Plain language summary of the HIMALAYA study: tremelimumab and durvalumab for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (liver cancer).

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of results from a phase 3 clinical study called HIMALAYA. HIMALAYA looked at treatment with one dose of a medication called tremelimumab combined with multiple doses of a medication called durvalumab (the STRIDE regimen) or multiple doses of durvalumab alone. These treatments were compared with a medication called sorafenib in participants with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). HCC is a type of liver cancer that is difficult to treat because it is often diagnosed when it is unresectable, meaning it can no longer be removed with surgery. Sorafenib has been the main treatment for unresectable HCC since 2007. However, people who take sorafenib may experience side effects that can reduce their quality of life, so alternative medicines are being trialed. Tremelimumab and durvalumab are types of drugs called immunotherapies, and they both work in different ways to help the body's immune system fight cancer. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY?: Participants who took STRIDE lived longer than participants who took sorafenib, whilst participants who took durvalumab alone lived a similar length of time as participants who took sorafenib. Participants who took STRIDE or durvalumab had a lower relative risk of experiencing worsening in their quality of life than participants who took sorafenib. The side effects that participants who received STRIDE or durvalumab experienced were expected for these types of treatments and could mostly be managed. WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: Overall, STRIDE is more effective than sorafenib for people with unresectable HCC.

A Practical Guide for the Systemic Treatment of Biliary Tract Cancer in Canada.

Biliary tract cancers (BTC) are rare and aggressive tumors with poor prognosis. Radical surgery offers the best chance for cure; however, most patients present with unresectable disease, and among those receiving curative-intent surgery, recurrence rates remain high. While other locoregional therapies for unresectable disease may be considered, only select patients may be eligible. Consequently, systemic therapy plays a significant role in the treatment of BTC. In the adjuvant setting, capecitabine is recommended following curative-intent resection. In the neoadjuvant setting, systemic therapy has mostly been explored for downstaging in borderline resectable tumours, although evidence for its routine use is lacking. For advanced unresectable or metastatic disease, gemcitabine-cisplatin plus durvalumab has become the standard of care, while the addition of pembrolizumab to gemcitabine-cisplatin has also recently demonstrated improved survival compared to chemotherapy alone. Following progression on gemcitabine-cisplatin, several chemotherapy combinations and biomarker-driven targeted agents have been explored. However, the optimum regimen remains unclear, and access to targeted agents remains challenging in Canada. Overall, this article serves as a practical guide for the systemic treatment of BTC in Canada, providing valuable insights into the current and future treatment landscape for this challenging disease.

The evolution of immune checkpoint inhibitor combinations in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma - A systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Since approval of sorafenib in 2008, systemic therapy has been established as the main treatment option for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Recently, immune checkpoints inhibitors (ICIs) have been extensively tested in this setting. Multiple ICI combination regimens have recently received regulatory approval and new data continues to emerge. The purpose of this review is to provide a comprehensive summary of the most up-to-date evidence on ICI combinations in advanced HCC. METHODS: A search of published and presented literature was conducted to identify phase III trials of ICI combinations in advanced HCC patients. Supplemental bibliographic search of review articles and meta-analyses was also conducted. Efficacy and safety data was summarized in text, tables, and plots. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION: The literature search identified a total of six phase III trials assessing ICI combinations in advanced HCC. Two trials compared ICI plus anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody combinations to sorafenib, three trials compared ICI plus tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) combinations to TKIs alone, and one trial compared a dual ICI regimen to sorafenib. Statistically significant survival benefits were seen with atezolizumab-bevacizumab and sintilimab-bevacizumab biosimilar as well as durvalumab-tremelimumab and camrelizumab-rivoceranib combinations. ICI combination regimens have also shown improvements in response rates and progression-free survival relative to the previous standard of care, sorafenib, and generally presented predictable and manageable safety profiles. CONCLUSION: ICI combinations represent the new standard of care for advanced HCC. Ongoing randomized trials and real-world evidence will further clarify the role of these combinations in this rapidly evolving field.

