recorded an objective response in 18 (17%; 95% CI 11-26) of 104 patients. The best overall responses were one (1%) complete and 17 (16%) partial responses; meanwhile, 46 (44%) patients had stable disease, 34 (33%) had progressive disease, and six (6%) patients who did not have a post-baseline assessment on the cutoff date were considered not to be assessable. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 76 (73%) of 104 patients, which were serious in 16 (15%) patients. Grade 3 treatment-related events were reported in 25 (24%) of the 104 patients; the most common were increased aspartate aminotransferase concentration in seven (7%) patients, increased alanine aminotransferase concentration in four (4%) patients, and fatigue in four (4%) patients. One (1%) grade 4 treatment-related event of hyperbilirubinaemia occurred. One death associated with ulcerative oesophagitis was attributed to treatment. Immune-mediated hepatitis occurred in three (3%) patients, but there were no reported cases of viral flares. INTERPRETATION: Pembrolizumab was effective and tolerable in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who had previously been treated with sorafenib. These results indicate that pembrolizumab might be a treatment option for these patients. This drug is undergoing further assessment in two phase 3, randomised trials as a second-line treatment in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. FUNDING: Merck & Co, Inc.

CA-125, but not galectin-3, complements CA 19-9 for discriminating ductal adenocarcinoma versus non-malignant pancreatic diseases.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: CA 19-9 is the gold standard biomarker of pancreatic adenocarcinoma despite several weaknesses in particular a high rate of false positives or negatives. CA-125 corresponding to MUC16 and galectin-3, a lectin able to interact with mucin-associated carbohydrates, are tumor-associated proteins. We investigated whether combined measurement of CA 19-9, galectin-3 and CA-125 may help to better discriminate pancreatic adenocarcinoma versus non-malignant pancreatic diseases. METHODS: We evaluated by immunohistochemistry the expression of MUC4, MUC16 (CA-125) and galectin-3 in 31 pancreatic adenocarcinomas. We measured CA 19-9, CA-125 and Gal-3 in the serum from patients with pancreatic benign diseases (n = 58) or adenocarcinoma (n = 44). Clinical performance of the 3 biomarkers for cancer diagnosis and prognosis was analyzed. RESULTS: By immunohistochemistry, MUC16 and Gal-3 were expressed in 74% and 84% of adenocarcinomas versus 0% and 3.2% in peri-tumoral regions, respectively. At the serum level, CA 19-9 and CA125 were significantly higher in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma whereas Gal-3 levels did not differ. The performance of CA 19-9 for cancer detection was higher than those of CA-125 or Gal-3 by ROC analysis. However, CA-125 offers the highest specificity for malignancy (81%) because of an absence of false positives among type 2 diabetic patients. Cancer deaths assessed 6 or 12 months after diagnosis varied according to the initial CA-125 level (p < 0.006). CONCLUSION: Gal-3 is not an interesting biomarker for pancreatic adenocarcinoma detection. CA 19-9 alone exhibits the best performance but measuring CA-125 provides complementary information in terms of diagnosis and prognosis.

Hepatocellular carcinoma screening in patients with compensated hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related cirrhosis aware of their HCV status improves survival: a modeling approach.

UNLABELLED: Because of the ongoing debate on the benefit of ultrasound (US) screening for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), we assessed the impact of screening on hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related compensated cirrhosis patients aware of their HCV status. A Markov model simulated progression from HCC diagnosis to death in 700 patients with HCV-related compensated cirrhosis aware of their HCV status to estimate life expectancy (LE) and cumulative death at 5 years. Five scenarios were compared: S1, no screening; S2, screening by currently existing practices (57% access and effectiveness leading to the diagnosis of 42% at Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage [BCLC-0/A]); S3, S2 with increased access (97%); S4, S2 with an efficacy of screening close to that achieved in a randomized controlled trial leading to the diagnosis of 87% of patients at stage BCLC-0/A; S5, S3+S4. The analysis was corrected for lead-time bias. Currently existing practices of HCC screening increased LE by 11 months and reduced HCC mortality at 5 years by 6% compared to no screening (P = 0.0013). Compared to current screening practices, we found that: 1) increasing the rate of access to screening would increase LE by 7 months and reduce HCC mortality at 5 years by 5% (P = 0.045); 2) optimal screening would increase LE by 14 months and reduce HCC mortality at 5 years by 9% (P = 0.0002); 3) the combination of an increased rate of access and optimal effectiveness of HCC screening would increase LE by 31 months and decrease HCC mortality at 5 years by 20% (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The present study shows that US screening for HCC in patients with compensated HCV-related cirrhosis aware of their HCV status improves survival and emphasizes the crucial role of screening effectiveness.

