Feasibility of delivering supervised exercise training following surgical resection and during adjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PRECISE): a case series.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive neoplasm, with surgical resection and adjuvant chemotherapy the only curative treatment. Treatment-related toxicities place a considerable burden on patients although exercise training has shown promise is helping to manage such adversities and facilitate rehabilitation. The feasibility and safety of exercise training as a supportive therapy during adjuvant chemotherapy remains unknown. METHODS: Patients with PDAC were screened post-surgical resection and enrolled in a 16-week, progressive, concurrent exercise programme alongside their chemotherapy regimen. Feasibility was the primary objective detailing recruitment, retention and adherence rates throughout as well as the safety and fidelity of the intervention. Secondarily, the impact on functional fitness and patient-reported outcomes was captured at baseline, post-intervention and 3-month follow up. RESULTS: Eight patients consented to participate in this trial, with five proceeding to enrol in exercise training. Concurrent exercise training is feasible and safe during adjuvant chemotherapy and prevented an expected decline in functional fitness and patient-reported outcomes during this time. DISCUSSION: This case series provides preliminary evidence that concurrent exercise training during adjuvant therapy is safe, feasible and well tolerated, preventing an expected decline in functional fitness, muscular strength and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Given the adverse effects of treatment, these findings are promising and provide further evidence for the inclusion of exercise training as a standard of care for surgical rehabilitation and managing treatment-related toxicities. Future research should explore the impact of exercise training during neoadjuvant chemotherapy, with prehabilitation now standard practice for borderline resectable disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04305067, prospectively registered 12/03/2020, https://classic. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT04305067 .

A DNA-damage immune response assay combined with PET biomarkers predicts response to neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and survival in oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET-CT may guide treatment decisions in patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC). This study evaluated the added value of maximum standardised uptake value (SUVmax) to a novel DNA-damage immune response (DDIR) assay to improve pathological response prediction. The diagnostic accuracy of PET response and the prognostic significance of PET metrics for recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed. This was a retrospective, single-centre study of OAC patients treated with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy from 2003 to 2014. SUVmax was recorded from baseline and repeat PET-CT after completion of pre-operative chemotherapy. Logistic regression models tested the additional predictive value of PET metrics combined with the DDIR assay for pathological response. Cox regression models tested the prognostic significance of PET metrics for RFS and OS. In total, 113 patients were included; 25 (22.1%) were DDIR positive and 88 (77.9%) were DDIR negative. 69 (61.1%) were PET responders (SUVmax reduction of 35%) and 44 (38.9%) were PET non-responders. After adding PET metrics to DDIR status, post-chemotherapy SUVmax (hazard ratio (HR) 0.75, p = 0.02), SUVmax change (HR 1.04, p = 0.003) and an optimum SUVmax reduction of 46.5% (HR 4.36, p = 0.021) showed additional value for predicting pathological response. The optimised SUVmax threshold was independently significant for RFS (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.26-0.85, p = 0.012) and OS (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.26-0.99, p = 0.047). This study demonstrated the additional value of PET metrics, when combined with a novel DDIR assay, to predict pathological response in OAC patients treated with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. Furthermore, an optimised SUVmax reduction threshold for pathological response was calculated and was independently significant for RFS and OS.

Exercise efficacy and prescription during treatment for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection remains the only curative treatment for pancreatic cancer and is associated with significant post-operative morbidity and mortality. Patients eligible for surgery, increasingly receive neo-adjuvant therapy before surgery or adjuvant therapy afterward, inherently exposing them to toxicity. As such, optimizing physical function through exercise during treatment remains imperative to optimize quality of life either before surgery or during rehabilitation. However, current exercise efficacy and prescription in pancreatic cancer is unknown. Therefore, this study aims to summarise the published literature on exercise studies conducted in patients with pancreatic cancer undergoing treatment with a focus on determining the current prescription and progression patterns being used in this population. METHODS: A systematic review of four databases identified studies evaluating the effects of exercise on aerobic fitness, muscle strength, physical function, body composition, fatigue and quality of life in participants with pancreatic cancer undergoing treatment, published up to 24 July 2020. Two reviewers independently reviewed and appraised the methodological quality of each study. RESULTS: Twelve studies with a total of 300 participants were included. Heterogeneity of the literature prevented meta-analysis. Exercise was associated with improvements in outcomes; however, study quality was variable with the majority of studies receiving a weak rating. CONCLUSIONS: High quality evidence regarding the efficacy and prescription of exercise in pancreatic cancer is lacking. Well-designed trials, which have received feedback and input from key stakeholders prior to implementation, are required to examine the impact of exercise in pancreatic cancer on key cancer related health outcomes.

