Onvansertib in Combination with FOLFIRI and Bevacizumab in Second-line Treatment of KRAS-mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Phase 1b Clinical Study.

PURPOSE: Onvansertib is a highly specific inhibitor of Polo-like kinase 1 (PLK1), with demonstrated safety in solid tumors. We evaluated, preclinically and clinically, the potential of onvansertib in combination with chemotherapy as a therapeutic option for KRAS-mutant colorectal cancer (CRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Preclinical activity of onvansertib was assessed: (1) in vitro in KRAS-wild type and -mutant isogenic CRC cells; and (2) in vivo, in combination with irinotecan, in a KRAS-mutant xenograft model. Clinically, a Phase Ib trial was conducted to investigate onvansertib at doses 12, 15, and 18 mg/m2 (days 1-5 and 14-19 of a 28-day cycle) in combination with FOLFIRI/bevacizumab (days 1 and 15) in KRAS-mutant metastatic CRC patients who had prior oxaliplatin exposure. Safety, efficacy, and changes in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) were assessed. RESULTS: In preclinical models, onvansertib displayed superior activity in KRAS-mutant than wild-type isogenic CRC cells and demonstrated potent anti-tumor activity in combination with irinotecan in vivo. Eighteen patients enrolled in the Phase Ib study. Onvansertib recommended phase 2 dose was established at 15 mg/m2. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events (AE) represented 15% of all treatment-related AEs, with neutropenia being the most common. Partial responses were observed in 44% of patients with a median duration of response of 9.5 months. Early ctDNA dynamics were predictive of treatment efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Onvansertib combined with FOLIFRI/bevacizumab exhibited manageable safety and promising efficacy in second-line treatment of KRAS-mutant metastatic CRC patients. Further exploration of this combination therapy is ongoing.

Evaluation of Intratumoral Response Heterogeneity in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer and Its Impact on Patient Overall Survival: Findings from 10,551 Patients in the ARCAD Database.

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a heterogeneous disease that can evoke discordant responses to therapy among different lesions in individual patients. The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria do not take into consideration response heterogeneity. We explored and developed lesion-based measurement response criteria to evaluate their prognostic effect on overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients enrolled in 17 first-line clinical trials, who had mCRC with ≥ 2 lesions at baseline, and a restaging scan by 12 weeks were included. For each patient, lesions were categorized as a progressing lesion (PL: > 20% increase in the longest diameter (LD)), responding lesion (RL: > 30% decrease in LD), or stable lesion (SL: neither PL nor RL) based on the 12-week scan. Lesion-based response criteria were defined for each patient as follows: PL only, SL only, RL only, and varied responses (mixture of RL, SL, and PL). Lesion-based response criteria and OS were correlated using stratified multivariable Cox models. The concordance between OS and classifications was measured using the C statistic. RESULTS: Among 10,551 patients with mCRC from 17 first-line studies, varied responses were noted in 51.6% of patients, among whom, 3.3% had RL/PL at 12 weeks. Among patients with RL/SL, 52% had stable disease (SD) by RECIST 1.1, and they had a longer OS (median OS (mOS) = 19.9 months) than those with SL only (mOS = 16.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 0.81 (0.76, 0.85), p < 0.001), although a shorter OS than those with RL only (mOS = 25.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 1.42 (1.32, 1.53), p < 0.001). Among patients with SL/PL, 74% had SD by RECIST 1.1, and they had a longer OS (mOS = 9.0 months) than those with PL only (mOS = 8.0 months, HR (95% CI) = 0.75 (0.57, 0.98), p = 0.040), yet a shorter OS than those with SL only (mOS = 16.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 1.98 (1.80, 2.18), p < 0.001). These associations were consistent across treatment regimen subgroups. The lesion-based response criteria showed slightly higher concordance than RECIST 1.1, although it was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Varied responses at first restaging are common among patients receiving first-line therapy for mCRC. Our lesion-based measurement criteria allowed for better mortality discrimination, which could potentially be informative for treatment decision-making and influence patient outcomes.

Changes in Prescribing Patterns in Stage III Colon Cancer.