Effect of everolimus on survival in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma after failure of sorafenib: the EVOLVE-1 randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Aside from the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib, there are no effective systemic therapies for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of everolimus in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma for whom sorafenib treatment failed. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: EVOLVE-1 was a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study conducted among 546 adults with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C hepatocellular carcinoma and Child-Pugh A liver function whose disease progressed during or after sorafenib or who were intolerant of sorafenib. Patients were enrolled from 17 countries between May 2010 and March 2012. Randomization was stratified by region (Asia vs rest of world) and macrovascular invasion (present vs absent). INTERVENTIONS: Everolimus, 7.5 mg/d, or matching placebo, both given in combination with best supportive care and continued until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Per the 2:1 randomization scheme, 362 patients were randomized to the everolimus group and 184 patients to the placebo group. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points included time to progression and the disease control rate (the percentage of patients with a best overall response of complete or partial response or stable disease). RESULTS: No significant difference in overall survival was seen between treatment groups, with 303 deaths (83.7%) in the everolimus group and 151 deaths (82.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.05; 95% CI, 0.86-1.27; P = .68; median overall survival, 7.6 months with everolimus, 7.3 months with placebo). Median time to progression with everolimus and placebo was 3.0 months and 2.6 months, respectively (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.75-1.15), and disease control rate was 56.1% and 45.1%, respectively (P = .01). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events for everolimus vs placebo were anemia (7.8% vs 3.3%, respectively), asthenia (7.8% vs 5.5%, respectively), and decreased appetite (6.1% vs 0.5%, respectively). No patients experienced hepatitis C viral flare. Based on central laboratory results, hepatitis B viral reactivation was experienced by 39 patients (29 everolimus, 10 placebo); all cases were asymptomatic, but 3 everolimus recipients discontinued therapy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Everolimus did not improve overall survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma whose disease progressed during or after receiving sorafenib or who were intolerant of sorafenib. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01035229.

A phase Ib/II trial of capmatinib plus spartalizumab vs. spartalizumab alone in patients with pretreated hepatocellular carcinoma.

Background & aims: This phase Ib/II trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of capmatinib in combination with spartalizumab or spartalizumab alone in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods: Eligible patients who had progressed or were intolerant to sorafenib received escalating doses of capmatinib 200 mg, 300 mg, and 400 mg twice a day (bid) plus spartalizumab 300 mg every 3 weeks (q3w) in the phase Ib study. Once the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) was determined, the phase II study commenced with randomised 1:1 treatment with either capmatinib + spartalizumab (n = 32) or spartalizumab alone (n = 30). Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability (phase Ib) and investigator-assessed overall response rate per RECIST v1.1 for combination vs. single-agent arms using a Bayesian logistic regression model (phase II). Results: In phase Ib, the RP2D for capmatinib in combination with spartalizumab was determined to be 400 mg bid. Dose-limiting toxicity consisting of grade 3 diarrhoea was reported in one patient at the capmatinib 400 mg bid + spartalizumab 300 mg q3w dose level. The primary endpoint in the phase II study was not met. The observed overall response rate in the capmatinib + spartalizumab arm was 9.4% vs. 10% in the spartalizumab arm. The most common any-grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs, ≥20%) were nausea (37.5%), asthenia and vomiting (28.1% each), diarrhoea, pyrexia, and decreased appetite (25.0% each) in the combination arm; TRAEs ≥10% were pruritus (23.3%), and rash (10.0%) in the spartalizumab-alone arm. Conclusion: Capmatinib at 400 mg bid plus spartalizumab 300 mg q3w was established as the RP2D, with manageable toxicities and no significant safety signals, but the combination did not show superior clinical activity compared with spartalizumab single-agent treatment in patients with advanced HCC who had previously been treated with sorafenib. Impact and implications: Simultaneous targeting of MET and programmed cell death protein 1 may provide synergistic clinical benefit in patients with advanced HCC. This is the first trial to report a combination of capmatinib (MET inhibitor) and spartalizumab (programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitor) as second-line treatment after sorafenib for advanced HCC. The combination did not show superior clinical activity compared with spartalizumab single-agent treatment in patients with advanced HCC who had previously been treated with sorafenib. The results indicate that there is a clear need to identify a reliable predictive marker of response for HCC and to identify patients with HCC that would benefit from the combination of checkpoint inhibitor +/- targeted therapy. Clinical trial number: NCT02795429.