Considerations for the treatment of pancreatic cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: the UK consensus position.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic epicentre has moved to the USA and Europe, where it is placing unprecedented demands on healthcare resources and staff availability. These service constraints, coupled with concerns relating to an increased incidence and severity of COVID-19 among patients with cancer, should lead to re-consideration of the risk-benefit balance for standard treatment pathways. This is of particular importance to pancreatic cancer, given that standard diagnostic modalities such as endoscopy may be restricted, and that disease biology precludes significant delays in treatment. In light of this, we sought consensus from UK clinicians with an interest in pancreatic cancer for management approaches that would minimise patient risk and accommodate for healthcare service restrictions. The outcomes are described here and include recommendations for treatment prioritisation, strategies to bridge to later surgical resection in resectable disease and factors that modify the risk-benefit balance for treatment in the resectable through to the metastatic settings. Priority is given to strategies that limit hospital visits, including through the use of hypofractionated precision radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy treatment approaches.

Dual Erb B Inhibition in Oesophago-gastric Cancer (DEBIOC): A phase I dose escalating safety study and randomised dose expansion of AZD8931 in combination with oxaliplatin and capecitabine chemotherapy in patients with oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: AZD8931 has equipotent activity against epidermal growth factor receptor, erbB2, and erbB3. Primary objectives were to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of AZD8931 + chemotherapy, and subsequently assess safety/preliminary clinical activity in patients with operable oesophagogastric cancer (OGC). METHODS: AZD8931 (20 mg, 40 mg or 60 mg bd) was given with Xelox (oxaliplatin + capecitabine) for eight 21-day cycles, continuously or with intermittent schedule (4 days on/3 off every week; 14 days on/7 off, per cycle) in a rolling-six design. Subsequently, patients with OGC were randomised 2:1 to AZD8931 + Xelox at RP2D or Xelox only for two cycles, followed by radical oesophagogastric surgery. Secondary outcomes were safety, complete resection (R0) rate, six-month progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival. RESULTS: During escalation, four dose-limiting toxicities were observed among 24 patients: skin rash (1) and failure to deliver 100% of Xelox because of treatment-associated grade III-IV adverse events (AEs) (3: diarrhoea and vomiting; vomiting; fatigue). Serious adverse events (SAE) occurred in 15 of 24 (63%) patients. RP2D was 20-mg bd with the 4/3 schedule. In the expansion phase, 2 of 20 (10%) patients in the Xelox + AZD8931 group and 5/10 (50%) patients in the Xelox group had grade III-IV AEs. Six-month PFS was 85% (90% CI: 66%-94%) in Xelox + AZD8931 and 100% in Xelox alone. Seven deaths (35%) occurred with Xelox + AZD8931 and one (10%) with Xelox. R0 rate was 45% (9/20) with Xelox + AZD8931 and 90% (9/10) with Xelox-alone (P = 0.024). CONCLUSION: Xelox + AZD8931 (20 mg bd 4/3 days) has an acceptable safety profile administered as neoadjuvant therapy in operable patients with OGC. (Trial registration: EudraCT 2011-003169-13, ISRCTN-68093791).

Immune activation by DNA damage predicts response to chemotherapy and survival in oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: Current strategies to guide selection of neoadjuvant therapy in oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) are inadequate. We assessed the ability of a DNA damage immune response (DDIR) assay to predict response following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in OAC. DESIGN: Transcriptional profiling of 273 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded prechemotherapy endoscopic OAC biopsies was performed. All patients were treated with platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy and resection between 2003 and 2014 at four centres in the Oesophageal Cancer Clinical and Molecular Stratification consortium. CD8 and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemical staining was assessed in matched resection specimens from 126 cases. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis were applied according to DDIR status for recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 66 OAC samples (24%) were DDIR positive with the remaining 207 samples (76%) being DDIR negative. DDIR assay positivity was associated with improved RFS (HR: 0.61; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.98; p=0.042) and OS (HR: 0.52; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.88; p=0.015) following multivariate analysis. DDIR-positive patients had a higher pathological response rate (p=0.033), lower nodal burden (p=0.026) and reduced circumferential margin involvement (p=0.007). No difference in OS was observed according to DDIR status in an independent surgery-alone dataset.DDIR-positive OAC tumours were also associated with the presence of CD8+ lymphocytes (intratumoural: p<0.001; stromal: p=0.026) as well as PD-L1 expression (intratumoural: p=0.047; stromal: p=0.025). CONCLUSION: The DDIR assay is strongly predictive of benefit from DNA-damaging neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgical resection and is associated with a proinflammatory microenvironment in OAC.