Clinical consensus statement: Establishing the roles of locoregional and systemic therapies for the treatment of intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) a leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide and approximately one-third of patients present with intermediate-stage disease. The treatment landscape of intermediate-stage HCC is rapidly evolving due to developments in local, locoregional and systemic therapies. Treatment recommendations focused on this heterogenous disease stage and that take into account the Canadian reality are lacking. To address this gap, a pan-Canadian group of experts in hepatology, transplant, surgery, radiation therapy, nuclear medicine, interventional radiology, and medical oncology came together to develop consensus recommendations on management of intermediate-stage HCC relevant to the Canadian context. METHODS: A modified Delphi framework was used to develop consensus statements with strengths of recommendation and supporting levels of evidence graded using the AHA/ACC classification system. Tentative consensus statements were drafted based on a systematic search and expert input in a series of iterative feedback cycles and were then circulated via online survey to assess the level of agreement. RESULTS & CONCLUSION: The pre-defined ratification threshold of 80 % agreement was reached for all statements in the areas of multidisciplinary treatment (n = 4), intra-arterial therapy (n = 14), biologics (n = 5), radiation therapy (n = 3), surgical resection and transplantation (n = 7), and percutaneous ablative therapy (n = 4). These generally reflected an expansion in treatment options due to developments in previously established or emergent techniques, introduction of new and more active therapies and increased therapeutic flexibility. These developments have allowed for greater treatment tailoring and personalization as well as a paradigm shift toward strategies with curative intent in a wider range of disease settings.

Impact of NAFLD on clinical outcomes in hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sorafenib: an international cohort study.

Background: The impact of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) on overall survival (OS), treatment response and toxicity in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with sorafenib is unknown. We examined the impact of NAFLD on survival and toxicity in an international cohort of patients receiving sorafenib. Methods: Clinical and demographic data were collected from patients consecutively treated at specialist centres in Europe and North America. The impact of NAFLD on OS, sorafenib-specific survival and toxicity compared with other aetiologies of liver disease using multivariable Cox-proportional hazards and logistic regression modelling was assessed. Results: A total of 5201 patients received sorafenib; 183 (3.6%) had NAFLD-associated HCC. NAFLD-associated HCC patients were more likely to be older women (median age 65.8 versus 63.0 years, p < 0.01 and 10.4% versus 2.3%, < 0.01), with a median body mass index (BMI) of 29.4. After controlling for known prognostic factors, no difference in OS in patients with or without NAFLD was observed [hazard ratio (HR): 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.84-1.18, p = 0.98]. NAFLD-associated patients had more advanced stage HCC when they commenced sorafenib [Barcelona Clinic Liver Class (BCLC) C/D 70.9% versus 58.9%, p < 0.01] and were more likely to be commenced on a lower starting dose of sorafenib (51.4 versus 36.4%, p < 0.01). There was no difference in sorafenib-specific survival between NAFLD and other aetiologies (HR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.79-1.17, p = 0.96). Adverse events were similar between NAFLD and non-NAFLD HCC groups, including rates of greater than grade 2 hypertension (6.3% versus 5.8%, p = 1.00). Conclusion: Survival in HCC does not appear to be influenced by the presence of NAFLD. NAFLD-associated HCC derive similar clinical benefit from sorafenib compared with other aetiologies.

Emerging Systemic Therapies in Advanced Unresectable Biliary Tract Cancer: Review and Canadian Perspective.

Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is a group of rare and aggressive malignancies with a dismal prognosis. There is currently a significant lack in effective treatment options for BTC, with gemcitabine-cisplatin remaining the first-line standard of care treatment for over a decade. A wave of investigational therapies, including new chemotherapy combinations, immunotherapy, and biomarker-driven targeted therapy have demonstrated promising results in BTC, and there is hope for many of these therapies to be incorporated into the Canadian treatment landscape in the near future. This review discusses the emerging therapies under investigation for BTC and provides a perspective on how they may fit into Canadian practice, with a focus on the barriers to treatment access.