Gemcitabine plus oxaliplatin in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a large multicenter AGEO study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The current standard treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is sorafenib. This drug is effective but generally does not induce tumor shrinkage and other treatment options are still needed. METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study included all consecutive patients with advanced HCC treated with gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) between 2001 and 2010. Survival curves were drawn with the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to evaluate prognostic factors. RESULTS: Two hundred four consecutive patients were treated with GEMOX (median age, 60 years; men, 86%; underlying cirrhosis, 76%). Grade 3-4 toxicity was observed in 44% of the patients (thrombocytopenia 24%, neutropenia 18%, diarrhea 14%, neurotoxicity 12%) leading to treatment discontinuation in 16% of the cases. The overall response and disease control rates were 22% (95% CI, 16-27) and 66% (95% CI, 59-72), respectively. No clinical or biological factors were associated with the treatment response, and 8.5% of the patients were subsequently eligible for curative-intent therapies after downstaging. Median PFS, TTP, and OS were 4.5 (95% CI, 4-6), 8 (95% CI, 6-11), and 11 months (95% CI, 9-14), respectively. In multivariate analysis, gender (p=0.03), underlying cirrhosis (p=0.01), CLIP score (p=0.03), and response to GEMOX (p<0.0001) were independently associated with OS. CONCLUSIONS: This large study confirms that GEMOX is effective with manageable toxicity in patients with advanced HCC. Tumor responses permitted potentially curative treatment that was not initially feasible in a significant proportion of patients.

Pembrolizumab as Second-Line Therapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Longer Term Follow-Up from the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-240 Trial.

Introduction: KEYNOTE-240 showed a favorable benefit/risk profile for pembrolizumab versus placebo in patients with sorafenib-treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, prespecified statistical significance criteria for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) superiority were not met at the final analysis. Outcomes based on an additional 18 months of follow-up are reported. Methods: Adults with sorafenib-treated advanced HCC were randomized 2:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks or placebo. Dual primary endpoints were OS and PFS assessed per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), assessed per RECIST v1.1 by BICR, and safety. Results: 413 patients were randomized (pembrolizumab, n = 278; placebo, n = 135). As of July 13, 2020, median (range) time from randomization to data cutoff was 39.6 (31.7-48.8) months for pembrolizumab and 39.8 (31.7-47.8) months for placebo. Estimated OS rates (95% CI) were 17.7% (13.4-22.5%) for pembrolizumab and 11.7% (6.8-17.9%) for placebo at 36 months. The estimated PFS rate (95% CI) for pembrolizumab was 8.9% (5.3-13.6%) and 0% for placebo at 36 months. ORR (95% CI) was 18.3% (14.0-23.4%) for pembrolizumab and 4.4% (1.6-9.4%) for placebo. Immune-mediated hepatitis events did not increase with follow-up. No viral hepatitis flare events were reported. Conclusion: With extended follow-up, pembrolizumab continued to maintain improvement in OS and PFS and was associated with a consistent adverse event profile compared with placebo in patients with sorafenib-treated advanced HCC. Although KEYNOTE-240 did not meet prespecified statistical significance criteria at the final analysis, these results together with the antitumor activity of second-line pembrolizumab observed in KEYNOTE-224 and the statistically significant and clinically meaningful OS and PFS benefits of second-line pembrolizumab in patients from Asia observed in KEYNOTE-394 reinforce the clinical activity of pembrolizumab in previously treated patients with advanced HCC.

