Integrated Capecitabine-Temozolomide with Radioembolization for Liver-Dominant G2 NETs: Long-Term Outcomes of a Single-Institution Retrospective Study.

PURPOSE: Capecitabine-Temozolomide (CapTem) is an oral chemotherapy regimen for NETs. Both drugs are radiosensitizers. Integrating CapTem and Y90 transarterial radioembolization (TARE) in patients with grade 2 neuroendocrine tumor (NET) liver metastases achieved an encouraging objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) in a feasibility study. This study expands that report to a larger cohort with longer follow-up. METHODS: Therapy consisted of monthly cycles of capecitabine 600 mg/m2 twice daily for 14 days and temozolomide 150-200 mg/m2 on day 10-14. Simulation angiography was performed during the initial cycle. The dominant lobe was treated with 90Y-resin microspheres using BSA dosimetry on day 7 of the second cycle of CapTem. Patients with bilobar disease had the other lobe treated on day 7 of the third or fourth cycle. CapTem was continued until progression or intolerance. Clinical and laboratory assessment was done monthly and imaging every 3 months. RESULTS: 35/37 patients completed the prescribed regimen. Primary sites of disease were pancreas (16), lung (10), gut (7) and unknown (4). Mean duration of CapTem was 12 months (range, 4-32 months). ORR in the liver was 72% with a disease control rate of 100%. Median PFS was 36 months (95% CI, 25-45 months). Median overall survival was 41 months (95% CI, 24-87 months) from initiation of CapTemY90 therapy and 130 months (95% CI, 56-172 months) from initial diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Chemoradiation with CapTem and TARE provided durable control of G2 NET liver metastases for substantially longer than expectations for embolotherapy or chemotherapy alone.

The Clinical Implications of Reversions in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer and Pathogenic Variants in BRCA1, BRCA2, or PALB2 after Progression on Rucaparib.

PURPOSE: PARP inhibitors (PARPi) provide an effective maintenance option for patients with BRCA- or PALB2-mutated pancreatic cancer. However, mechanisms of PARPi resistance and optimal post-PARPi therapeutic strategies are poorly characterized. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We collected paired cell-free DNA samples and post-PARPi clinical data on 42 patients with advanced, platinum-sensitive pancreatic cancer who were treated with maintenance rucaparib on NCT03140670, of whom 32 developed progressive disease. RESULTS: Peripherally detected, acquired BRCA or PALB2 reversion variants were uncommon (5/30; 16.6%) in patients who progressed on rucaparib. Reversions were significantly associated with rapid resistance to PARPi treatment (median PFS, 3.7 vs. 12.5 months; P = 0.001) and poor overall survival (median OS, 6.2 vs. 23.0 months; P < 0.0001). All patients with reversions received rechallenge with platinum-based chemotherapy following PARPi progression and experienced faster progression on this therapy than those without reversion variants (real-world time-to-treatment discontinuation, 2.4 vs. 5.8 months; P = 0.004). Of the patients who progressed on PARPi and received further chemotherapy, the OS from initiation of second-line therapy was significantly lower in those with reversion variants than in those without (5.5 vs. 12.0 months, P = 0.002). Finally, high levels of tumor shedding were independently associated with poor outcomes in patients who received rucaparib. CONCLUSIONS: Acquired reversion variants were uncommon but detrimental in a population of patients with advanced BRCA- or PALB2-related pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who received maintenance rucaparib. Reversion variants led to rapid progression on PARPi, rapid failure of subsequent platinum-based treatment, and poor OS of patients. The identification of such variants in the blood may have both predictive and prognostic value. See related commentary by Tsang and Gallinger, p. 5005.