Relative effectiveness of sunitinib versus everolimus in advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: an updated matching-adjusted indirect comparison.

AIM: A matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) of sunitinib and everolimus has been previously reported based on the RADIANT-3 everolimus trial. We performed an analysis using updated overall survival (OS) data based on sunitinib's trial (A6181111). METHODS: The MAIC matched on all baseline characteristics available from both studies. An anchored MAIC was performed for progression-free survival (PFS); an unanchored analysis was deemed more appropriate for OS due to crossover in both trials. A hazard ratio for sunitinib versus everolimus was derived from adjusted (weighted) sunitinib effects compared with the observed results for everolimus. RESULTS: The adjusted hazard ratio for sunitinib versus everolimus was 0.85 (0.39-1.89) for PFS and 0.82 (0.53-1.27) for OS. CONCLUSION: Findings indicate comparable PFS and OS with sunitinib and everolimus.

Glucose transporter 1 expression as a marker of prognosis in oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The current TNM staging system for oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) has limited ability to stratify patients and inform clinical management following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and surgery. RESULTS: Functional genomic analysis of the gene expression data using Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA) identified GLUT1 as putative prognostic marker in OAC.In the discovery cohort GLUT1 positivity was observed in 114 patients (80.9%) and was associated with poor overall survival (HR 2.08, 95% CI 1.1-3.94; p=0.024) following multivariate analysis. A prognostic model incorporating GLUT1, CRM and nodal status stratified patients into good, intermediate and poor prognosis groups (p< 0.001) with a median overall survival of 16.6 months in the poorest group.In the validation set 182 patients (69.5%) were GLUT1 positive and the prognostic model separated patients treated with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and surgery (p<0.001) and surgery alone (p<0.001) into three prognostic groups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Transcriptional profiling of 60 formalin fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) biopsies was performed. GLUT1 immunohistochemical staining was assessed in a discovery cohort of 141 FFPE OAC samples treated with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and surgery at the Northern Ireland Cancer Centre from 2004-2012. Validation was performed in 262 oesophageal adenocarcinomas collected at four OCCAMS consortium centres. The relationship between GLUT1 staining, T stage, N stage, lymphovascular invasion and circumferential resection margin (CRM) status was assessed and a prognostic model developed using Cox Proportional Hazards. CONCLUSIONS: GLUT1 staining combined with CRM and nodal status identifies a poor prognosis sub-group of OAC patients and is a novel prognostic marker following potentially curative surgical resection.

Neurokinin A monitoring of response to interferon alpha in a patient with an advanced small bowel neuroendocrine tumour uncontrolled by somatostatin analogue therapy.

A 52-year-old lady presented with a history of occasional, severe abdominal cramps, postprandial diarrhoea and weight loss. After routine gastrointestinal investigations, she was diagnosed with irritable bowel syndrome. Over six months, she developed occasional facial flushing prompting assessment of neuroendocrine tumour markers. Urinary 5HIAA, 5HT, chromogranin A and neurokinin A were significantly elevated. Scans showed extensive hepatic metastases but did not show the location of a primary tumour. Somatostatin analogue therapy was commenced but despite increasing doses, symptoms increased and biomarkers rose dramatically. Interferon alpha was introduced concomitant with somatostatin analogue therapy. Biomarkers were monitored regularly. Within six months, symptoms abated and biomarkers reduced, continuing to fall over the next year, close to reference range. To manage side-effects of interferon alpha, dose was reduced from time to time. During these short periods, neurokinin A showed significant transient increases (75-150 ng/L) and carcinoid symptoms returned. For more than seven years, and with the co-operation of the patient, a balance was achieved between interferon alpha side-effects and disease control. Scans showed tumour load to be stable. The patient survived for 10 years post diagnosis. She chose to discontinue interferon alpha and received peptide receptor radiation therapy in her final year. Throughout, neurokinin A remained the most sensitive monitor of her disease progression.