Randomised, Phase II study of selumetinib, an oral inhibitor of MEK, in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Cisplatin and gemcitabine (CisGem) are standard chemotherapy for advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). The MEK inhibitor selumetinib showed synergy with gemcitabine when administered sequentially in BTC. This randomised Phase 2 trial aimed to assess the efficacy of sequential or continuous selumetinib with CisGem. METHODS: Patients with advanced BTC received CisGem; arm A included selumetinib every day, arm B: selumetinib, days 1-5, 8-19 each cycle. Arm C received CisGem alone. Selumetinib was dosed at 75 mg BID but amended to 50 mg BID due to toxicity. RESULTS: In all, 51 participants were evaluable for response. No significant difference was seen in mean change in tumour size at 10 weeks between arms A and C (-7.8% vs -12.8%, P = 0.54) or arms B and C (-15% vs -12.8%, P = 0.78). There was no difference in median progression-free survival (6.0, 7.0, 6.3 months, P > 0.95) or overall survival (11.7, 11.7, 12.8 months, P = 0.70) for arms A, B and C, respectively. More participants experienced grade 3-4 toxicities in selumetinib-containing arms. More participants in arm A required chemotherapy dose reductions (P = 0.01) with lower chemotherapy dose intensity during the first 10 weeks. CONCLUSION: Adding sequential or continuous selumetinib to CisGem failed to improve efficacy and increased toxicity in patients with advanced BTC.

Tremelimumab plus Durvalumab in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Tremelimumab/Durvalumab for Hepatocellular CarcinomaThis trial examined overall survival (OS) with tremelimumab plus durvalumab, durvalumab alone, or sorafenib in untreated patients with hepatocellular cancer who were not candidates for locoregional therapy. Median OS increased significantly by 2.5 months (16.4 vs. 13.8) with single-dose tremelimumab plus durvalumab treatment every 4 weeks versus sorafenib alone.

Metastatic pancreatic cancer with complete response to FOLFIRINOX treatment.

A 59-year-old woman presented with abdominal pain associated with nausea and night sweats. A large mass was found in the pancreatic tail and innumerable liver lesions were identified. Ultrasound-guided biopsy of a liver nodule confirmed moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma consistent with a pancreatobiliary primary. On FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy, subsequent CT scans showed shrinkage of the pancreatic mass and liver metastases. Her cancer antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) normalised after 11 months. Oxaliplatin was discontinued due to peripheral neuropathy but she completed 37 cycles of FOLFIRI during which her pancreatic mass disappeared, liver lesions decreased in size and were subsequently deemed to be scar tissue by the radiologist. After 4 years of treatment, the patient agreed to a break from chemotherapy. Eighteen months afterwards, an MRI abdomen continues to demonstrate no visible pancreatic mass and the two remaining liver lesions, believed to be scar tissue, remain stable. Her CA 19-9 level remains normal. This appears to be a complete response to FOLFIRINOX/FOLFIRI chemotherapy in a patient with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Optimizing Survival and the Changing Landscape of Targeted Therapy for Intermediate and Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) consisting of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor sorafenib has remained unchanged for over a decade, although results from phase III targeted therapy trials have recently emerged. This review considers available phase III evidence on the use and sequencing of targeted therapy for intermediate and advanced non-locoregional therapy (LRT) eligible HCC and discusses implications for clinical practice. METHODS: Published and presented literature on phase III data reporting on targeted therapy for advanced HCC that was not eligible for loco-regional therapies was identified using the key search terms "hepatocellular cancer" AND "advanced" AND "targeted therapy" AND "phase III" OR respective aliases (PRISMA). RESULTS: Ten phase III trials assessed targeted therapy first-line and eight following sorafenib. In the first-line, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab statistically significantly improved overall survival (OS) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) compared with sorafenib, while lenvatinib demonstrated non-inferior OS. Following progression on sorafenib, statistically significant OS improvements over placebo were seen for cabozantinib and regorafenib in unselected patients and for ramucirumab in those with baseline α-fetoprotein≥400 ng/mL. Based on improved OS and PROs, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab appears to be a preferred first-line treatment option for intermediate or advanced non-LRT eligible HCC. Phase III data informing sequencing of later lines of treatment is lacking. Therefore, sequencing principles are proposed that can be used to guide treatment selection. CONCLUSIONS: Ongoing trials will continue to inform optimal therapy. Multiple targeted therapies have improved OS in intermediate or advanced non-LRT eligible HCC, although optimal sequencing is an area of ongoing investigation.