Multianalyte Prognostic Signature Including Circulating Tumor DNA and Circulating Tumor Cells in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is associated with a poor prognosis. Multianalyte signatures, including liquid biopsy and traditional clinical variables, have shown promise for improving prognostication in other solid tumors but have not yet been rigorously assessed for PDAC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of patients with newly diagnosed locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) or metastatic PDAC (mPDAC) who were planned to undergo systemic therapy. We collected peripheral blood before systemic therapy and assessed circulating tumor cells (CTCs), cell-free DNA concentration (cfDNA), and circulating tumor KRAS (ctKRAS)-variant allele fraction (VAF). Association of variables with overall survival (OS) was assessed in univariate and multivariate survival analysis, and comparisons were made between models containing liquid biopsy variables combined with traditional clinical prognostic variables versus models containing traditional clinical prognostic variables alone. RESULTS: One hundred four patients, 40 with LAPC and 64 with mPDAC, were enrolled. CTCs, cfDNA concentration, and ctKRAS VAF were all significantly higher in patients with mPDAC than patients with LAPC. ctKRAS VAF (cube root; 0.05 unit increments; hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.21; P = .01), and CTCs ≥ 1/mL (hazard ratio, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.34 to 3.69; P = .002) were significantly associated with worse OS in multivariate analysis while cfDNA concentration was not. A model selected by backward selection containing traditional clinical variables plus liquid biopsy variables had better discrimination of OS compared with a model containing traditional clinical variables alone (optimism-corrected Harrell's C-statistic 0.725 v 0.681). CONCLUSION: A multianalyte prognostic signature containing CTCs, ctKRAS, and cfDNA concentration outperformed a model containing traditional clinical variables alone suggesting that CTCs, ctKRAS, and cfDNA provide prognostic information complementary to traditional clinical variables in advanced PDAC.

Implementing Pharmacogenetic Testing in Gastrointestinal Cancers (IMPACT-GI): Study Protocol for a Pragmatic Implementation Trial for Establishing DPYD and UGT1A1 Screening to Guide Chemotherapy Dosing.

Background: Fluoropyrimidines (fluorouracil [5-FU], capecitabine) and irinotecan are commonly prescribed chemotherapy agents for gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies. Pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing for germline DPYD and UGT1A1 variants associated with reduced enzyme activity holds the potential to identify patients at high risk for severe chemotherapy-induced toxicity. Slow adoption of PGx testing in routine clinical care is due to implementation barriers, including long test turnaround times, lack of integration in the electronic health record (EHR), and ambiguity in test cost coverage. We sought to establish PGx testing in our health system following the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework as a guide. Our implementation study aims to address barriers to PGx testing. Methods: The Implementing Pharmacogenetic Testing in Gastrointestinal Cancers (IMPACT-GI) study is a non-randomized, pragmatic, open-label implementation study at three sites within a major academic health system. Eligible patients with a GI malignancy indicated for treatment with 5-FU, capecitabine, or irinotecan will undergo PGx testing prior to chemotherapy initiation. Specimens will be sent to an academic clinical laboratory followed by return of results in the EHR with appropriate clinical decision support for the care team. We hypothesize that the availability of a rapid turnaround PGx test with specific dosing recommendations will increase PGx test utilization to guide pharmacotherapy decisions and improve patient safety outcomes. Primary implementation endpoints are feasibility, fidelity, and penetrance. Exploratory analyses for clinical effectiveness of genotyping will include assessing grade ≥3 treatment-related toxicity using available clinical data, patient-reported outcomes, and quality of life measures. Conclusion: We describe the formative work conducted to prepare our health system for DPYD and UGT1A1 testing. Our prospective implementation study will evaluate the clinical implementation of this testing program and create the infrastructure necessary to ensure sustainability of PGx testing in our health system. The results of this study may help other institutions interested in implementing PGx testing in oncology care. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04736472, identifier [NCT04736472].