Phase II study of TP300 in patients with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: TP300, a recently developed synthetic camptothecin analogue, is a highly selective topoisomerase I inhibitor. A phase I study showed good safety and tolerability. As camptothecins have proven active in oesophago-gastric adenocarcinomas, in this phase II study we assessed the efficacy and safety of TP300 in patients with gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) adenocarcinomas. METHODS: Eligible patients had metastatic or locally advanced gastric or Siewert Types II or III GOJ inoperable adenocarcinoma. Patients were chemotherapy naïve unless this had been administered in the perioperative setting. TP300 was administered as a 1-h intravenous infusion every 3 weeks (a cycle) for up to 6 cycles at a starting dose of 8 mg/m2 with intra-patient escalation to 10 mg/m2 from cycle 2 in the absence of dose-limiting toxicity. Tumour responses (RECIST 1.1) were assessed every 6 weeks. Toxicity was recorded by NCI-CTCAE version 3.0. Using a modified two-stage Simon design (Stage I and II), a total of 43 patients were to be included providing there were 3 of 18 patients with objective response in Stage I of the study. RESULTS: In Stage I of the study 20 patients (14 males, 6 females), median age 67 years (range 40 - 82), performance status ECOG 0/1, with GC [14] or GOJ carcinoma [6] were enrolled. Of the 16 evaluable patients, 11 received the planned dose increase to 10 mg/m2 at cycle 2, 2 decreased to 6 mg/m2, and 3 continued on 8 mg/m2. There were no objective responses after 2 cycles of treatment. Twelve patients had stable disease for 1 - 5 months and 4 had progressive disease. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 4.1 months (CI [1.6 - 4.9]), median time to progression (TTP) was 2.9 months (CI [1.4 - 4.2]). Grade 3/4 toxicities (worst grade all cycles) included 7 patients (35 %) with neutropenia, 4 patients (20 %) with anaemia, 2 patients (10 %) with thrombocytopenia, and 3 patients (15 %) with fatigue. This study was terminated at the end of Stage I due to a lack of the required (3/18) responders. CONCLUSIONS: This study of TP300 showed good drug tolerability but it failed to demonstrate sufficient efficacy as measured by radiological response. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EU-CTR 2009-012097-12 2009-09-03.

Gemcitabine and capecitabine with or without telomerase peptide vaccine GV1001 in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer (TeloVac): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of sequential or simultaneous telomerase vaccination (GV1001) in combination with chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. METHODS: TeloVac was a three-group, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. We recruited patients from 51 UK hospitals. Eligible patients were treatment naive, aged older than 18 years, with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive either chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy with sequential GV1001 (sequential chemoimmunotherapy), or chemotherapy with concurrent GV1001 (concurrent chemoimmunotherapy). Treatments were allocated with equal probability by means of computer-generated random permuted blocks of sizes 3 and 6 in equal proportion. Chemotherapy included six cycles of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2), 30 min intravenous infusion, at days 1, 8, and 15) and capecitabine (830 mg/m(2) orally twice daily for 21 days, repeated every 28 days). Sequential chemoimmunotherapy included two cycles of combination chemotherapy, then an intradermal lower abdominal injection of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF; 75 µg) and GV1001 (0·56 mg; days 1, 3, and 5, once on weeks 2-4, and six monthly thereafter). Concurrent chemoimmunotherapy included giving GV1001 from the start of chemotherapy with GM-CSF as an adjuvant. The primary endpoint was overall survival; analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN4382138. FINDINGS: The first patient was randomly assigned to treatment on March 29, 2007, and the trial was terminated on March 27, 2011. Of 1572 patients screened, 1062 were randomly assigned to treatment (358 patients were allocated to the chemotherapy group, 350 to the sequential chemoimmunotherapy group, and 354 to the concurrent chemoimmunotherapy group). We recorded 772 deaths; the 290 patients still alive were followed up for a median of 6·0 months (IQR 2·4-12·2). Median overall survival was not significantly different in the chemotherapy group than in the sequential chemoimmunotherapy group (7·9 months [95% CI 7·1-8·8] vs 6·9 months [6·4-7·6]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·19, 98·25% CI 0·97-1·48, p=0·05), or in the concurrent chemoimmunotherapy group (8·4 months [95% CI 7·3-9·7], HR 1·05, 98·25% CI 0·85-1·29, p=0·64; overall log-rank of χ(2)2df=4·3; p=0·11). The commonest grade 3-4 toxic effects were neutropenia (68 [19%] patients in the chemotherapy group, 58 [17%] patients in the sequential chemoimmunotherapy group, and 79 [22%] patients in the concurrent chemoimmunotherapy group; fatigue (27 [8%] in the chemotherapy group, 35 [10%] in the sequential chemoimmunotherapy group, and 44 [12%] in the concurrent chemoimmunotherapy group); and pain (34 [9%] patients in the chemotherapy group, 39 [11%] in the sequential chemoimmunotherapy group, and 41 [12%] in the concurrent chemoimmunotherapy group). INTERPRETATION: Adding GV1001 vaccination to chemotherapy did not improve overall survival. New strategies to enhance the immune response effect of telomerase vaccination during chemotherapy are required for clinical efficacy. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK and KAEL-GemVax.

