Nivolumab plus chemotherapy or ipilimumab in gastro-oesophageal cancer.

Standard first-line chemotherapy results in disease progression and death within one year in most patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma1-4. Nivolumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated superior overall survival versus chemotherapy at 12-month follow-up in gastric, gastro-oesophageal junction or oesophageal adenocarcinoma in the randomized, global CheckMate 649 phase 3 trial5 (programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) combined positive score ≥5 and all randomized patients). On the basis of these results, nivolumab plus chemotherapy is now approved as a first-line treatment for these patients in many countries6. Nivolumab and the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) inhibitor ipilimumab have distinct but complementary mechanisms of action that contribute to the restoration of anti-tumour T-cell function and induction of de novo anti-tumour T-cell responses, respectively7-11. Treatment combining 1 mg kg-1 nivolumab with 3 mg kg-1 ipilimumab demonstrated clinically meaningful anti-tumour activity with a manageable safety profile in heavily pre-treated patients with advanced gastro-oesophageal cancer12. Here we report both long-term follow-up results comparing nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone and the first results comparing nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy alone from CheckMate 649. After the 24.0-month minimum follow-up, nivolumab plus chemotherapy continued to demonstrate improvement in overall survival versus chemotherapy alone in patients with PD-L1 combined positive score ≥5 (hazard ratio 0.70; 95% confidence interval 0.61, 0.81) and all randomized patients (hazard ratio 0.79; 95% confidence interval 0.71, 0.88). Overall survival in patients with PD-L1 combined positive score ≥ 5 for nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy alone did not meet the prespecified boundary for significance. No new safety signals were identified. Our results support the continued use of nivolumab plus chemotherapy as standard first-line treatment for advanced gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Mapping the hallmarks of lung adenocarcinoma with massively parallel sequencing.

Lung adenocarcinoma, the most common subtype of non-small cell lung cancer, is responsible for more than 500,000 deaths per year worldwide. Here, we report exome and genome sequences of 183 lung adenocarcinoma tumor/normal DNA pairs. These analyses revealed a mean exonic somatic mutation rate of 12.0 events/megabase and identified the majority of genes previously reported as significantly mutated in lung adenocarcinoma. In addition, we identified statistically recurrent somatic mutations in the splicing factor gene U2AF1 and truncating mutations affecting RBM10 and ARID1A. Analysis of nucleotide context-specific mutation signatures grouped the sample set into distinct clusters that correlated with smoking history and alterations of reported lung adenocarcinoma genes. Whole-genome sequence analysis revealed frequent structural rearrangements, including in-frame exonic alterations within EGFR and SIK2 kinases. The candidate genes identified in this study are attractive targets for biological characterization and therapeutic targeting of lung adenocarcinoma.

Adjuvant Nivolumab in Resected Esophageal or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer.

BACKGROUND: No adjuvant treatment has been established for patients who remain at high risk for recurrence after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery for esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer. METHODS: We conducted CheckMate 577, a global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial to evaluate a checkpoint inhibitor as adjuvant therapy in patients with esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer. Adults with resected (R0) stage II or III esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer who had received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and had residual pathological disease were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive nivolumab (at a dose of 240 mg every 2 weeks for 16 weeks, followed by nivolumab at a dose of 480 mg every 4 weeks) or matching placebo. The maximum duration of the trial intervention period was 1 year. The primary end point was disease-free survival. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 24.4 months. Among the 532 patients who received nivolumab, the median disease-free survival was 22.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.6 to 34.0), as compared with 11.0 months (95% CI, 8.3 to 14.3) among the 262 patients who received placebo (hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death, 0.69; 96.4% CI, 0.56 to 0.86; P<0.001). Disease-free survival favored nivolumab across multiple prespecified subgroups. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events that were considered by the investigators to be related to the active drug or placebo occurred in 71 of 532 patients (13%) in the nivolumab group and 15 of 260 patients (6%) in the placebo group. The trial regimen was discontinued because of adverse events related to the active drug or placebo in 9% of the patients in the nivolumab group and 3% of those in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with resected esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer who had received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, disease-free survival was significantly longer among those who received nivolumab adjuvant therapy than among those who received placebo. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; CheckMate 577 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02743494.).