Niraparib plus nivolumab or niraparib plus ipilimumab in patients with platinum-sensitive advanced pancreatic cancer: a randomised, phase 1b/2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Establishing alternatives to lifelong chemotherapy for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer has been proposed to address chemotherapy resistance and cumulative toxicity. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have shown efficacy in this setting, and concurrent immune checkpoint blockade could offer synergistic tumour control. The aim of this study was to test the safety and antitumour activity of maintenance with PARP inhibition combined with immune checkpoint blockade in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who had a stable response to platinum-based chemotherapy. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, randomised, phase 1b/2 study of niraparib plus anti-PD-1 (nivolumab) or anti-CTLA-4 (ipilimumab) therapy for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer whose cancer had not progressed after at least 16 weeks of platinum-based therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via permuted block randomisation (block sizes 2 and 4) to niraparib 200 mg orally per day plus either nivolumab 240 mg intravenously every 2 weeks (later changed to 480 mg intravenously every 4 weeks based on manufacturer update) or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg intravenously every 4 weeks for four doses. The primary endpoints were safety and progression-free survival at 6 months. Treatment groups were not compared for activity, which was assessed in each group against a clinically meaningful progression-free survival at 6 months of 44% (null hypothesis). Superiority of a treatment regimen could be declared if 6-month progression-free survival was 60%, and inferiority if 6-month progression-free survival was 27%. All patients who received at least one dose of study treatment and had at least one post-treatment assessment of response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1 were included in the efficacy population. The safety population consisted of all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03404960, and enrolment is completed and follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: 91 patients were enrolled between Feb 7, 2018, and Oct 5, 2021 and were randomly assigned to niraparib plus nivolumab (n=46) or niraparib plus ipilimumab (n=45). Of these patients, 84 were evaluable for the progression-free survival endpoint (niraparib plus nivolumab=44; niraparib plus ipilimumab=40). Median follow-up was 23·0 months (IQR 15·0-31·5). 6-month progression-free survival was 20·6% (95% CI 8·3-32·9; p=0·0002 vs the null hypothesis of 44%) in the niraparib plus nivolumab group; and 59·6% (44·3-74·9; p=0·045) in the niraparib plus ipilimumab group. Ten (22%) of 46 patients in the niraparib plus nivolumab group and 23 (50%) of 45 patients in the niraparib plus ipilimumab group had a grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse event. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the niraparib plus nivolumab group were hypertension (in four [8%] patients), anaemia (two [4%]), and thrombocytopenia (two [4%]) whereas in the niraparib plus ipilimumab group these were fatigue (in six [14%]), anaemia (five [11%]), and hypertension (four [9%]). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: The primary endpoint of 6-month progression-free survival was met in the niraparib plus ipilimumab maintenance group, whereas niraparib plus nivolumab yielded inferior progression-free survival. These findings highlight the potential for non-cytotoxic maintenance therapies in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, the Basser Center Young Leadership Council, The Konner Foundation, The Pearl and Philip Basser Innovation Research Award, the Anonymous Foundation, and the US National Institutes of Health.

Phase I Trial of Regorafenib, Hydroxychloroquine, and Entinostat in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitor regorafenib provides a survival benefit in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Antiangiogenic therapy causes hypoxic stress within tumor cells, which activates autophagy as a survival mechanism. The histone deacetylase inhibitor (HDAC) entinostat increases dependence on autophagy through epigenetic mechanisms. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) blocks autophagy by blunting lysosomal acidification. We hypothesized that HCQ and entinostat would be tolerable with regorafenib and potentiate the antitumor response. METHODS: This was a 3+3 phase I trial of HCQ and entinostat with regorafenib in patients with metastatic CRC. The primary objective was safety, and the secondary objective was clinical efficacy. RESULTS: Twenty patients received study therapy. Six evaluable patients were enrolled at each of the three planned dose levels, one patient at an intermediate dose level, and one additional patient withdrew consent after 4 days to receive treatment closer to home. One dose-limiting toxicity was noted in the study at dose level 2 (grade 3 fatigue). Seven patients discontinued therapy due to related toxicities; rapid weight loss was near universal, with a median weight loss of 4.4 kg (range 1.5-12.2 kg) in the first 2 weeks of treatment. No objective responses were observed. CONCLUSION: The combination of regorafenib, HCQ, and entinostat was poorly tolerated without evident activity in metastatic CRC. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03215264.

Preemptive pharmacogenetic testing to guide chemotherapy dosing in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies: a qualitative study of barriers to implementation.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing for germline variants in the DPYD and UGT1A1 genes can be used to guide fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan dosing, respectively. Despite the known association between PGx variants and chemotherapy toxicity, preemptive testing prior to chemotherapy initiation is rarely performed in routine practice. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study of oncology clinicians to identify barriers to using preemptive PGx testing to guide chemotherapy dosing in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies. Each participant completed a semi-structured interview informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Interviews were analyzed using an inductive content analysis approach. RESULTS: Participants included sixteen medical oncologists and nine oncology pharmacists from one academic medical center and two community hospitals in Pennsylvania. Barriers to the use of preemptive PGx testing to guide chemotherapy dosing mapped to four CFIR domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, and characteristics of individuals. The most prominent themes included 1) a limited evidence base, 2) a cumbersome and lengthy testing process, and 3) a lack of insurance coverage for preemptive PGx testing. Additional barriers included clinician lack of knowledge, difficulty remembering to order PGx testing for eligible patients, challenges with PGx test interpretation, a questionable impact of preemptive PGx testing on clinical care, and a lack of alternative therapeutic options for some patients found to have actionable PGx variants. CONCLUSIONS: Successful adoption of preemptive PGx-guided chemotherapy dosing in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies will require a multifaceted effort to demonstrate clinical effectiveness while addressing the contextual factors identified in this study.