Oncology education for family medicine residents: a national needs assessment survey.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the current state of oncology education in Canadian family medicine postgraduate medical education programs (FM PGME) and examine opinions regarding optimal oncology education in these programs. METHODS: A survey was designed to evaluate ideal and current oncology teaching, educational topics, objectives, and competencies in FM PGMEs. The survey was sent to Canadian family medicine (FM) residents and program directors (PDs). RESULTS: In total, 150 residents and 17 PDs affiliated with 16 of 17 Canadian medical schools completed the survey. The majority indicated their programs do not have a mandatory clinical rotation in oncology (79% residents, 88% PDs). Low rates of residents (7%) and PDs (13%) reported FM residents being adequately prepared for their role in caring for cancer patients (p = 0.03). Residents and PDs believed the most optimal method of teaching oncology is through clinical exposure (65% residents, 80% PDs). Residents and PDs agreed the most important topics to learn (rated ≥4.7 on 5-point Likert scale) were: performing pap smears, cancer screening/prevention, breaking bad news, and approach to patient with increased cancer risk. According to residents, other important topics such as appropriate cancer patient referrals, managing cancer complications and post-treatment surveillance were only taught at frequencies of 52, 40 and 36%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Current FM PGME oncology education is suboptimal, although the degree differs in the opinion of residents and PDs. This study identified topics and methods of education which could be focussed upon to improve FM oncology education.

Serum Alpha-fetoprotein Levels and Clinical Outcomes in the Phase III CELESTIAL Study of Cabozantinib versus Placebo in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: The phase III CELESTIAL study demonstrated improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) with cabozantinib versus placebo in patients with previously treated, advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We analyzed outcomes by baseline alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and on-treatment AFP changes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Serum AFP was measured every 8 weeks by blinded, centralized testing. Outcomes were analyzed by baseline AFP bifurcated at 400 ng/mL and by on-treatment AFP response (≥20% decrease from baseline at Week 8). The optimal cutoff for change in AFP at Week 8 was evaluated using maximally selected rank statistics. RESULTS: Median OS for cabozantinib versus placebo was 13.9 versus 10.3 months [HR, 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.62-1.04] for patients with baseline AFP <400 ng/mL, and 8.5 versus 5.2 months (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.54-0.94) for patients with baseline AFP ≥400 ng/mL. Week 8 AFP response rate was 50% for cabozantinib versus 13% for placebo. In the cabozantinib arm, median OS for patients with and without AFP response was 16.1 versus 9.1 months (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.45-0.84). AFP response was independently associated with longer OS. The optimal cutoff for association with OS in the cabozantinib arm was ≤0% change in AFP at Week 8 [AFP control; HR 0.50 (95% CI, 0.35-0.71)]. HRs for PFS were consistent with those for OS. CONCLUSIONS: Cabozantinib improved outcomes versus placebo across a range of baseline AFP levels. On-treatment AFP response and control rates were higher with cabozantinib than placebo, and were associated with longer OS and PFS with cabozantinib.

PPARα exacerbates necroptosis, leading to increased mortality in postinfluenza bacterial superinfection.

Patients infected with influenza are at high risk of secondary bacterial infection, which is a major proximate cause of morbidity and mortality. We have shown that in mice, prior infection with influenza results in increased inflammation and mortality upon Staphylococcus aureus infection, recapitulating the human disease. Lipidomic profiling of the lungs of superinfected mice revealed an increase in CYP450 metabolites during lethal superinfection. These lipids are endogenous ligands for the nuclear receptor PPARα, and we demonstrate that Ppara-/- mice are less susceptible to superinfection than wild-type mice. PPARα is an inhibitor of NFκB activation, and transcriptional profiling of cells isolated by bronchoalveolar lavage confirmed that influenza infection inhibits NFκB, thereby dampening proinflammatory and prosurvival signals. Furthermore, network analysis indicated an increase in necrotic cell death in the lungs of superinfected mice compared to mice infected with S. aureus alone. Consistent with this, we observed reduced NFκB-mediated inflammation and cell survival signaling in cells isolated from the lungs of superinfected mice. The kinase RIPK3 is required to induce necrotic cell death and is strongly induced in cells isolated from the lungs of superinfected mice compared to mice infected with S. aureus alone. Genetic and pharmacological perturbations demonstrated that PPARα mediates RIPK3-dependent necroptosis and that this pathway plays a central role in mortality following superinfection. Thus, we have identified a molecular circuit in which infection with influenza induces CYP450 metabolites that activate PPARα, leading to increased necrotic cell death in the lung which correlates with the excess mortality observed in superinfection.