The effects of gemcitabine and capecitabine combination chemotherapy and of low-dose adjuvant GM-CSF on the levels of myeloid-derived suppressor cells in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

In pre-clinical models, the only two chemotherapy drugs which have been demonstrated to directly reduce the number of myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) are gemcitabine and 5-fluorouracil. Here we analyze the dynamics of MDSCs, phenotyped as Lin-DR-CD11b+, in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving the combination of gemcitabine and capecitabine, a 5-FU pro-drug. We found no evidence that gemcitabine and capecitabine directly reduce MDSC% in patients. Gemcitabine and capecitabine reduced MDSCs in 42% of patients (n = 19) and MDSC% fell in only 3/9 patients with above-median baseline MDSCs. In 5/8 patients with minimal tumour volume change on treatment, the MDSC% went up: increases in MDSC% in these patients appeared to correlate with sustained cancer-related inflammatory cytokine upregulation. In a separate cohort of 21 patients treated with gemcitabine and capecitabine together with concurrently administered GV1001 vaccine with adjuvant GM-CSF, the MDSC% fell in 18/21 patients and there was a significant difference in the trajectory of MDSCs between those receiving GV1001 and GM-CSF in combination with chemotherapy and those receiving chemotherapy alone. Thus, there was no evidence that the addition of low-dose adjuvant GM-CSF increased Lin-DR-CD11b+ MDSC in patients receiving combination chemoimmunotherapy. 9/21 patients developed an immune response to GV1001 and the MDSCs fell in 8 of these 9 patients, 6 of whom had above-median pre-vaccination MDSC levels. A high pre-vaccination MDSC% does not preclude the development of immunity to a tumour-associated antigen.

A systematic review of non-surgical treatments for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (pNETs) are rare and the majority of patients present with advanced disease. Such patients have limited treatment options. We conducted a systematic review of published clinical trials of non-surgical interventions in pNET, to understand the efficacy, safety and health related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes from the current evidence base. METHODS: Electronic databases and manual bibliographic searches were conducted to identify relevant studies. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Forty seven clinical studies met the predefined inclusion criteria. The following interventions were included: targeted therapies (two RCTs and six single-arm studies), chemotherapy (two RCTs, one prospective nonrandomised, comparative study and 14 single-arm studies);somatostatin analogues (SSA) and radiolabeled SSA therapies (nine single-arm studies), liver-directed therapies (six single-arm studies), mixed treatment regimens (one RCT, four single-arm studies) and other interventions such as interferon and recombinant human endostatin (one single-arm study for each). The paucity of RCT data and lack of consistency in reporting validated study outcomes and differing patient inclusion criteria between studies made it difficult to compare the relative efficacy of therapies. DISCUSSION: The majority of published studies assessing treatment regimens for the management of pNET are single arm, non-randomised studies, often enrolling a small number of patients and not reporting clinically meaningful outcomes. However data from recently conducted studies assessing targeted therapies indicate that it is possible to conduct adequately powered RCTs reporting standardised oncological endpoints in this rare cancer. Further, similarly robust studies should be conducted to define the optimal treatment algorithm.