German, Austrian, and Swiss guidelines for systemic treatment of gastric cancer.

The updated edition of the German, Austrian and Swiss Guidelines for Systemic Treatment of Gastric Cancer was completed in August 2023, incorporating new evidence that emerged after publication of the previous edition. It consists of a text-based "Diagnosis" part and a "Therapy" part including recommendations and treatment algorithms. The treatment part includes a comprehensive description regarding perioperative and palliative systemic therapy for gastric cancer and summarizes recommended standard of care for surgery and endoscopic resection. The guidelines are based on a literature search and evaluation by a multidisciplinary panel of experts nominated by the hematology and oncology scientific societies of the three involved countries.

Perioperative FLOT plus ramucirumab for resectable esophagogastric adenocarcinoma: A randomized phase II/III trial of the German AIO and Italian GOIM.

This multicenter, randomized phase II/III study evaluated the addition of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 inhibitor ramucirumab to FLOT as perioperative treatment for resectable esophagogastric adenocarcinoma. Patients received either FLOT alone (Arm A) or combined with ramucirumab followed by ramucirumab monotherapy (Arm B). The primary endpoint for the phase II portion was the pathological complete or subtotal response (pCR/pSR) rate. Baseline characteristics were comparable between both arms with a high rate of tumors signet-ring cell component (A:47% B:43%). No between-arm difference in pCR/pSR rate was seen (A:29% B:26%), therefore the transition to phase III was not pursued. Nevertheless, the combination was associated with a significantly increased R0-resection rate compared with FLOT alone (A:82% B:96%; P = .009). In addition, the median disease-free survival was numerically improved in Arm B (A:21 months B:32 months, HR 0.75, P = 0.218), while the median overall survival was similar in both treatment arms (A:45 months B:46 months, HR 0.94, P = 0.803). Patients with Siewert type I tumors receiving transthoracic esophagectomy with intrathoracic anastomosis showed an increased risk of serious postoperative complications after ramucirumab treatment, therefore recruitment of those patients was stopped after the first-third of the study. Overall, surgical morbidity and mortality was comparable, whereas more non-surgical grade ≥ 3 adverse events were observed with the combination, especially anorexia (A:1% B:11%), hypertension (A:4% B:13%) and infections (A:19% B:33%). The combination of ramucirumab and FLOT as perioperative treatment shows efficacy signals, particularly in terms of R0 resection rates, for a study population with a high proportion of prognostically poor histological subtypes, and further evaluation in this subgroup seems warranted.

Phase Ib/II Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Binimetinib (MEK162) Plus Panitumumab for Mutant or Wild-Type RAS Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Activating RAS gene mutations occur in approximately 55% of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and are associated with poorer clinical outcomes due to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) blockade resistance. Combined EGFR and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MEK) inhibition may extend response to EGFR inhibition and overcome acquired resistance. This phase Ib/II dose escalation trial evaluated the safety and activity of dual inhibition with binimetinib (MEK1/2 inhibitor) and panitumumab (EGFR inhibitor [EGFRi]) in patients with RAS mutant or BRAF wild type (WT)/RAS WT mCRC. METHODS: Phase Ib dose escalation started with binimetinib 45 mg twice daily plus panitumumab 6 mg/kg administered every 2 weeks. In the phase II study, patients with measurable mCRC were enrolled into 4 groups based on previous anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody therapy and RAS mutational status. RESULTS: No patients in the phase Ib portion (n = 10) had a response; 70% of patients had stable disease. In the phase II portion (n = 43), overall response rate (ORR, confirmed) was 2.3% with one partial response in the RAS WT group, DCR was 30.2%, and median progression-free survival was 1.8 months (95%CI, 1.6-3.3). All patients experienced ≥1 adverse event, with the most common being diarrhea (71.7%), vomiting (52.8%), nausea (50.9%), fatigue (49.1%), dermatitis acneiform (43.4%), and rash (41.5%). Most patients required treatment interruption or dose reduction due to difficulties tolerating treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of binimetinib and panitumumab had substantial toxicity and limited clinical activity for patients with mutant or WT RAS mCRC, independent of EGFRi treatment history (Trial registration: NCT01927341).