Effect of sorafenib starting dose and dose intensity on survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: Results from a Canadian Multicenter Database.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib has been shown to improve survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), however, full dose can be difficult to tolerate. The aim of this study was to determine whether sorafenib starting dose and mean dose intensity affect survival. METHODS: Patients treated with sorafenib for HCC from January 2008 to July 2016 in several Canadian provinces were included and retrospectively analyzed. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) of patients starting on sorafenib full dose compared to reduced dose. Secondary analysis compared OS with different mean dose-intensity groups. Survival outcomes were assessed with Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models. A propensity score analysis was performed to account for treatment bias and confounding. RESULTS: Of 681 patients included, sorafenib was started at full dose in 289 patients (42%). Median survival for starting full and reduced dose was 9.4 months and 8.9 months (P = .15) respectively. After propensity score matching and adjusting for potential confounders there was still no difference in survival (HR 0.8, 95% CI, 0.61-1.06, P = .12). Almost half of the patients (45%) received a dose intensity < 50%. Median survival for mean dose intensity > 75%, 50%-75%, and < 50% were 9.5 months, 12.9 months, and 7.1 months (P = .005) respectively. In multivariable models, starting dose(HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.93-1.44, P = .180) and mean dose intensity were not associated with survival. CONCLUSIONS: Starting HCC patients on a reduced dose of sorafenib compared to full dose may not compromise survival. Mean dose-intensity of sorafenib may also not affect survival.

Second-line treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma after sorafenib: Characterizing treatments used over the past 10 years and real-world eligibility for cabozantinib, regorafenib, and ramucirumab.

BACKGROUND: The CELESTIAL, RESORCE, and REACH-2 trials showed survival benefit of cabozantinib, regorafenib, and ramucirumab, respectively, in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated with sorafenib who had good performance status (ECOG 0-1) and liver function (Child-Pugh-A). This study characterizes subsequent treatments received by HCC patients after sorafenib, and determines the proportion of patients eligible for novel therapies if strict eligibility criteria (SEC) were utilized compared to more liberal modified eligibility criteria (MEC, including ECOG 2, Child-Pugh-B7). METHODS: HCC patients who received sorafenib between 2008 and 2017 were included from the Canadian HCC CHORD Database. Patients were classified as eligible or ineligible based on available CELESTIAL, RESORCE, and REACH-2 trial SEC or MEC. Median overall survival (mOS) was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 730 patients were identified; and 172 (23.6%) received subsequent treatment. Patients who received subsequent treatment had longer mOS than those who did not (12.1 vs 3.3 months; P < .001). Using SEC, only 13.1% of patients would be eligible for cabozantinib, regorafenib, or ramucirumab. Expanding eligibility to include patients who meet MEC increased the proportion of eligible patients to 31.7%. Higher ineligibility for regorafenib and ramucirumab was driven by trial-specific criteria, including sorafenib intolerance (28%) for RESORCE and AFP <400 (58.9%) for REACH-2. CONCLUSIONS: A small proportion of real-world HCC patients would be eligible for cabozantinib, regorafenib, or ramucirumab if SEC in clinical trials were followed, while more than double would be eligible if MEC were applied. Patients who received subsequent treatment had improved mOS, regardless of whether they met SEC or MEC.

