Multicenter Phase II Trial of Lenvatinib plus Hepatic Intra-Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy with Cisplatin for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: LEOPARD.

Introduction: Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) with cisplatin and lenvatinib exhibits strong antitumor effects against advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Higher antitumor activity is expected for the combination treatment. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib in combination with HAIC using cisplatin in patients with advanced HCC. Methods: In this multicenter, open-labeled, single-arm, phase II trial, patients with advanced HCC categorized as Child-Pugh class A with no prior history of systemic therapy were enrolled. Patients received lenvatinib plus HAIC with cisplatin (lenvatinib: 12 mg once daily for patients ≥60 kg, 8 mg once daily for patients <60 kg; HAIC with cisplatin: 65 mg/m2, day 1, every 4-6 weeks, maximum of six cycles). The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) assessed using modified RECIST by the Independent Review Committee. The secondary endpoints were the ORR assessed using RECIST v1.1, progression-free survival, overall survival, and frequency of adverse events associated with the treatment. Results: A total of 36 patients were enrolled between September 2018 and March 2020. In the 34 evaluable patients, the ORR assessed by the Independent Review Committee using modified RECIST and RECIST v1.1 were 64.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 46.5-80.3%) and 45.7% (95% CI: 28.8-63.4%), respectively. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 6.3 months (95% CI: 5.1-7.9 months) and 17.2 months (95% CI: 10.9 - not available, months), respectively. The main grade 3-4 adverse events were increased aspartate aminotransferase (34%), leukopenia (22%), increased alanine aminotransferase (19%), and hypertension (11%). Conclusion: Lenvatinib plus HAIC with cisplatin yielded a favorable ORR and overall survival and was well tolerated in patients with advanced HCC. Further evaluation of this regimen in a phase III trial is warranted.

Multicenter validation study of a treatment selection MAP for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

BACKGROUND: Somatostatin analogs, molecular-targeted agents and cytotoxic anticancer agents are available as therapeutic agents for the systemic treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, and we have developed a first-line treatment selection MAP to enable selection of the optimal treatment strategy for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. The purpose of this study was to validate the usefulness of the treatment selection MAP. METHODS: Patients who had received systemic therapy for a pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor between January 2017 and December 2020 were compared according to whether they had been treated as recommended by the MAP (matched patients) or not (unmatched patients) to determine whether better outcomes were achieved by the matched patients. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival of the matched group and unmatched groups in the somatostatin analog, molecular-targeted agent and cytotoxic anticancer agents areas of the MAP. RESULTS: There were 41 (55%) MAP-matched patients in all areas among the 74 patients registered at seven hospitals. The MAP-matched rates were 100, 77 and 38% in the somatostatin analog area, molecular-targeted agent area and cytotoxic anticancer agents area, respectively. All of the unmatched patients had been selected for less intensive treatment. The median progression-free survival in the matched group and unmatched group in the molecular-targeted agent area of the MAP were 46.6 and 15.4 months, respectively, and a multivariate analysis identified MAP-matched (hazard ratio 0.18 [95% confidence interval: 0.04-0.87], P = 0.032) as the only significant independent favorable predictive factor. CONCLUSION: The usefulness of the MAP for treatment selection was validated in the molecular-targeted agent area of the MAP.

Characteristics of patients with longer treatment period of lenvatinib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: A post-hoc analysis of post-marketing surveillance study in Japan.

Patient profiles suitable for long-term lenvatinib treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) are yet to be fully understood. This post-hoc analysis aimed to identify such patient characteristics and explore the impact of treatment duration and relative dose intensity (RDI) on treatment outcomes. The data were obtained from 703 patients in a multicenter, prospective cohort study in Japan. Lenvatinib-naïve patients with uHCC were enrolled between July 2018 and January 2019 and were followed up for 12 months. Moreover, patients were dichotomized using the median treatment duration into the longer- (≥177 days; n = 352) or shorter-treatment (<177 days; n = 351) groups. The longer-treatment group often had better performance status, lower Child-Pugh score and better modified albumin-bilirubin grade than the shorter treatment group (p<0.05 for all). The objective response rate (47.6% vs. 28.2%; p<0.001) and disease control rate (92.4% vs. 60.2%; p<0.001) were both significantly higher in the longer-treatment groups than in the shorter-treatment groups. The proportion of patients with any adverse drug reactions was generally similar between the two treatment groups. Within the longer-treatment group, the disease control rate was high regardless of dose modification (i.e., RDI <100% vs. ≥100% during the initial 177 days) (91.2% vs. 98.0%). In conclusion, patients with longer treatment tended to have better overall conditions. Lenvatinib dose modifications at the physician's discretion, considering the balance between effectiveness and safety, may contribute to the long-term treatment.