The tight junction protein claudin 6 is a potential target for patient-individualized treatment in esophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma and is associated with poor prognosis.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) remains poor, and new therapeutic approaches are urgently needed. Claudin 6 (CLDN6) is an oncofetal antigen that is largely absent in healthy tissues and upregulated in several cancers, making it a promising therapeutical target. In this study, the expression of CLDN6 was assessed in an large Caucasian EAC and GAC cohort. METHODS: RNA-Seq data from 89 EACs and 371 GACs were obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas project and EAC/GAC cases were stratified by CLDN6 mRNA expression based on a survival-associated cutoff. For groups with CLDN6 expression above or below this cutoff, differential gene expression analyses were performed using DESeq, and dysregulated biological pathways were identified using the Enrichr tool. Additionally, CLDN6 protein expression was assessed in more than 800 EACs and almost 600 GACs using a CLDN6-specific immunohistochemical antibody (clone 58-4B-2) that is currently used in Phase I/II trials to identify patients with CLDN6-positive tumors (NCT05262530; NCT04503278). The expression of CLDN6 was also correlated with histopathological parameters and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: EACs and GACs with high CLDN6 mRNA levels displayed an overexpression of pathways regulating the cell cycle, DNA replication, and receptor / extracellular matrix interactions. CLDN6 protein expression was associated with shorter OS in EAC and GAC, both in treatment-naïve subgroups and cohorts receiving neoadjuvant therapy. In multivariate analysis, CLDN6 protein expression was an independent adverse prognostic factor in EAC associated with a shorter OS (HR: 1.75; p = 0.01) and GAC (HR: 2.74; p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: High expression of CLDN6 mRNA is associated with the dysregulation of distinct biological pathways regulating cell growth, proliferation, and cell-matrix interactions. Clinically, the expression of CLDN6 protein is a valuable adverse prognostic marker in EAC and GAC.

Long-Term Postsurgical Outcomes of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation (CROSS) Versus Chemotherapy (FLOT) for Multimodal Treatment of Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagus and the Esophagogastric Junction.

BACKGROUND: The question of the ideal neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma has not been answered to date. Multimodal treatment has become a standard treatment for these adenocarcinomas. Currently, perioperative chemotherapy (FLOT) or neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CROSS) is recommended. METHODS: A monocentric retrospective analysis compared long-term survival after CROSS versus FLOT. The study enrolled patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus (EAC) or the esophagogastric junction type I or II undergoing oncologic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy between January 2012 and December 2019. The primary objective was to determine the long-term outcome in terms of overall survival. The secondary objectives were to determine differences regarding the histopathologic categories after neoadjuvant treatment and the histomorphologic regression. RESULTS: The findings showed no survival advantage for one or the other treatment in this highly standardized cohort. All the patients underwent open (CROSS: 9.4% vs. FLOT: 22%), hybrid (CROSS: 82% vs. FLOT: 72%), or minimally invasive (CROSS: 8.9% vs. FLOT: 5.6%) thoracoabdominal esophagectomy. The median post-surgical follow-up period was 57.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 23.2-109.7 months), and the median survival was longer for the CROSS patients (54 months) than for the FLOT patients (37.2 months) (p = 0.053). The overall 5-years survival was 47% for the entire cohort (48% for the CROSS and 43% for the FLOT patients). The CROSS patients showed a better pathologic response and fewer advanced tumor stages. CONCLUSION: The improved pathologic response after CROSS cannot be translated into longer overall survival. To date, the choice of which neoadjuvant treatment to use can be made only on the basis of clinical parameters and the patient's performance status.