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

Cabozantinib Following Immunotherapy in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

(1) Background: Cabozantinib, a multikinase inhibitor, is approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following progression on sorafenib. Recently, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab has been approved in the first line setting for advanced HCC and has become the new standard of care. Whether cabozantinib improves outcomes following progression on immunotherapy remains unknown. We describe the clinical outcomes following treatment with immunotherapy in patients with advanced HCC who received cabozantinib. (2) Methods: We conducted a multicentric, retrospective analysis of patients with advanced HCC diagnosed between 2010-2021 at Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, Arizona, and Florida who received cabozantinib. Median overall survival and progression free survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Adverse events were determined using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). (3). Results: We identified 26 patients with advanced HCC who received cabozantinib following progression on immunotherapy. Median progression free survival on cabozantinib therapy was 2.1 months (95% CI: 1.3-3.9) and median overall survival from time of cabozantinib initiation was 7.7 months (95% CI: 5.3-14.9). (4) Conclusion: The optimal sequencing of therapy for patients with advanced HCC following progression on immunotherapy remains unknown. Our study demonstrates that patients may benefit from treatment with cabozantinib following progression on immunotherapy.

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

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

Individualized, heterologous chimpanzee adenovirus and self-amplifying mRNA neoantigen vaccine for advanced metastatic solid tumors: phase 1 trial interim results.

Checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) therapies provide limited benefit to patients with tumors of low immune reactivity. T cell-inducing vaccines hold promise to exert long-lasting disease control in combination with CPI therapy. Safety, tolerability and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of an individualized, heterologous chimpanzee adenovirus (ChAd68) and self-amplifying mRNA (samRNA)-based neoantigen vaccine in combination with nivolumab and ipilimumab were assessed as primary endpoints in an ongoing phase 1/2 study in patients with advanced metastatic solid tumors (NCT03639714). The individualized vaccine regimen was safe and well tolerated, with no dose-limiting toxicities. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) >10% included pyrexia, fatigue, musculoskeletal and injection site pain and diarrhea. Serious TRAEs included one count each of pyrexia, duodenitis, increased transaminases and hyperthyroidism. The RP2D was 1012 viral particles (VP) ChAd68 and 30 µg samRNA. Secondary endpoints included immunogenicity, feasibility of manufacturing and overall survival (OS). Vaccine manufacturing was feasible, with vaccination inducing long-lasting neoantigen-specific CD8 T cell responses. Several patients with microsatellite-stable colorectal cancer (MSS-CRC) had improved OS. Exploratory biomarker analyses showed decreased circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in patients with prolonged OS. Although small study size limits statistical and translational analyses, the increased OS observed in MSS-CRC warrants further exploration in larger randomized studies.

Cell-Free Tumor DNA Dominant Clone Allele Frequency Is Associated With Poor Outcomes in Advanced Biliary Cancers Treated With Platinum-Based Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: This investigation sought to evaluate the prognostic value of pretreatment of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in metastatic biliary tract cancers (BTCs) treated with platinum-based first-line chemotherapy treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 67 patients who underwent ctDNA testing before platinum-based chemotherapy for first-line treatment for metastatic BTC. For analysis, we considered the detected gene with highest variant allele frequency as the dominant clone allele frequency (DCAF). Results of ctDNA analysis were correlated with patients' demographics, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The median age of patients was 67 (27-90) years. Fifty-four (80.6%) of 67 patients evaluated had intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma; seven had extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and six gallbladder cancers. Forty-six (68.6%) of the patients were treated with cisplatin plus gemcitabine, and 16.4% of patients received gemcitabine and other platinum (carboplatin or oxaliplatin) combinations, whereas 15% of patients were treated on a clinical trial with gemcitabine and cisplatin plus additional agents (CX4945, PEGPH20, or nab-paclitaxel). TP53, KRAS, FGFR2, ARID1A, STK11, and IDH1 were the genes with highest frequency as DCAF. The median DCAF was 3% (0%-97%). DCAF > 3% was associated with worse OS (median OS: 10.8 v 18.8 months, P = .032). Stratifying DCAF in quartiles, DCAF > 10% was significantly related to worse PFS (median PFS: 3 months, P = .014) and worse OS (median OS: 7.0 months, P = .001). Each 1% increase in ctDNA was associated with a hazard ratio of 13.1 in OS when adjusting for subtypes, metastatic sites, size of largest tumor, age, sex, and CA19-9. CONCLUSION: DCAF at diagnosis of advanced BTC can stratify patients who have worse outcomes when treated with upfront platinum-based chemotherapy. Each increase in %ctDNA decreases survival probabilities.

Pembrolizumab in Combination with Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Patients with Resectable Adenocarcinoma of the Gastroesophageal Junction.