Quantifying the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gastrointestinal cancer care delivery.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: This study quantifies how changes in healthcare utilization and delivery during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic have altered the presentation, treatment, and management of patients with gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies within an academic health system. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients diagnosed with a GI malignancy (ICD10: C15-C26) who received medical care within the health system during the observation period (first 44 weeks of 2019 and 2020) were identified for a retrospective cohort study. Deidentified patient encounter parameters were collected for this observation period and separated into pre-pandemic (weeks 1-10) and early pandemic (weeks 11-20) study periods. Difference-in-difference analyses adjusted for week-specific and year-specific effects quantified the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on care delivery between pre-pandemic and early pandemic study periods in 2020. Across all GI malignancies, the COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with a significant decline in the number of patients with new patient visits (NPVs) (p = 1.2 × 10-4 ), Radiology encounters (p = 1.9 × 10-7 ), Surgery encounters (p = 1.6 × 10-3 ), Radiation Oncology encounters (p = 4.1 × 10-3 ), and infusion visits (6.1 × 10-5 ). Subgroup analyses revealed cancer-specific variations in changes to delivery. Patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) had the most significant decrease in NPVs (p = 7.1 × 10-5 ), which was significantly associated with a concomitant decrease in colonoscopies performed during the early pandemic period (r2  = 0.722, p = 2.1 × 10-10 ). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with significant disruptions to care delivery. While these effects were appreciated broadly across GI malignancies, CRC, diagnosed and managed by periodic screening, has been affected most acutely.

Concurrent Nab-paclitaxel and Radiotherapy: Novel Radiosensitization for Borderline Resectable or Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer.

PURPOSE: This study evaluates the toxicity and tumor response with concurrent nab-paclitaxel chemoradiotherapy (CRT) compared with standard (5-fluorouracil or gemcitabine) CRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty patients with borderline resectable or unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma from 2014 to 2017 were divided into 2 groups: concurrent nab-paclitaxel (100 to 125 mg/m2 weekly) CRT (median: 2.1 Gy fraction size and 52.5 Gy total) or standard CRT (median: 1.8 Gy fraction size, 54.5 Gy total). The primary endpoint was toxicity, and secondary endpoints were local failure and conversion to resectability. Comparisons were made using rank-sum or Fisher exact test and multivariable competing risk regression for the cumulative incidence of local failure. RESULTS: There were 28 patients in the nab-paclitaxel CRT group and 22 in the standard CRT group; 88% had the unresectable disease. The median follow-up was 18 months. The median duration of chemotherapy before concurrent CRT was 1.9 and 2.3 months in the nab-paclitaxel and standard CRT groups (P=0.337), and radiotherapy dose was 52.5 Gy (range, 52.5 to 59.4 Gy) and 54.5 Gy (range, 45.0 to 59.4 Gy), respectively. There were no statistically significant grade ≥2 toxicities. The nab-paclitaxel CRT group experienced a nonstatistically significant lower incidence of local failure (hazard ratio=0.91, 95% confidence interval: 0.27-3.03, P=0.536). More patients in the nab-paclitaxel CRT group proceeded to surgery (9/28 compared with 3/22 in the standard CRT, P=0.186); of which 6 (25%) in the nab-paclitaxel CRT and 2 (10%) in the standard CRT groups were initially unresectable. CONCLUSIONS: Nab-paclitaxel CRT had similar toxicity compared with standard CRT in the treatment of borderline resectable or unresectable pancreatic cancer. Its use was associated with an arithmetically lower cumulative incidence of local failure and an arithmetically higher conversion to resectability, both of which were not statistically significant.

Phase II Study of Maintenance Rucaparib in Patients With Platinum-Sensitive Advanced Pancreatic Cancer and a Pathogenic Germline or Somatic Variant in BRCA1, BRCA2, or PALB2.