A plain language summary of the CheckMate 649 study: nivolumab in combination with chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone for untreated advanced or metastatic cancer of the stomach or esophagus.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of the 1-year results of a clinical research study known as CheckMate 649 published in The Lancet in June 2021. The 2-year results on the participants' health and overall quality of life from the same study are in a second publication in Nature in March 2022. Until recently, chemotherapy was the only first treatment option for people with advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma who had not been treated before. Patients receiving chemotherapy lived on average for less than 1 year. Nivolumab is an immunotherapy that works by activating a person's immune system to fight back against cancer cells. The goal of CheckMate 649 was to find out if the combination of nivolumab and chemotherapy would help patients with advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma live longer and without their cancer getting worse. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Results from the final analysis are reported here. Of 1581 people who took part in the study, 789 received nivolumab and chemotherapy and 792 received chemotherapy. Researchers found that, on average, participants who received nivolumab and chemotherapy lived longer overall than those who received chemotherapy alone. The length of time participants lived without their cancer getting worse was also longer on average with nivolumab and chemotherapy than chemotherapy treatment alone. However, more participants in the nivolumab and chemotherapy group had side effects than those in the chemotherapy group. The three most common side effects in both types of treatment were nausea (urge to vomit), diarrhea and peripheral neuropathy. Participants who received nivolumab and chemotherapy had a lower risk of their cancer symptoms worsening and reported that they were 'less bothered' from side effects of treatment than those receiving chemotherapy alone. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: The nivolumab and chemotherapy combination is considered a new standard treatment option and is approved in several countries as a treatment for adults who have not been treated before for their advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal cancer based on results from CheckMate 649. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02872116 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

First-line nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for advanced gastric, gastro-oesophageal junction, and oesophageal adenocarcinoma (CheckMate 649): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: First-line chemotherapy for advanced or metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma has a median overall survival (OS) of less than 1 year. We aimed to evaluate first-line programmed cell death (PD)-1 inhibitor-based therapies in gastric, gastro-oesophageal junction, and oesophageal adenocarcinoma. We report the first results for nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial (CheckMate 649), we enrolled adults (≥18 years) with previously untreated, unresectable, non-HER2-positive gastric, gastro-oesophageal junction, or oesophageal adenocarcinoma, regardless of PD-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression from 175 hospitals and cancer centres in 29 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1 while all three groups were open) via interactive web response technology (block sizes of six) to nivolumab (360 mg every 3 weeks or 240 mg every 2 weeks) plus chemotherapy (capecitabine and oxaliplatin every 3 weeks or leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin every 2 weeks), nivolumab plus ipilimumab, or chemotherapy alone. Primary endpoints for nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone were OS or progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review, in patients whose tumours had a PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) of five or more. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of the assigned treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02872116. FINDINGS: From March 27, 2017, to April 24, 2019, of 2687 patients assessed for eligibility, we concurrently randomly assigned 1581 patients to treatment (nivolumab plus chemotherapy [n=789, 50%] or chemotherapy alone [n=792, 50%]). The median follow-up for OS was 13·1 months (IQR 6·7-19·1) for nivolumab plus chemotherapy and 11·1 months (5·8-16·1) for chemotherapy alone. Nivolumab plus chemotherapy resulted in significant improvements in OS (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71 [98·4% CI 0·59-0·86]; p<0·0001) and PFS (HR 0·68 [98 % CI 0·56-0·81]; p<0·0001) versus chemotherapy alone in patients with a PD-L1 CPS of five or more (minimum follow-up 12·1 months). Additional results showed significant improvement in OS, along with PFS benefit, in patients with a PD-L1 CPS of one or more and all randomly assigned patients. Among all treated patients, 462 (59%) of 782 patients in the nivolumab plus chemotherapy group and 341 (44%) of 767 patients in the chemotherapy alone group had grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events. The most common any-grade treatment-related adverse events (≥25%) were nausea, diarrhoea, and peripheral neuropathy across both groups. 16 (2%) deaths in the nivolumab plus chemotherapy group and four (1%) deaths in the chemotherapy alone group were considered to be treatment-related. No new safety signals were identified. INTERPRETATION: Nivolumab is the first PD-1 inhibitor to show superior OS, along with PFS benefit and an acceptable safety profile, in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in previously untreated patients with advanced gastric, gastro-oesophageal junction, or oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Nivolumab plus chemotherapy represents a new standard first-line treatment for these patients. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb, in collaboration with Ono Pharmaceutical.