Assessment of Treatment With Sorafenib Plus Doxorubicin vs Sorafenib Alone in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Phase 3 CALGB 80802 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Previous communication has reported significant improvement in overall survival (OS) when using doxorubicin plus sorafenib in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular cancer (HCC). OBJECTIVE: To determine if doxorubicin added to sorafenib therapy improves OS, with stratification for locally advanced and metastatic disease. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This unblinded randomized phase 3 clinical trial was led by Alliance in collaboration with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network, Canadian Cancer Trials Group, and Southwest Oncology Group. It was launched in February 2010 and completed in May 2015; data were also analyzed during this time frame. Patients with histologically proven advanced HCC, no prior systemic therapy, Child-Pugh grade A score, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2 (later amended to 0-1), and adequate hematologic, hepatic, renal, and cardiac function were eligible. The OS primary end point had a final analysis planned with 364 events observed among 480 total patients with 90% power to detect a 37% increase in median OS. INTERVENTIONS OR EXPOSURES: Patients received either 60 mg/m2 of doxorubicin every 21 days plus 400 mg of sorafenib orally twice daily or the sorafenib alone, adjusted to half doses for patients with bilirubin levels of 1.3 to 3.0 mg/dL. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was OS, and progression-free survival (PFS) was a secondary end point. RESULTS: Of 356 patients included in the study, the mean (SD) age was 62 (10.1) years, and 306 (86.0%) were men. Although it was planned to include 480 patients, the study was halted after accrual of 356 patients (180 patients treated with doxorubicin plus sorafenib and 176 with sorafenib alone) with a futility boundary crossed at a planned interim analysis. Median OS was 9.3 months (95% CI, 7.3-10.8 months) in the doxorubicin plus sorafenib arm and 9.4 months (95% CI, 7.3-12.9 months) in the sorafenib alone arm (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83-1.31). The median PFS was 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.4-4.9 months) in the doxorubicin plus sorafenib arm and 3.7 months (95% CI, 2.9-4.5 months) in the sorafenib alone arm (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.75-1.16). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia adverse events occurred in 61 (36.8%) and 29 (17.5%) patients, respectively, being treated with doxorubicin plus sorafenib vs 1 (0.6%) and 4 (2.4%) patients treated with sorafenib. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This multigroup study of the addition of doxorubicin to sorafenib therapy did not show improvement of OS or PFS in patients with HCC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01015833.

Prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sorafenib: a comparison of five models in a large Canadian database.

Several systems (tumor-node-metastasis [TNM], Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer [BCLC], Okuda, Cancer of the Liver Italian Program [CLIP], and albumin-bilirubin grade [ALBI]) were developed to estimate the prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) mostly prior to the prevalent use of sorafenib. We aimed to compare the prognostic and discriminatory power of these models in predicting survival for HCC patients treated with sorafenib and to identify independent prognostic factors for survival in this population. Patients who received sorafenib for the treatment of HCC between 1 January 2008 and 30 June 2015 in the provinces of British Columbia and Alberta, and two large cancer centers in Toronto, Ontario, were included. Survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate Cox regression was used to identify predictors of survival. The models were compared with respect to homogeneity, discriminatory ability, monotonicity of gradients, time-dependent area under the curve, and Akaike information criterion. A total of 681 patients were included. 80% were males, 86% had Child-Pugh class A, and 37% of patients were East Asians. The most common etiology for liver disease was hepatitis B (34%) and C (31%). In all model comparisons, CLIP performed better while BCLC and TNM7 performed less favorably but the differences were small. The utility of each system in allocating patients into different prognostic groups varied, for example, TNM poorly differentiated patients in advanced stages (8.7 months (m) (95% CI 6.5-11.5) versus 8.4 m (95% CI 7.0-9.6) for stages III and IV, respectively) while ALBI had excellent discrimination of early grades (15.6 m [95% CI 13.0-18.4] versus 8.3 m [95% CI 7.0-9.2] for grades 1 and 2, respectively). On multivariate analysis, hepatitis C, alcoholism, and prior hepatic resection were independently prognostic of better survival (P < 0.01). In conclusion, none of the prognostic systems was optimal in predicting survival in sorafenib-treated patients with HCC. Etiology of liver disease should be considered in future models and clinical trial designs.