Safety Profile and Adverse Event Management for Futibatinib, An Irreversible FGFR1-4 Inhibitor: Pooled Safety Analysis of 469 Patients.

PURPOSE: Futibatinib, a covalently-binding inhibitor of fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR)1-4 gained approval for the treatment of refractory, advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) harboring an FGFR2 fusion/other rearrangement. An integrated analysis was performed to evaluate safety and provide guidance on the management of futibatinib-associated adverse events (AEs) in patients with unresectable/metastatic tumors, including iCCA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from three global phase I or II studies of futibatinib (NCT02052778; JapicCTI-142552) were pooled. AEs were graded per NCI CTCAE v4.03, where applicable. Safety was analyzed for patients receiving any futibatinib starting dose (overall population) and in those receiving the approved starting dose of 20 mg once every day. RESULTS: In total, 469 patients with one of 33 known tumor types were analyzed, including 318 patients who received futibatinib 20 mg every day. AEs of clinical interest (AECI; any grade/grade ≥3) in the overall population included hyperphosphatemia (82%/19%), nail disorders (27%/1%), hepatic AEs (27%/11%), stomatitis (19%/3%), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (PPES; 13%/3%), rash (9%/0%), retinal disorders (8%/0%), and cataract (4%/1%). Median time to onset of grade ≥3 AECIs ranged from 9 days (hyperphosphatemia) to 125 days (cataract). Grade ≥3 hyperphosphatemia, hepatic AEs, PPES, and nail disorders resolved to grade ≤2 within a median of 7, 7, 8, and 28 days, respectively. Discontinuations due to treatment-related AEs were rare (2%), and no treatment-related deaths occurred. AE management included phosphate-lowering medication and dose adjustments. CONCLUSIONS: Futibatinib showed a consistent and manageable safety profile across patients with various tumor types. AECIs were mostly reversible with appropriate clinical management.

A Retrospective Study of Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel for Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Refractory to Gemcitabine Monotherapy.

BACKGROUND/AIM: This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine (GEM) plus nab-paclitaxel (nab-PTX), termed GnP, which is limited, in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (PC) who show good tolerance to GEM monotherapy prior to being refractory to it. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients with locally advanced or metastatic PC who received GEM followed by GnP between December 2014 and March 2019, regardless of the treatment line. RESULTS: A total of 14 patients who received GnP after becoming refractory to GEM were included in this study. Eight patients were included in the nab-PTX-naïve group, seven of whom were treated with GEM monotherapy as first-line chemotherapy, and one was refractory to GEM monotherapy after modified FOLFIRINOX treatment. The other six patients were included in the nab-PTX reintroduction group. In this group, all patients received GnP followed by GEM maintenance therapy to prevent adverse events, such as peripheral neuropathy and fatigue. Two patients in the nab-PTX-naïve group showed partial response and none in the reintroduction group; median progression-free survival was 7.6 and 1.4 months and median overall survival was 9.4 and 6.2 months, respectively. In the safety analysis, grade 3 anemia and peripheral neuropathy were observed in one patient in the nab-PTX reintroduction group, while the remaining adverse events were of grade 1 or 2. CONCLUSION: GnP is safe and effective even in patients with GEM-refractory PC, and GEM treatment followed by GnP can be an effective treatment option for patients with nab-PTX-naïve PC.