Long-Term Outcome After Histopathological Complete Response with and Without Nodal Metastases Following Multimodal Treatment of Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study analyzed the long-term survival after pathological complete response (pCR) with and without nodal metastases and associated recurrence following multimodal treatment of esophageal cancer. The recurrence pattern after pCR is of importance for different postoperative surveillance strategies. METHODS: A cohort of 890 patients with esophageal cancer received neoadjuvant therapy followed by transthoracic esophagectomy. Only patients with pCR of the primary tumor with and without nodal metastasis were analyzed. A clinicopathological database was set up and completed with long-term follow up information on recurrent disease. RESULTS: The specimen of 201 patients (23%) demonstrated pCR, 84% without (ypT0N0) and 16% with residual nodal disease (ypT0N+). For ypT0N0 patients, the 5-year overall survival was significantly higher than for patients with metastatic nodes (77% vs. 24%) (p < 0.0001). Sixty-eight percent of patients had no evidence of tumor recurrence, whereas 32% had proven relapse. For patients with and without tumor recurrence, 5-year survival rates were 14% and 93%, respectively (p < 0.0001). For patients with recurrent disease, median survival time was 27 for locoregional, 44 for distant, and 24 months for combined recurrence (p = 0.302). In the multivariable Cox-regression analysis, node-positive disease predicted both locoregional and metastatic recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Pathological CR offers long-term survival in patients without nodal metastases but outcome significantly deteriorates with the presence of nodal metastases. Follow-up recommendations may therefore be adopted in patients with pCR. Furthermore, "watch-and-wait" surveillance strategies with suspected clinical complete response have to be considered with caution.

[What should specialist in internal medicine be aware of in patients treated with biologics? : Infections and autoimmune phenomena]. / Was muss der Internist bei Patienten unter Biologikabehandlung beachten? : Infektionen und Autoimmunphänomene.

Biologics that influence the immune system play a crucial role in the treatment of autoimmune and malignant diseases. Overall these drugs have revolutionized treatment as they demonstrate high efficacy and a relatively low amount of side effects. This leads to longer treatment of patients with a high quality of life. Side effects, especially longer-term side effects, become ever more important as patients are simultaneously seen by different physicians due to comorbidities. Infections, mainly of the upper airway or urogenital tract, represent the main side effect of immunosuppressive biologics, but atypical infections by fungi or mycobacteria may also occur. Biologics that enhance the immune response such as checkpoint inhibitors lead to autoimmune phenomena necessitating the interruption of treatment or immunosuppressive treatment.

Microwave ablation enhances tumor-specific immune response in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Thermal ablative therapies are standard treatments for localized hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In addition to local tumor destruction, ablation leads to abscopal effects in distant lesions most likely mediated by an anti-tumor immune response. Although microwave ablation (MWA) is increasingly substituting other ablative techniques, its systemic immunostimulatory effects are poorly studied. We analyzed tumor-specific immune responses in peripheral blood of HCC patients after thermal ablation with regard to T cell responses and disease outcome. While comprehensive flow cytometric analyses in sequential samples of a prospective patient cohort (n = 23) demonstrated only moderate effects of MWA on circulating immune cell subsets, fluorospot analyses of specific T cell responses against seven tumor-associated antigens (TTAs) revealed de-novo or enhanced tumor-specific immune responses in 30% of patients. This anti-tumor immune response was related to tumor control as Interferon-y and Interleukin-5 T cell responses against TAAs were more frequent in patients with a long-time remission (> 1 year) after MWA (7/16) compared to patients suffering from an early relapse (0/13 patients) and presence of tumor-specific T cell response (IFN-y and/or IL-5) was associated to longer progression-free survival (27.5 vs. 10.0 months). Digital image analysis of immunohistochemically stained archival HCC samples (n = 18) of patients receiving combined MWA and resection revealed a superior disease-free survival of patients with high T cell abundance at the time of thermal ablation (37.4 vs. 13.1 months). Our data demonstrates remarkable immune-related effects of MWA in HCC patients and provides additional evidence for a combination of local ablation and immunotherapy in this challenging disease.