Updated efficacy and safety of KEYNOTE-224: a phase II study of pembrolizumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma previously treated with sorafenib.

OBJECTIVE: Pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, demonstrated anti-tumour activity and tolerability in patients treated with sorafenib and with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in KEYNOTE-224. Longer-term efficacy and safety after ∼2.5 years of additional follow-up are reported. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adults with confirmed hepatocellular carcinoma who experienced progression after or intolerance to sorafenib treatment received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for ≤35 cycles or until confirmed progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent or investigator decision. The primary end-point was objective response rate assessed by blinded independent central review per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours v1.1. The secondary end-points included duration of response, disease control rate, time to progression, progression-free survival, overall survival and adverse events. RESULTS: Efficacy and safety were assessed in 104 patients. The median time from first dose to data cutoff was 45.1 months (range, 41.3-49.3). Objective response rate was 18.3% (95% CI: 11.4-27.1), and median duration of response was 21.0 months (range, 3.1 to 39.5+). Disease control rate was 61.5%, and median time to progression was 4.8 months (95% CI: 3.9-7.0). Median progression-free survival was 4.9 months (95% CI: 3.5-6.7) and median overall survival was 13.2 months (95% CI: 9.7-15.3). Of 104 patients, 76 (73.1%) patients reported treatment-related adverse events; most were low grade in severity (grade 3-4, n = 26 [25.0%]; grade 5, n = 1 [1.0%]). Immune-mediated hepatitis occurred in 3 patients (all grade 3). No viral-induced hepatitis flares occurred. CONCLUSIONS: After ∼2.5 years of additional follow-up, pembrolizumab continued to provide durable anti-tumour activity and no new safety concerns were identified. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02702414.

Pembrolizumab Monotherapy for Previously Untreated Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Data from the Open-Label, Phase II KEYNOTE-224 Trial.

PURPOSE: KEYNOTE-224 cohort 1 demonstrated that pembrolizumab was efficacious and tolerable in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) previously treated with sorafenib. We report results from KEYNOTE-224 (NCT02702414) cohort 2, which enrolled patients with advanced HCC and no prior systemic therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: KEYNOTE-224 was an open-label, multicountry phase II trial. Eligible patients in cohort 2 had advanced HCC not amenable or refractory to locoregional therapy and not previously treated with systemic therapy. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for ≤2 years. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) by central imaging review per RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), disease control rate (DCR), time to progression (TTP), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety/tolerability. RESULTS: Between September 4, 2018, and February 20, 2019, 51 patients were allocated in cohort 2. The median time from the first dose to data cutoff (January 19, 2021) was 27 months (range, 23-29). ORR was 16% [95% confidence interval (CI), 7-29] and was similar across key subgroups. Median DOR was 16 months (range, 3-24+), and DCR was 57%. The median PFS was 4 months (95% CI, 2-8), and median TTP was 4 months (95% CI, 3-9). Median OS was 17 months (95% CI, 8-23). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 16% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced HCC with no prior systemic therapy, pembrolizumab provided durable antitumor activity, promising OS, and had a safety profile consistent with previous observations. These findings support further evaluation of pembrolizumab-based regimens for HCC.

A first-in-human phase 1/2 study of FGF401 and combination of FGF401 with spartalizumab in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma or biomarker-selected solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Deregulation of FGF19-FGFR4 signaling is found in several cancers, including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), nominating it for therapeutic targeting. FGF401 is a potent, selective FGFR4 inhibitor with antitumor activity in preclinical models. This study was designed to determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), characterize PK/PD, and evaluate the safety and efficacy of FGF401 alone and combined with the anti-PD-1 antibody, spartalizumab. METHODS: Patients with HCC or other FGFR4/KLB expressing tumors were enrolled. Dose-escalation was guided by a Bayesian model. Phase 2 dose-expansion enrolled patients with HCC from Asian countries (group1), non-Asian countries (group2), and patients with other solid tumors expressing FGFR4 and KLB (group3). FGF401 and spartalizumab combination was evaluated in patients with HCC. RESULTS: Seventy-four patients were treated in the phase I with single-agent FGF401 at 50 to 150 mg. FGF401 displayed favorable PK characteristics and no food effect when dosed with low-fat meals. The RP2D was established as 120 mg qd. Six of 70 patients experienced grade 3 dose-limiting toxicities: increase in transaminases (n = 4) or blood bilirubin (n = 2). In phase 2, 30 patients in group 1, 36 in group 2, and 20 in group 3 received FGF401. In total, 8 patients experienced objective responses (1 CR, 7 PR; 4 each in phase I and phase II, respectively). Frequent adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (73.8%), increased AST (47.5%), and ALT (43.8%). Increase in levels of C4, total bile acid, and circulating FGF19, confirmed effective FGFR4 inhibition. Twelve patients received FGF401 plus spartalizumab. RP2D was established as FGF401 120 mg qd and spartalizumab 300 mg Q3W; 2 patients reported PR. CONCLUSIONS: At biologically active doses, FGF401 alone or combined with spartalizumab was safe in patients with FGFR4/KLB-positive tumors including HCC. Preliminary clinical efficacy was observed. Further clinical evaluation of FGF401 using a refined biomarker strategy is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02325739 .