A phase I study of the heat shock protein 90 inhibitor alvespimycin (17-DMAG) given intravenously to patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: A phase I study to define toxicity and recommend a phase II dose of the HSP90 inhibitor alvespimycin (17-DMAG; 17-dimethylaminoethylamino-17-demethoxygeldanamycin). Secondary endpoints included evaluation of pharmacokinetic profile, tumor response, and definition of a biologically effective dose (BED). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced solid cancers were treated with weekly, intravenous (i.v.) 17-DMAG. An accelerated titration dose escalation design was used. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was the highest dose at which ≤ 1/6 patients experienced dose limiting toxicity (DLT). Dose de-escalation from the MTD was planned with mandatory, sequential tumor biopsies to determine a BED. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic assays were validated prior to patient accrual. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients received 17-DMAG (range 2.5-106 mg/m(2)). At 106 mg/m(2) of 17-DMAG 2/4 patients experienced DLT, including one treatment-related death. No DLT occurred at 80 mg/m(2). Common adverse events were gastrointestinal, liver function changes, and ocular. Area under the curve and mean peak concentration increased proportionally with 17-DMAG doses 80 mg/m(2) or less. In peripheral blood mononuclear cells significant (P < 0.05) HSP72 induction was detected (≥ 20 mg/m(2)) and sustained for 96 hours (≥ 40 mg/m(2)). Plasma HSP72 levels were greatest in the two patients who experienced DLT. At 80 mg/m(2) client protein (CDK4, LCK) depletion was detected and tumor samples from 3 of 5 patients confirmed HSP90 inhibition. Clinical activity included complete response (castration refractory prostate cancer, CRPC 124 weeks), partial response (melanoma, 159 weeks), and stable disease (chondrosarcoma, CRPC, and renal cancer for 28, 59, and 76 weeks, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The recommended phase II dose of 17-DMAG is 80 mg/m(2) weekly i.v.

Attitudes towards weight and weight assessment in oncology patients: survey of hospice staff and patients with advanced cancer.

The objective of this study was to compare attitudes of hospice staff towards weight loss and weight assessment in the hospice setting with those of patients with advanced malignancy in the hospital outpatient setting. Two paper-based questionnaires (one for staff and one for patients) were designed. The staff survey was circulated to all hospices in the UK and Ireland, and the patient questionnaire was given to patients attending three oncological care clinics in Belfast, Northern Ireland; Wolverhampton, England; and Auckland, New Zealand. The staff survey was posted to the medical director of each of the 215 hospices in the UK and Ireland. A total of 129 oncology outpatients with a confirmed diagnosis of malignancy and no longer receiving curative oncological interventions took part in the questionnaire. The main outcome measure was descriptive information about hospice weighing practices and attitudes of hospice staff towards weighing patients, and descriptive information was collected about patient attitudes to weighing and weight loss. We found that weighing practices vary across hospices in UK and Ireland. Patients attending the majority of hospices, 96/146 (66%), are rarely weighed. A little over half of hospice staff, 81/146 (56%) considered that weighing could cause patients to be upset. However, 124/129 (96%) of patients with advanced cancer reported that they had never found the experience of being weighed in a healthcare facility upsetting. Some 95/129 (74%) of patients weighed themselves at home and 89% would want to know if their weight was changing. While there is reluctance on the part of many hospice staff to weigh patients, most patients with advanced malignancy in the hospital setting do not report weight measurement to be upsetting.

Phase III randomized comparison of gemcitabine versus gemcitabine plus capecitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

PURPOSE: Both gemcitabine (GEM) and fluoropyrimidines are valuable treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer. This open-label study was designed to compare the overall survival (OS) of patients randomly assigned to GEM alone or GEM plus capecitabine (GEM-CAP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated histologically or cytologically proven locally advanced or metastatic carcinoma of the pancreas with a performance status

A phase II open-label study of DHA-paclitaxel (Taxoprexin) by 2-h intravenous infusion in previously untreated patients with locally advanced or metastatic gastric or oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Combination chemotherapy regimens can improve survival in patients with advanced gastric and oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)-paclitaxel is a novel conjugate formed by the covalent linkage of the fatty acid DHA to paclitaxel and may result in increased tumour exposure to paclitaxel without increased toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this single arm, phase II study of DHA-paclitaxel, eligible patients with previously untreated, inoperable locally advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus, oesophago-gastric junction or stomach were treated with DHA-paclitaxel (1,100 mg/m(2)) administered by 2-h intravenous infusion every 21 days. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients were recruited of whom 53 were evaluable for toxicity, and 48 for response. There were five confirmed partial responses (9.4%) by the RECIST criteria. The median duration of response was 87 days (range 49-97 days), the median time to progression was 84 days (95% CI 78-124 days), and median overall survival was 262 days (95% CI 205-357 days). Grade >or=3 neutropaenia occurred in 93% of patients, and febrile neutropaenia in 17% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: DHA-paclitaxel has modest activity in patients with oesophago-gastric cancer and with haematological toxicity that is comparable to paclitaxel and docetaxel.