Optimized PD-L1 scoring of gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: PD-1/PD-L1-Immunotherapy has been approved for gastric carcinoma. PD-L1 assessment by immunohistochemistry is the principle biomarker. Are biopsies able to map the actual PD-L1 status of the entire tumor? METHODS: Whole tumor slides of 56 gastric carcinoma were analyzed to determine the distribution of PD-L1 positive cells in the entire tumor areas. Tissue micro arrays with four cores of the tumor surface, which represents the endoscopically accessible biopsy zone, were built from the same tumors. The PD-L1 CPS value was determined separately for each core. Preoperative diagnostic biopsies were available for 22 of the tumors. PD-L1 prevalence, sensitivity and specificity were analyzed using the whole tumor slides as reference scores. Molecular subtyping was performed and related to the PD-L1 status. RESULTS: 27.3% of cases were PD-L1 negative (CPS < 1), 43.6% showed low PD-L1 expression (CPS ≥ 1 to < 5), 12.7% moderate (CPS ≥ 5 to < 10) and 16.4% strong expression (CPS ≥ 10). The biopsies showed best test characteristics if four surface biopsies were analyzed combined, i.e., the CPS was calculated across all four biopsies. The prevalence showed a distribution similar to the resection specimens, sensitivity was 0.73 and specificity 1.0. Using fewer surface biopsies decreased sensitivity and specificity and caused false-negative classifications. Compared to the TMAs, the preoperative biopsies showed reduced sensitivity (0.412). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first comprehensive study to optimize PD-L1 assessment in gastric cancer using endoscopically available tissue. The obtained PD-L1 prevalence is consistent with data of current clinical studies. Calculation of the test characteristics shows that surface biopsies can be indicative of the true PD-L1 status based on the resection specimen. However, an adequate number of biopsies is required. In this study, n = 4 biopsies yielded best results.

Sex-specific prognostic effect of CD66b-positive tumor-infiltrating neutrophils (TANs) in gastric and esophageal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Tumor-associated neutrophils (TANs) have recently been identified as a relevant component of the tumor microenvironment (TME) in solid tumors. Within the TME TANs mediate either tumor-promoting or tumor-inhibiting activities. So far, their prognostic relevance remains to be determined. This study aims to evaluate the prognostic relevance of TANs in different molecular subtypes of gastric and esophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: We analyzed a total of 1118 Caucasian patients divided into gastric adenocarcinoma (n = 458) and esophageal adenocarcinoma cohort (n = 660) of primarily resected and neoadjuvant-treated individuals. The amount of CD66b + TANs in the tumor stroma was determined using quantitative image analysis and correlated to both molecular, as well as clinical data. RESULTS: An accumulation of TANs in the tumor stroma of gastric carcinomas was associated to a significant favorable prognosis (p = 0.026). A subgroup analysis showed that this effect was primarily related to the molecular chromosomal instable subtype (CIN) of gastric carcinomas (p = 0.010). This was only observed in female patients (p = 0.014) but not in male patients (p = 0.315). The same sex-specific effect could be confirmed in adenocarcinomas of the esophagus (p = 0.027), as well as in female individuals after receiving neoadjuvant therapy (p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: Together, we show a sex-specific prognostic effect of TANs in gastric cancer within a Caucasian cohort. For the first time, we showed that this sex-specific prognostic effect of TANs can also be seen in esophageal cancer.

Immune profile and immunosurveillance in treatment-naive and neoadjuvantly treated esophageal adenocarcinoma.