PURPOSE: Olaparib, a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor (PARPi), is approved as maintenance therapy for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (PC) and a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variant (PV). This investigator-initiated, single-arm phase II study assessed the role of the PARPi rucaparib as maintenance therapy in advanced PC with germline or somatic PV in BRCA1, BRCA2, or PALB2. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had advanced PC; germline (g) or somatic (s) PVs in BRCA1, BRCA2, or PALB2, and received at least 16 weeks of platinum-based chemotherapy without evidence of platinum resistance. Chemotherapy was discontinued and patients received rucaparib 600 mg orally twice a day until progression. The primary end point was the progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months (PFS6). Secondary end points included safety, ORR, disease control rate, duration of response, and overall survival. RESULTS: Of 46 enrolled patients, 42 were evaluable (27 gBRCA2, seven gBRCA1, six gPALB2, and two sBRCA2). PFS6 was 59.5% (95% CI, 44.6 to 74.4), median PFS was 13.1 months (95% CI, 4.4 to 21.8), and median overall survival was 23.5 months (95% CI, 20 to 27). The PFS at 12 months was 54.8%. ORR of the 36 patients with measurable disease was 41.7% (3 complete responses; 12 partial responses; 95% CI, 25.5 to 59.2), and disease control rate was 66.7% (95% CI, 49.0 to 81.4). Median duration of response was 17.3 months (95% CI, 8.8 to 25.8). Responses occurred in patients with gBRCA2 (41%, 11 out of 27), gPALB2 (50%, 3 out of 6), and sBRCA2 (50%, 1 out of 2). No new safety signals were noted. CONCLUSION: Maintenance rucaparib is a safe and effective therapy for platinum-sensitive, advanced PC with a PV in BRCA1, BRCA2, or PALB2. The finding of efficacy in patients with gPALB2 and sBRCA2 PVs expands the population likely to benefit from PARPi beyond gBRCA1/2 PV carriers.

DPYD and UGT1A1 Pharmacogenetic Testing in Patients with Gastrointestinal Malignancies: An Overview of the Evidence and Considerations for Clinical Implementation.

Gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies are among the most commonly diagnosed cancers worldwide. Despite the introduction of targeted and immunotherapy agents in the treatment landscape, cytotoxic agents, such as fluoropyrimidines and irinotecan, remain as the cornerstone of chemotherapy for many of these tumors. Pharmacogenetics (PGx) is a rapidly evolving field that accounts for interpatient variability in drug metabolism to predict therapeutic response and toxicity. Given the significant incidence of severe treatment-related adverse events associated with cytotoxic agents, utilizing PGx can allow clinicians to better anticipate drug tolerability while minimizing treatment interruptions or delays. In this review, the PGx profiles of drug-gene pairs with potential impact in GI malignancy therapy - DPYD-5-fluorouracil/capecitabine and UGT1A1-irinotecan - and the available clinical evidence of their roles in reducing severe adverse events are discussed. Considerations for clinical implementation, such as optimal laboratory workflows, electronic health record integration, and stakeholder engagement, as well as provider education, are addressed. Last, exploratory PGx markers in GI malignancy treatment are described. As the PGx knowledge base rapidly evolves, pharmacists will be vital in leveraging their pharmacology knowledge and clinical skills to implement PGx testing in the clinic.

Phase II Trial of Palbociclib in Patients with Advanced Esophageal or Gastric Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: Palbociclib monotherapy demonstrated minimal clinical activity in patients with previously treated gastroesophageal cancers. Further clinical evaluation of palbociclib monotherapy is not warranted in gastroesophageal cancers, but improved understanding of resistance mechanisms may permit rational combination approaches. BACKGROUND: Dysregulation of the cell cycle is a hallmark of cancer. Progression through the G1/S transition requires phosphorylation of retinoblastoma (RB) by cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) 4 and 6, which are regulated by cyclins D and E. Amplifications of cyclin D loci and activating mutations in CDKs are frequent molecular aberrations in gastroesophageal malignancies. We conducted a phase II trial of the CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib as an initial test of efficacy. METHODS: Patients with previously treated metastatic gastroesophageal cancers with intact RB nuclear expression by immunohistochemistry were treated with 125 mg daily of palbociclib for days 1-21 of 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall response rate. RESULTS: We screened 29 patients and enrolled 21 patients: 5 with gastric adenocarcinoma, 3 with gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, 8 with esophageal adenocarcinoma, and 5 with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. All 29 tumors screened had intact nuclear RB expression, and four treated patients tested positive for CCND1 overexpression. No objective responses were seen. Median progression-free survival was 1.8 months, and median overall survival was 3.0 months. All recurrent grade 3 or 4 toxicities were hematologic, with neutropenia in eight patients (38%), anemia in four patients (19%), and thrombocytopenia in two patients (10%). CONCLUSION: Palbociclib has limited single-agent activity in gastroesophageal tumors.