PURPOSE: This phase Ib/2 trial investigated pembrolizumab-containing trimodality therapy in patients with gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with GEJ adenocarcinoma (cT1-3NanyM0) received neoadjuvant pembrolizumab-containing chemoradiation (CROSS regimen) followed by surgical resection and adjuvant pembrolizumab. The primary endpoints were tolerability in the first 16 patients and pathologic complete response [pCR (ypT0N0)]. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). An independent propensity-score-matched cohort (treated with CROSS without immunotherapy) was used for comparison. Exploratory analyses included immune biomarkers in the tumor microenvironment (TME) and plasma. RESULTS: We enrolled 31 eligible patients, of whom 29 received all expected doses of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab and 28 underwent R0 resection. Safety endpoints were met. The primary efficacy endpoint was not met [7/31 (22.6%) achieved pCR]. Patients with high [i.e., combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 10] baseline expression of programmed death (PD)-L1 in the TME had a significantly higher pCR rate than those with low expression [50.0% (4/8) vs. 13.6% (3/22); P = 0.046]. Patients with high PD-L1 expression also experienced longer PFS and OS than propensity-score-matched patients. Among trial patients with PD-L1 CPS < 10, unprespecified analysis explored whether extracellular vesicles (EV) could identify further responders: an elevated plasma level of PD-L1-expressing EVs was significantly associated with higher pCR. CONCLUSIONS: Adding pembrolizumab to trimodality therapy showed acceptable tolerability but did not meet the pre-specified pCR endpoint. Exploratory analyses suggested that high PD-L1 expression in the TME and/or on EVs may identify patients most likely to achieve tumor response.

Clinical outcomes for hilar and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with adjuvant, definitive, or liver transplant-based neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy strategies: a single-center experience.

Background: We report our experience with 3 strategies for treating hilar and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) including chemoradiotherapy: neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and orthotopic liver transplant, surgical resection and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (aCRT), and definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT). Methods: We included patients treated from 1998 through 2019. Kaplan-Meier estimates, log-rank testing, and univariate/multivariate Cox models were used to assess outcomes (local progression-free survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival). Results: Sixty-five patients (nCRT, n=20; aCRT, n=16; dCRT, n=29) met inclusion criteria [median (range) age 65 years (27-84 years)]. Median posttreatment follow-up was 19.1 months (0.8-164.8 months) for all patients and 38.6, 24.3, and 9.0 months for the nCRT, aCRT, and dCRT groups, respectively. At 3 and 5 years, overall survival was 78% and 59% for the nCRT group; 47% and 35%, aCRT group; and 11% and 0%, dCRT group. Compared with the dCRT group, the nCRT group (hazard ratio =0.13, 95% CI: 0.05-0.33) and the aCRT group (hazard ratio =0.29, 95% CI: 0.14-0.64) had significantly improved overall survival (P<0.001). The 5-year local progression-free survival (50% nCRT vs. 30% aCRT vs. 0% dCRT, P<0.001) and 5-year disease-free survival (61% nCRT vs. 30% aCRT vs. 0% dCRT, P=0.01) were significantly better for strategies combined with surgery. Conclusions: Outcomes for patients with extrahepatic CCA were superior for those who underwent nCRT/orthotopic liver transplant or postsurgical aCRT than for patients treated with dCRT. The excellent outcomes after nCRT/orthotopic liver transplant provide additional independent data supporting the validity of this strategy. The poor survival of patients treated with dCRT highlights a need for better therapies when surgery is not possible.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Maintenance Therapy in First-Line Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: A Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Fluoropyrimidine with platinum-based chemotherapy has become the standard of care for advanced gastric and gastroesophageal (GEJ) cancer. Trials in colon cancer show that induction chemotherapy followed by maintenance chemotherapy is an efficacious strategy to maximize clinical response while minimizing toxicity. The current retrospective study aims to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of maintenance versus continuous treatment in advanced GEJ malignancy. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients with metastatic gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma treated with fluoropyrimidine and platinum chemotherapy between 2007-2017 was performed. Patients who achieved at least stable disease after initial induction treatment were included. After 16 weeks of induction chemotherapy, patients were categorized into the continuous group if induction chemotherapy was continued and the maintenance group if chemotherapy was switched to maintenance fluoropyrimidine monotherapy or observed off treatment. Endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicities. RESULTS: In total, 90 patients met the criteria, 48 received continuous therapy, and 42 received maintenance. Baseline characteristics were comparable. No difference in PFS (9.9 vs 8.4 months p = .28) or in OS (16.1 vs 21.3 months p = .75) was observed, including after controlling for the best response on induction therapy and other variables. In patients on continuous induction therapy, there was a higher prevalence of grade three neuropathy (42.6% vs 9.8% p = .001) and neutropenic fever (13% vs 0% p =.03). CONCLUSIONS: Maintenance therapy following induction fluoropyrimidine and platinum-based therapy is associated with an improved toxicity profile and appears to have comparable efficacy to continuous treatment in metastatic gastric/GEJ cancer.