Combination 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid and cisplatin (LV5FU2-CDDP) followed by gemcitabine or the reverse sequence in metastatic pancreatic cancer: final results of a randomised strategic phase III trial (FFCD 0301).

PURPOSE: Gemcitabine is the standard chemotherapy for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Although the 5-fluorouracil (5FU), folinic acid and cisplatin combination (LV5FU2-CDDP) is an option, the optimal order of the regimens must be determined. The first strategic phase III trial comparing LV5FU2-CDDP followed by gemcitabine versus gemcitabine followed by LV5FU2-CDDP was conducted. METHODS: Patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, performance status (PS) 0-2, without prior chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either LV5FU2-CDDP followed by gemcitabine at disease progression or toxicity (Arm A), or the opposite sequence (Arm B). 202 patients had to be included and 170 deaths had to be observed to detect an expected improvement in median overall survival (OS) from 6.5 to 10 months in Arm A (two-sided α = 5% and ß = 20%). RESULTS: 202 patients were included (Arm A, 102; Arm B, 100). Median age, male/female ratio, PS 0-1 and previous surgery were similar in the two arms. After a median follow-up of 44 months, median OS in Arm A was 6.6 months versus 8.0 months in Arm B (p = 0.85). Median progression-free survival was similar between Arms A and B. More grade 3/4 toxicities were observed when LV5FU2-CDDP was administered as a first-line treatment compared with gemcitabine: 79% versus 64% (p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: This trial did not show any strategic advantage to using LV5FU2-CDDP as a first-line treatment and suggests that gemcitabine remains the standard first-line treatment. Sixty-one per cent of patients were able to receive a second line of chemotherapy.

Experience of gemcitabine plus oxaliplatin chemotherapy in patients with advanced biliary tract carcinoma.

BACKGROUNDS: The combination gemcitabine-oxaliplatin (GEMOX) is frequently used in patients with advanced biliary tract carcinoma (BTC). However, this is only based on phase II studies performed in selected patients.We assessed the efficacy and safety of the GEMOX regimen in non-selected patients with advanced BTC. METHODS: All consecutive patients with advanced BTC received the GEMOX regimen in a setting outside a study: gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on day 1, and oxaliplatin 100 mg/m(2) on day 2, treatment repeated every 2 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were enrolled. EFFICACY: 1 complete and 6 partial responses (objective response rate = 16.3%), 18 tumour stabilizations (41.9%, disease control rate = 58.1%), median progression-free survival was 5.0 months and median overall survival was 11.0 months. TOXICITY: grade 3 neuropathy in 4 patients, grade 3 asthenia in 5 patients. CONCLUSION: The GEMOX combination was well tolerated, with a modest activity in non-selected patients with advanced BTC. This regimen should be compared to the new standard gemcitabine-cisplatin combination.

Curative Irradiation Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Multicenter Phase 2 Trial.