Effect of Gemcitabine and nab-Paclitaxel With or Without Hydroxychloroquine on Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Autophagy is a mechanism of treatment resistance to chemotherapy that has a role in the maintenance of pancreatic cancer. Hydroxychloroquine sulfate (HCQ) is an inhibitor of autophagy that inhibits the fusion of the autophagosome to the lysosome. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether HCQ improves overall survival at 1 year in combination with gemcitabine hydrochloride and nab-paclitaxel (GA) among patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Open-label, phase 2 randomized clinical trial conducted between March 18, 2013, and November 16, 2017, at the University of Pennsylvania, HonorHealth, and The Johns Hopkins University among 112 patients with previously untreated metastatic or advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate marrow and organ function. All efficacy analyses were performed for the intention-to-treat population. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive GA with or without HCQ. All patients received standard doses of GA, and those randomized to receive HCQ were treated continuously with 600 mg orally twice daily. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE: Overall survival at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients (45 women and 67 men; median age, 65 years; range, 43-86 years) were enrolled; 55 were randomized to receive GA plus HCQ, and 57 to receive GA. Overall survival at 12 months was 41% (95% CI, 27%-53%) in the HCQ group and 49% (95% CI, 35%-61%) in the non-HCQ group. Median progression-free survival was 5.7 months (95% CI, 4.0-9.3 months) in the HCQ group and 6.4 months (95% CI, 4.5-7.6 months) in the non-HCQ group. Median overall survival was 11.1 months (95% CI, 9.0-14.2 months) in the HCQ group and 12.1 months (95% CI, 9.3-15.5 months) in the non-HCQ group. Overall response rate was 38.2% (n = 21) in the HCQ group and 21.1% (n = 12) in the non-HCQ group (P = .047). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events that differed between the HCQ and non-HCQ groups were neutropenia (23 of 54 [42.6%] vs 12 of 53 [22.6%]), anemia (2 of 54 [3.7%] vs 9 of 53 [17.0%]), fatigue (4 of 54 [7.4%] vs 0), nausea (5 of 54 [9.3%] vs 0), peripheral neuropathy (7 of 54 [13.0%] vs 3 of 53 [5.7%]), visual changes (3 of 54 [5.6%] vs 0), and neuropsychiatric symptoms (3 of 54 [5.6%] vs 0). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The addition of HCQ to block autophagy did not improve the primary end point of overall survival at 12 months. These data do not support the routine use of GA plus HCQ for metastatic pancreatic cancer in the absence of a biomarker. However, improvement seen in the overall response rate with HCQ may indicate a role for HCQ in the locally advanced setting, where tumor response may permit resection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01506973.

Efficacy of Oral Cryotherapy During Oxaliplatin Infusion in Preventing Oral Thermal Hyperalgesia: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced oral thermal hyperalgesia (OTH) is a common and debilitating side effect of platinum-based anticancer agents. This study evaluated the efficacy of oral cryotherapy in preventing OTH during oxaliplatin chemotherapy infusion. METHODS: Patients with gastrointestinal cancer treated with biweekly oxaliplatin (85 mg/m2 over 120 minutes) at Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania were randomized to receive oral cryotherapy (ice chips) during oxaliplatin infusion or standard-of-care treatment. All patients completed baseline questionnaires regarding oral and peripheral symptoms and on-treatment questionnaires on day 1 of each subsequent chemotherapy cycle. Those in the treatment arm were asked to document how long they kept the ice chips in their mouths (0, <30, 30, 60, 90, or 120 minutes) and to report their discomfort associated with oral cryotherapy. Evaluable patients were those who had completed at least 2 cycles of oxaliplatin therapy. RESULTS: Of 62 randomized patients with a variety of gastrointestinal malignancies, 50 (25 per treatment arm) were evaluable for efficacy. The rate of patients with oral symptoms after the first treatment cycle was significantly lower in the intervention arm (n=8; 32%) than in the control arm (n=18; 72%), meeting the primary study objective (P=.01). The magnitude of difference in symptom scores before versus after the first treatment cycle was significantly less in the intervention versus control arm (P=.001). No difference in oral symptoms over time was seen between the intervention and control groups (P=.20), although a high attrition rate was noted. Duration of ice chip exposure was associated with improved oral symptoms over time (P=.02). CONCLUSIONS: Oral cryotherapy is a tolerable and cost-effective method of diminishing OTH in patients receiving oxaliplatin chemotherapy, and seems to be most effective in the early stages of treatment.

Retrospective Survival Analysis of Patients With Resected Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma and a Germline BRCA or PALB2 Mutation.