The outcome in esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is still poor with only 20% of patients in Western populations surviving for more than 5 years. Almost nothing is known about the precise composition of immune cells and their gene expression profiles in primary resected EACs and also nothing compared to neoadjuvant treated EACs. This study analyzes and compares immune profiles of primary resected and neoadjuvant treated esophageal adenocarcinoma and unravels possible targets for immunotherapy. We analyzed 47 EAC in total considering a set of 30 primary treatment-naive EACs and 17 neoadjuvant pretreated (12 × CROSS, 5 × FLOT) using the Nanostring's panel-based gene expression platform including 770 genes being important in malignant tumors and their immune micromileu. Most of the significantly altered genes are involved in the regulation of immune responses, T-and B cell functions as well as antigen processing. Chemokine-receptor axes like the CXCL9, -10,-11/CXCR3- are prominent in esophageal adenocarcinoma with a fold change of up to 9.5 promoting cancer cell proliferation and metastasis. ARG1, as a regulator of T-cell fate is sixfold down-regulated in untreated primary esophageal tumors. The influence of the currently used neoadjuvant treatment revealed a down-regulation of nearly all important checkpoint markers and inflammatory related genes in the local microenvironment. We found a higher expression of checkpoint markers like LAG3, TIM3, CTLA4 and CD276 in comparison to PD-L1/PD-1 supporting clinical trials analyzing the efficacy of a combination of different checkpoint inhibitors in EACs. We found an up-regulation of CD38 or LILRB1 as examples of additional immune escape mechanism.

A phase 1 dose-escalation study of checkpoint kinase 1 (CHK1) inhibitor prexasertib in combination with p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (p38 MAPK) inhibitor ralimetinib in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer.

Purpose The primary objective was to determine the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of checkpoint kinase 1 inhibitor, prexasertib, in combination with the p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase inhibitor, ralimetinib, which may be safely administered to patients with advanced cancer. Methods This Phase 1, nonrandomized, open-label, dose-escalation study of prexasertib+ralimetinib included patients with advanced and/or metastatic cancer, followed by a planned cohort expansion in patients with colorectal or non-small-cell lung cancer with KRAS and/or BRAF mutations. Intravenous prexasertib was administered at 60 mg/m2 (days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle), together with oral ralimetinib every 12 h (days 1 to 14 at 100 mg [Cohort 1, n = 3] or 200 mg [Cohort 2, n = 6]). Dose escalations for each agent were planned using a model-based 3 + 3 escalation paradigm. Safety was assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.0X. Tumor response was determined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1. Results Nine patients were treated; 3 experienced dose-limiting toxicities, all in Cohort 2, prohibiting further dose escalation. The most common ≥Grade 3 adverse event was neutrophil count decreased; other reported ≥Grade 3 hematological toxicities included febrile neutropenia and anemia. The pharmacokinetics of prexasertib+ralimetinib was comparable to the monotherapy population profile for each agent. One patient achieved a best overall response of stable disease (for 2 cycles); there were no complete/partial responses. Conclusions This study did not achieve its primary objective of establishing an RP2D of combination prexasertib + ralimetinib that could be safely administered to patients with advanced cancer.

Loss of the SWI/SNF-ATPase subunit members SMARCF1 (ARID1A), SMARCA2 (BRM), SMARCA4 (BRG1) and SMARCB1 (INI1) in oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The SWI/SNF complex is an important chromatin remodeler, commonly dysregulated in cancer, with an estimated mutation frequency of 20%. ARID1A is the most frequently mutated subunit gene. Almost nothing is known about the other familiar members of the SWI/SNF complexes, SMARCA2 (BRM), SMARCA4 (BRG1) and SMARCB1 (INI1), in oesophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). METHODS: We analysed a large cohort of 685 patients with EAC. We used four different antibodies to detect a loss-of-protein of ARID1A BRM, BRG1 and INI1 by immunohistochemistry and correlated these findings with molecular and clinical data. RESULTS: Loss of ARID1A, BRG1, BRM and INI1 was observed in 10.4, 3.4, 9.9 and 2% of EAC. We found a co-existing protein loss of ARID1A and BRM in 9.9% and of ARID1A and BRG1 in 2.2%. Patients with loss of ARID1A and TP53 wildtype EACs showed a shortened overall survival compared with AIRDA1A-positive tumours [median overall survival was 60.1 months (95%CI 1.2-139.9 months)] in patients with ARIDA-1A expression and 26.2 months (95%CI 3.7-19.1 months) in cases of ARIDA-1A loss (p = 0.044). Tumours with loss or expression of ARID1A and TP53 loss were not associated with a difference in survival. Only one tumour revealed high microsatellite instability (MSI-H) with concomitant ARID1A loss. All other ARID1A loss-EACs were microsatellite-stable (MSS). No predictive relevance was seen for SWI/SNF-complex alterations and simultaneous amplification of different genes (PIK3CA, KRAS, c-MYC, MET, GATA6, ERBB2). CONCLUSION: Our work describes, for the first time, loss of one of the SWI/SNF ATPase subunit proteins in a large number of adenocarcinomas of the oesophagus. Several papers discuss possible therapeutic interventions for tumours showing a loss of function of the SWI/SNF complex, such as PARP inhibitors or PI3K and AKT inhibitors. Future studies will be needed to show whether SWI/SNF complex-deficient EACs may benefit from personalized therapy.