PURPOSE: Liver transplantation is the standard definitive treatment for nonmetastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, less than 5% of patients are ultimately candidates as a result of frequent comorbidities and graft shortage. The aim of this study was to evaluate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) as an ablative treatment for inoperable HCC. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A prospective phase 2 trial included newly diagnosed single HCC lesions that were without extrahepatic extension and that were deemed unsuitable for standard locoregional therapies, with a tumor size ranging from 1 to 6 cm. The SBRT dose was 45 Gy in 3 fractions. Primary endpoint was the local control of irradiated HCC at 18 months, defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. RESULTS: Forty-three patients were treated and evaluable. Median follow-up was 4.0 years (range, 1.2-4.6 years). All 43 patients had cirrhosis; 37 (88%) were Child-Pugh grade A and 5 (12%) grade B (1 missing data). No patients had received prior local treatment. Thirteen patients (31%) presented grade ≥3 acute adverse events, including 8 patients with an abnormality of the liver function tests (19%). Three patients (10%) experienced a decline in Child-Pugh at 3 months post-SBRT. The 18-month local control rate was 98% (95% confidence interval, 85%-99%). The 18-month overall survival rate was 72% (range, 56%-83%). Median overall survival was 3.5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Local control and overall survival after SBRT for untreated solitary HCC were excellent despite candidates being unfit for transplantation, resection, ablation, or embolization treatments. SBRT should be considered as a bridge to transplant or as definitive therapy for those ineligible for transplant.

Second-line cabozantinib after sorafenib treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a subgroup analysis of the phase 3 CELESTIAL trial.

OBJECTIVE: In the phase 3 CELESTIAL trial, cabozantinib improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo in patients with previously treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This subgroup analysis evaluated cabozantinib in patients who had received sorafenib as the only prior systemic therapy. METHODS: CELESTIAL randomised (2:1) patients with advanced HCC and Child-Pugh class A liver function to treatment with cabozantinib (60 mg daily) or placebo. Eligibility required prior treatment with sorafenib, and patients could have received ≤2 prior systemic regimens. The primary endpoint was OS. Outcomes in patients who had received sorafenib as the only prior therapy were analysed by duration of prior sorafenib (<3 months, 3 to <6 months and ≥6 months). RESULTS: Of patients who had received only prior sorafenib, 331 were randomised to cabozantinib and 164 to placebo; 136 patients had received sorafenib for <3 months, 141 for 3 to <6 months and 217 for ≥6 months. Cabozantinib improved OS relative to placebo in the overall second-line population who had received only prior sorafenib (median 11.3 vs 7.2 months; HR=0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.88). This improvement was maintained in analyses by prior sorafenib duration with longer duration generally corresponding to longer median OS-median OS 8.9 vs 6.9 months (HR=0.72, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.10) for prior sorafenib <3 months, 11.5 vs 6.5 months (HR=0.65, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.00) for 3 to <6 months and 12.3 vs 9.2 months (HR=0.82, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.16) for ≥6 months. Cabozantinib also improved PFS in all duration subgroups. Safety data were consistent with the overall study population. CONCLUSION: Cabozantinib improved efficacy outcomes versus placebo in the second-line population who had received only prior sorafenib irrespective of duration of prior sorafenib treatment, further supporting the utility of cabozantinib in the evolving treatment landscape of HCC. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT01908426.

In which context is physician empathy associated with cancer patient quality of life?

OBJECTIVE: In cancer settings, physician empathy is not always linked to a better patient emotional quality of life quality of life (eQoL). We tested two possible moderators of the inconsistent link: type of consultation (bad news versus follow-up) and patient emotional skills (emoSkills, i.e., the way patients process emotional information). METHODS: In a cross-sectional design, 296 thoracic and digestive tract cancer patients completed validated questionnaires to assess their physician empathy, their emoSkills and eQoL. Moderated multiple regressions were performed. RESULTS: In follow-up consultations, physician empathy was associated with a better eQoL in patients with low or average emotional skills. Those with high emotional skills did not benefit from physician empathy. Their eQoL was nonetheless very good. In bad news consultations, the pattern was reversed: only patients with average or high emotional skills benefited from physician empathy. Those with low emotional skills were not sensitive to it and presented a poor eQoL. CONCLUSION: Medical empathy is important in all consultations. However, in bad news consultations, patients with low emoSkills are at risk of psychological distress even with an empathetic doctor. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Accordingly, physicians should be trained to detect patients with low emoSkills in order to refer them to supportive care.

Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Easily Available Factors of Predictive Prolonged Survival Under Gemcitabine.

BACKGROUND: Prognosis of patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma is poor. In this study, we assessed the predictive value of easily available baseline factors for prolonged survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study on patients who received gemcitabine between 1999 and 2010 for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The primary end-point was the 12-month survival rate. RESULTS: We included 195 patients. The median age was 62.9 years; the performance status was 0-1 in 80 and 2-3 in 92 patients. The median number of metastatic sites was one. A total of 73 patients (37.4%) were alive 12 months after beginning chemotherapy. In multivariate analysis, no liver metastasis, CA19-9 level <250 IU/ml and localized or locally advanced cancer at diagnosis were good prognostic factors. According to a clinical score based on these features, overall survival was 7.7, 13.5, 19.7 and 21.0 months, respectively (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: We identified easily available prognostic factors for prolonged survival in patients treated with gemcitabine.

Patients with Crohn's Disease with High Body Mass Index Present More Frequent and Rapid Loss of Response to Infliximab.

BACKGROUND: Infliximab (IFX) is effective in inducing and maintaining remission in patients with luminal and anoperineal Crohn's disease (CD). However, treatment failure within 12 months after initiating IFX is observed in a significant proportion of patients. The aim of the present study was to determine whether the body mass index (BMI) affects response to IFX during the first year of treatment in patients with CD. METHODS: All patients with luminal CD who began IFX between January 2010 and May 2014 were prospectively included. BMI was calculated before IFX treatment was begun, and patients were divided into 3 groups: normal BMI (BMI < 25 kg/m), overweight patients (BMI of 25.0-30 kg/m), and obese patients (BMI > 30.0 kg/m). The primary outcome was to evaluate the rate and delay of IFX optimization during the first year of treatment among normal weight, overweight, and obese patients. RESULTS: One hundred forty patients were included. Demographic and clinical characteristics at IFX initiation were comparable among the 3 groups. Within 12 months after the initiation of IFX, the rate of IFX optimization was significantly higher in overweight and obese patients than in the normal BMI group: 52%, 56%, and 20%, respectively (P = 0.0002). The median time until optimization of IFX was significantly shorter in overweight and obese patients than in the normal BMI group: 7, 7, and 10 months, respectively (P = 0.03). A BMI >25 kg/m was significantly associated with IFX optimization within 12 months on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to show that optimization of IFX is more frequent and faster in obese and overweight patients with CD and occurs within 12 months after beginning IFX, suggesting that an induction regimen with higher doses of IFX and a tight control of IFX concentrations may be needed in these patients.

Low frequency of AXIN2 mutations and high frequency of MUTYH mutations in patients with multiple polyposis.

Familial adenomatous polyposis has been linked to germline mutations in the APC tumor suppressor gene. However, a number of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (with either classical or attenuated phenotype) have no APC mutation. Recently, germline mutations in the Wnt pathway component gene AXIN2 have been associated with tooth agenesis-colorectal cancer syndrome. Moreover, biallelic mutations in the base excision repair gene MUTYH have been associated with polyposis and early-onset colorectal cancer. The aim of this study was to further assess the contribution of AXIN2 and MUTYH to hereditary colorectal cancer susceptibility. AXIN2 and MUTYH genes were screened for germline mutations by PCR and direct sequencing in 39 unrelated patients with multiple adenomas or colorectal cancer without evidence of APC mutation nor mismatch repair defect. Two novel AXIN2 variants were detected in one patient with multiple adenomas, but no clearly pathogenic mutation. In contrast, nine different MUTYH mutations were detected in eight patients, including four novel mutations. Biallelic MUTYH mutations were only found in patients with multiple adenomatous polyposis (7 out of 22 (32%)). Interestingly, five MUTYH mutation carriers had a family history consistent with dominant inheritance. Moreover, one patient with biallelic MUTYH mutations presented with multiple adenomas and severe tooth agenesis. Therefore, germline mutations are rare in AXIN2 but frequent in MUTYH in patients with multiple adenomas. Our data suggest that genetic testing of MUTYH may be of interest in patients with pedigrees apparently compatible with autosomal recessive as well as dominant inheritance.