PURPOSE: Germline mutations in the homologous recombination genes BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 confer an increased risk for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Tumors associated with mutations in homologous recombination genes are sensitive to DNA-damaging agents. We retrospectively studied patients with resected PDAC and a pathogenic germline mutation in one of these three genes. The planned analyses included overall survival (OS) and changes therein when platinum chemotherapy was used in the perioperative setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-two individuals with pathogenic germline mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, or PALB2 and resected PDAC (mutation positive) were matched in a 1:2 fashion to patients who were noncarriers or untested (mutation negative) by age, year of diagnosis, stage, and sex. Patients were identified via one of two available databases at University of Pennsylvania: the Basser Center for BRCA Registry or the electronic medical record. The primary outcome was OS. RESULTS: Patients in the mutation-positive group had a median OS (mOS) of 46.6 months; those in the mutation-negative group had an mOS of 23.2 months (hazard ratio [HR], 0.49; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.88). With platinum exposure in the perioperative setting, mOS in the mutation-positive group had not yet been met versus a mOS of 23.1 months in the mutation-negative group (HR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.01 to 1.00). When neither group was treated with platinum, there was no significant OS difference between groups (HR, 0.52; 95% CI 0.12 to 2.24). Patients in the mutation-positive group who received perioperative treatment with platinum had a trend toward improved mOS compared with those who did not (HR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.02 to 1.23; P = .07). CONCLUSION: Platinum-based chemotherapy may confer a survival benefit in patients with resected PDAC and a pathogenic germline BRCA1, BRCA2, or PALB2 mutation. Knowledge of a germline mutation may be important to determine best choice of perioperative chemotherapy.

Safety and Feasibility of Integrating Yttrium-90 Radioembolization With Capecitabine-Temozolomide for Grade 2 Liver-Dominant Metastatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

OBJECTIVES: An integrated protocol combining capecitibine-temozolomide with yttrium-90 radioembolization (CapTemY90) for liver-dominant grade 2 neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) was designed in the hope of achieving synergistic improvement in liver disease control with no more than additive toxicities. This report describes the feasibility and safety of this regimen. METHODS: Twenty-one patients with unresectable grade 2 NET liver-dominant metastases without contraindications to radioembolization or to CapTem initiated therapy with capecitabine 600 mg/m twice daily for 14 days and temozolomide 150 to 200 mg/m in 2 divided doses on days 10 to 14, with 14 days between cycles. During the first cycle, simulation angiography was performed. The dominant lobe was radioembolized on day 7 of the second cycle. In patients with bilobar disease, the other lobe was treated on day 7 of the third or fourth cycle. RESULTS: Nineteen of 21 patients completed the protocol. Adverse events were as expected. Objective response rate was 74% in the liver and 55% for extrahepatic tumor. Median progression-free survival was not reached. Progression-free survival at 3 years was 67%, with 74% progression-free in the liver. CONCLUSIONS: CapTemY90 is feasible and safe for grade 2 NETs. Toxicities were additive. Oncologic outcomes suggest synergy.

E4206: AMG 706 and Octreotide in Patients with Low-Grade Neuroendocrine Tumors.

LESSONS LEARNED: Rate of progression-free survival at a particular point in time, i.e., a landmark analysis, is a difficult endpoint for a heterogenous malignancy such as neuroendocrine cancer.Landmark analyses can also be complicated by evolution in the standard of care during the conduct of a clinical trial.Improvements in biomarker development would be useful in developing future clinical trials in NET to better tailor individualized therapies and assess for possible efficacy endpoints. BACKGROUND: Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are rare malignancies of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract that are highly vascularized and overexpress vascular-endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Sunitinib has demonstrated efficacy in the pancreatic subset of NET. This study explored the activity of another oral VEGF inhibitor, AMG 706 or motesanib, a multikinase inhibitor that targets receptor tyrosine kinases, including VEGFR1, VEGFR2, VEGFR3, KIT, RET, and PDGFR (IC50s = 2, 3, 6, 8, 59, and 84 nM, respectively). METHODS: This was a single-arm, first-line, phase II study run through the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Patients with low-grade NET (as defined by central confirmation of Ki-67 of 0%-2%) were administered a flat dose of 125 mg per day orally combined with octreotide long acting-repeatable (LAR) for patients who had been on a stable dose. The primary objective was to determine the 4-month progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Forty-four patients were evaluated per protocol. The 4-month PFS was 78.5%. The partial response rate was 13.6% (6/44), stable disease was 54.5% (24/44), 9.1% (4/44) had progressive disease, and 10/44 were not evaluable for response. Common toxicities included fatigue, hypertension, nausea, and headache, and most were grade 1-2. Median PFS was 8.7 months, and overall survival was 27.5 months. CONCLUSION: Motesanib (AMG 706) demonstrated a 4-month PFS that met the per-protocol definition of efficacy. Fatigue and hypertension were the most common toxicities, and few grade 3-4 toxicities were encountered. The progression-free survival of 8.7 months in all NETs merits further study.