Amplification of KRAS and its heterogeneity in non-Asian gastric adenocarcinomas.

BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer is one of the deadliest cancer entities worldwide. While surgery is the only curative treatment option in early tumors, for locally advanced and metastatic patients further therapeutic targets are needed. Several studies not only reported mutations but also amplifications of the KRAS locus in different cancer entities. More recently, KRAS amplification was discussed as a new therapeutic target. Little is known about the (prognostic) relevance and (heterogenic) distribution of KRAS amplification in gastric adenocarcinomas, especially in Non-Asian patients. METHODS: Amplification of the KRAS locus and corresponding protein expression was analyzed in 582 gastric adenocarcinomas employing fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) and immunohistochemistry. Amplification status was correlated with clinico-pathological features, clinical outcome and molecular tumor data including a correlation to the TCGA subtypes of gastric carcinoma. RESULTS: KRAS amplification was detected in 27 out of 470 analysable tumors (5.7%) and correlated with protein expression of KRAS in all amplified tumors. Within the KRAS amplified gastric tumors 14/27 (51.9%) showed a heterogeneous distribution with also KRAS non-amplified tumor parts. According to TCGA 24 tumors (88.8%) were related to chromosomal instable tumors (CIN). The survival analysis of the entire patient cohort did not show any difference in overall survival in dependence on the KRAS status. However, a significant survival difference with a worse outcome for patients with KRAS amplified tumors was identified when analysing patients without neoadjuvant pre-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: We confirm the unfavorable prognosis of KRAS amplified tumors reported by other studies in (Asian) patient groups, at least in patients without neoadjuvant pre-treatment. Within KRAS amplified tumors we revealed intratumoral heterogeneity that may define a (more aggressive) tumor cell population which is more frequently observed in patients with lymph node metastases. Despite the heterogeneous distribution of KRAS amplified tumor clones, KRAS amplified locally advanced or metastasized gastric adenocarcinomas represent a therapeutically highly relevant tumor subgroup.

Identification of targeted therapy options for gastric adenocarcinoma by comprehensive analysis of genomic data.

BACKGROUND: So far only trastuzumab, pembrolizumab and ramucirumab have been approved by the FDA for targeted therapy in gastric cancer (GC). Here we report on potential targeted therapy options for gastric adenocarcinoma based on a novel analysis of "The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA)" database. METHODS: One hundred two FDA-approved targeted cancer drugs were compiled and molecular targets defined. Drugs were considered as potentially effective if targeted genes showed (1) an increase in copy number, (2) gain of function with oncogene activation, (3) specific alterations responsive to approved drugs. Additionally, genetic changes that confer drug resistance and/or sensitivity were evaluated. RESULTS: Fifty percentage of patients with GC may be treatable with non-GC but FDA-approved targeted cancer therapies. The major drug identified in our in silico study for GC is copanlisib, a PI3K inhibitor. In the TCGA patient database, our genetically based drug response prediction identified more patients with alterations sensitive to copanlisib compared to the already-GC-approved drug trastuzumab (20%, 78 out of 393 patients, vs. trastuzumab: 13%, 52 of 393 patients), which is mainly due to the high incidence of PIK3CA gain of function mutations within mutation hot spots. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that various currently FDA-approved drugs might be candidates for targeted therapy of GC. For clinical trials, cancer patients should be selected based on the genomic profile of their tumor.