Combination Immunotherapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Where Are We Currently?

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

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

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

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

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

Circulating Cell-Free Tumor DNA in Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Identifies Patients With Worse Overall Survival.

BACKGROUND: Plasma-based circulating cell-free tumor DNA (ctDNA) genomic profiling by next-generation sequencing (NGS)is an emerging diagnostic tool for pancreatic cancer (PC). The impact of detected genomic alterations and variant allele fraction (VAF) in tumor response to systemic treatments and outcomes is under investigation. METHODS: Patients with advanced PC who had ctDNA profiled at time of initial diagnosis were retrospectively evaluated. We considered the somatic alteration with the highest VAF as the dominant clone allele frequency (DCAF). ctDNA NGS results were related to clinical demographics, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 104 patients were evaluated. Somatic alterations were detected in 84.6% of the patients. Patients with ≥ 2 detectable genomic alterations had worse median PFS (p < 0.001) and worse median OS (p = 0.001). KRAS was associated with disease progression to systemic treatments (80.4% vs 19.6%, p = 0.006), worse median PFS (p < 0.001) and worse median OS (p = 0.002). TP53 was associated with worse median PFS (p = 0.02) and worse median OS (p = 0.001). The median DCAF was 0.45% (range 0-55%). DCAF >0.45% was associated with worse median PFS (p<0.0001) and median OS (p=0.0003). Patients that achieved clearance of KRAS had better PFS (p=0.047), while patients that achieved clearance of TP53 had better PFS (p=0.0056) and OS (p=0.037). CONCLUSIONS: Initial detection of ctDNA in advanced PC can identify somatic alterations that may help predict clinical outcomes. The dynamics of ctDNA are prognostic of outcomes and should be evaluated in prospective studies.

Acute Toxicities and Short-Term Patient Outcomes After Intensity-Modulated Proton Beam Radiation Therapy or Intensity-Modulated Photon Radiation Therapy for Esophageal Carcinoma: A Mayo Clinic Experience.

PURPOSE: Intensity modulated proton beam radiation therapy (IMPT) has a clinically significant dosimetric advantage over intensity modulated photon radiation therapy (IMRT) for the treatment of patients with esophageal cancer, particularly for sparing the heart and lungs. We compared acute radiation therapy-related toxicities and short-term clinical outcomes of patients with esophageal cancer who received treatment with IMPT or IMRT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We retrospectively reviewed the electronic health records of consecutive adult patients with esophageal cancer who underwent concurrent chemoradiotherapy with IMPT or IMRT in the definitive or neoadjuvant setting from January 1, 2014, through June 30, 2018, with additional follow-up data collected through January 31, 2019. Treatment-related toxicities were evaluated per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4. Survival outcomes were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 64 patients (32 per group) were included (median follow-up time: 10 months for IMPT patients vs 14 months for IMRT patients). The most common radiation therapy regimen was 45 Gy in 25 fractions, and 80% of patients received a simultaneous integrated boost to a median cumulative dose of 50 Gy. Similar numbers of IMPT patients (n = 15; 47%) and IMRT patients (n = 18; 56%) underwent surgery (P = .07), with no difference in pathologic complete response rates (IMPT: n = 5; 33% vs IMRT: n = 7; 39%; P = .14). At 1 year, the clinical outcomes also were similar for IMPT and IMRT patients, respectively. Local control was 92% versus 84% (P = .87), locoregional control 92% versus 80% (P = .76), distant metastasis-free survival 87% versus 65% (P = .08), progression-free survival 71% versus 45% (P = .15), and overall survival 74% versus 71% (P = .62). The rate of acute treatment-related grade 3 toxicity was similar between the groups (P = .71). CONCLUSIONS: In our early experience, IMPT is a safe and effective treatment when administered as part of definitive or trimodality therapy. Longer follow-up is required to evaluate the effectiveness of IMPT.