A phase I dose escalation trial of nab-paclitaxel and fixed dose radiation in patients with unresectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

PURPOSE: Patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer typically have poor outcomes, with a median survival of approximately 16 months. Novel methods to improve outcomes are needed. Nab-paclitaxel (Abraxane) has shown efficacy in pancreatic cancer and is FDA-approved for metastatic disease in combination with gemcitabine. Nab-paclitaxel is also a promising radiosensitizer based on laboratory studies, but it has never been clinically tested with definitive radiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma. METHODS: We performed a phase 1 study using a 3 + 3 dose escalation strategy to determine the safety and tolerability of dose-escalated nab-paclitaxel with fractionated radiotherapy for patients with unresectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Following induction chemotherapy with two cycles of nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine, patients were treated with weekly nab-paclitaxel and daily radiotherapy to a dose of 52.5 Gy in 25 fractions. Final dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) determination was performed at day 65 after the start of radiotherapy. RESULTS: Nine patients received nab-paclitaxel at a dose level of either 100 mg/m2 (n = 3) or 125 mg/m2 (n = 6). There were no observed grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicities. One DLT (grade 3 neuropathy) was observed in a patient who received 125 mg/m2 of nab-paclitaxel. Other grade 3 toxicities included fatigue (11%), anemia (11%) and neutropenia (11%). No grade 4 toxicities were observed. Following chemoradiotherapy, four patients (borderline resectable, n = 2 and unresectable, n = 2) underwent surgical resection, all with negative margins and with significant treatment effect with limited tumor viability. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of fractionated radiation and weekly full dose nab-paclitaxel was safe and well-tolerated.

Efficacy of Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy in a United States-Based Cohort of Metastatic Neuroendocrine Tumor Patients: Single-Institution Retrospective Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to analyze in a retrospective cohort study the outcomes of a United States-based group of metastatic neuroendocrine tumor (NET) patients who underwent peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT). METHODS: Twenty-eight patients from a single US NET Center were treated with PRRT. Toxicities were assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03. Progression was determined by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression was performed to identify potential predictors of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The median age at NET diagnosis was 56 years, 50% of the patients were male, 46% of NET primaries were located in the pancreas, 71% of tumors were nonfunctional, 25% were World Health Organization (WHO) grade III, and 20% had at least a 25% hepatic tumor burden. Anemia (36%) was the most common post-PRRT toxicity, followed by leukopenia (31%), nephrotoxicity (27%), and thrombocytopenia (24%). Median PFS was 18 months, and median OS was 38 months. Having a WHO grade III NET and receiving systemic chemotherapy prior to PRRT were found to be to independent predictors of shorter PFS and OS. CONCLUSIONS: Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy is an effective therapy in a US population. Progression-free survival and OS were better in WHO grade I/II NETs and when PRRT was sequenced prior to systemic chemotherapy.

Proton beam reirradiation for locally recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Local recurrence following definitive treatment for pancreatic adenocarcinoma is common and can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Retreatment options for these patients are limited. Proton beam reirradiation (PRT) may limit dose and toxicity to previously irradiated normal tissues in patients without evidence of metastatic disease. METHODS: Between 8/2010-2/2015, 15 patients with isolated, locally-recurrent pancreatic cancer were treated with PRT. Acute toxicity was graded using CTC v 4.0 and defined as occurring within 90 days. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed from the start of PRT. A log-rank test was used to compare survival with or without concurrent chemotherapy. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 15.7 months [2-48] from the start of PRT. The median clinical target volume (CTV) was 71 cc [15-200]. Ten (67%) patients received concurrent chemotherapy. Median PRT dose was 59.4 Gy (37.5-59.4 Gy). The median time interval from the prior treatment course was 26.7 months (7-461.3). There was a rate of 13% acute ≥ grade 3 toxicities attributed to PRT. The median overall survival (OS) was 16.7 months (95% CI, 4.7-36) and OS at 1 year was 67%. The "in-field" failure free survival at one year was 87%. The locoregional progression free survival (LPFS) and distant metastasis free survival (DMFS) at 1 year was 72% and 64% respectively. Concurrent chemotherapy was associated with a higher median survival. CONCLUSIONS: PRT was well tolerated, resulted in prolonged clinical outcomes compared to historical controls, and should be considered as a treatment option with concurrent chemotherapy in selected patients with locally-recurrent pancreatic cancer.