The Evolution of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Clinical Trials: Application of the ASCO Framework for Assessing Value.

Background: Phase III trials in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) have collectively led to progressive advancements in patient outcomes over the past decades. This study characterizes the evolution of mCRC phase III trials through assessing the value of cancer therapy, as measured by the ASCO Value Framework. Methods: Phase III trial results of systemic therapy for mCRC published between 1980 and 2015 were identified, and their outcome, statistical significance, journal impact factor, and citation by the 2016 NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for CRC were recorded. For each trial, the net health benefit (NHB) score was calculated using the June 2015 (original) and May 2016 (revised) ASCO Value Framework: Advanced Disease. Results: There were 114 mCRC phase III trials eligible for calculation of the NHB score. Using the revised framework, the median NHB score was 4.6 (range, -30 to 43.5); 12% of trials received bonus points. Trials with statistically significant results had higher NHB scores compared with nonsignificant trials (median NHB score, 21.6 vs 2.9; P<.0001). Clinical trials cited in the NCCN Guidelines had higher NHB scores than those not cited (median score, 8.0 vs 0.3; P=.02). In multivariate linear regression analysis, the only significant predictor of high NHB score was statistically significant studies. Conclusions: The median NHB score for mCRC phase III trials was 4.6. Higher NHB scores are associated with statistically significant studies and are cited in the NCCN Guidelines, a surrogate for practice-changing trials. The 2016 ASCO Value Framework may not fully capture the benefits on an individual patient level.

Drug development for breast, colorectal, and non-small cell lung cancers from 1979 to 2014.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the drug development pathway is critical for streamlining the development of effective cancer treatments. The objective of the current study was to delineate the drug development timeline and attrition rate of different drug classes for common cancer disease sites. METHODS: Drugs entering clinical trials for breast, colorectal, and non-small cell lung cancer were identified using a pharmaceutical business intelligence database. Data regarding drug characteristics, clinical trials, and approval dates were obtained from the database, clinical trial registries, PubMed, and regulatory Web sites. RESULTS: A total of 411 drugs met the inclusion criteria for breast cancer, 246 drugs met the inclusion criteria for colorectal cancer, and 315 drugs met the inclusion criteria for non-small cell lung cancer. Attrition rates were 83.9% for breast cancer, 87.0% for colorectal cancer, and 92.0% for non-small cell lung cancer drugs. In the case of non-small cell lung cancer, there was a trend toward higher attrition rates for targeted monoclonal antibodies compared with other agents. No tumor site-specific differences were noted with regard to cytotoxic chemotherapy, immunomodulatory, or small molecule kinase inhibitor drugs. Drugs classified as "others" in breast cancer had lower attrition rates, primarily due to the higher success of hormonal medications. Mean drug development times were 8.9 years for breast cancer, 6.7 years for colorectal cancer, and 6.6 years for non-small cell lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Overall oncologic drug attrition rates remain high, and drugs are more likely to fail in later-stage clinical trials. The refinement of early-phase trial design may permit the selection of drugs that are more likely to succeed in the phase 3 setting. Cancer 2017;123:4672-4679. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Tumour thrombus of the inferior vena cava extending into the right atrium in the setting of colon cancer.

Tumour thrombus is seen in renal cell and hepatocellular carcinoma, but is rarely reported in colorectal cancer. A woman aged 46 years, with metastatic colonic adenocarcinoma, was found to have a large mass in the inferior vena cava (IVC) extending into the right atrium. Although this lesion was initially thought to be bland thrombus, imaging with contrast-enhanced CT scan and contrast-enhanced ultrasound supported the diagnosis of tumour thrombus. Despite the large size of the lesion, the patient was asymptomatic. Her lack of symptoms, and poor overall prognosis from her cancer led to the decision to avoid aggressive surgical or radiological interventions. Several months later, the patient passed away. At autopsy, there was no evidence of fatal embolisation from the pre-existing thrombus. Diagnosis of tumour thrombus in the IVC is difficult and management can be challenging due to the significant risks associated with treatment options.