A Phase 2, Prospective, Multicenter, Single-Arm Trial of Transarterial Chemoembolization Therapy in Combination Strategy with Lenvatinib in Patients with Unresectable Intermediate-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma: TACTICS-L Trial.

Introduction: Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is the standard treatment for unresectable intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but recurrence after TACE is common. The present phase 2, prospective, multicenter, single-arm trial, the TACTICS-L trial, investigated the efficacy and safety of TACE plus lenvatinib (LEN), a drug that more strongly promotes vascular normalization and has a better objective response rate (ORR) than sorafenib (jRCTs031180074). Methods: Participants were patients with HCC who had not previously received systemic therapy, hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy, or immunotherapy and who were ineligible for resection or percutaneous ablation therapy. LEN was to be administered 14-21 days before the first TACE, stopped 2 days before TACE, and resumed 3 days after TACE. Key inclusion criteria were unresectable HCC, Child-Pugh A liver function, 0-2 prior TACE sessions, tumor size ≤10 cm, number of tumors ≤10, and ECOG performance status 0-1. Key exclusion criteria were vascular invasion and extrahepatic spread. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by RECICL, and secondary endpoints were time to untreatable progression, ORR, overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: A total of 62 HCC patients were enrolled in this trial. The median age was 72 years, 77.4% of patients were men, and 95.2% had PS 0. The primary endpoint of median PFS was 28.0 months (90% confidence interval [CI] 25.1-31.0) after a minimum 24 months of follow-up. The secondary endpoint of median OS was not reached (90% CI 35.5 months-NR). LEN-TACE achieved a high response rate and high complete response (CR) rate (4 weeks after the first TACE: ORR 79.0%, CR rate 53.2%; best response: ORR 88.7%, CR rate 67.7%) by RECICL. Exploratory subgroup analyses showed that the characteristics of responders/nonresponders (ORR and CR rate) were similar and that LEN-TACE would be effective in all subgroups, including the population in whom TACE alone would be less likely to be curative (e.g., patients with the non-simple nodular type or a high tumor burden). The relative dose intensity of LEN before the first TACE was important for achieving higher CR rate/ORR by LEN-TACE. No new safety concerns were observed. Conclusion: The results of this trial provide encouraging evidence, supporting the efficacy and favorable safety profile of LEN-TACE in patients who are ineligible for locoregional therapy.

Effect of cancer cachexia on first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a claims database study in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Cancer cachexia is a multifactorial syndrome leading to progressive functional impairment. How cachexia affects the treatment course of chemotherapy in patients with pancreatic cancer has not been well understood. METHODS: This is an exploratory, retrospective, observational cohort study using the Japanese medical claims database from Medical Data Vision Co., Ltd. The study population included patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in whom first-line FOLFIRINOX (FFX) or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) was initiated between October 1, 2018, and September 30, 2020. In this study, we defined patients with cancer cachexia as those who had a weight loss of ≥ 5% in the preceding 6 months. The primary outcome was time-to-treatment failure (TTF). The observation period was six months from the initiation of first-line FFX or GnP treatment. RESULTS: A total of 1897 patients (421 patients into the cachexia group; 1476 patients into the non-cachexia group) were analyzed in this study. The median TTF was 121 days (95% confidence interval [CI] 94-146) in the cachexia group and 143 days (95% CI 134-152) in the non-cachexia group. The hazard ratio for TTF of the cachexia versus non-cachexia group was 1.136 (95% CI 0.979-1.319). The median number of doses was two doses fewer in the cachexia group than in the non-cachexia group for both FFX and GnP. CONCLUSION: Cancer cachexia was suggested to be associated with shorter TTF and a reduced number of doses in patients with pancreatic cancer who received first-line FFX or GnP treatment. Clinical Trial Registration clinicaltrials.jp: UMIN000045820.

Early Tumor Shrinkage and Depth of Response as Predictors of Survival for Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer: An Exploratory Analysis of JCOG1113.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that early tumor shrinkage (ETS) and depth of response (DpR) reflect outcomes of chemotherapy in various cancers. This study evaluated the association of ETS and DpR with clinical outcomes using data from JCOG1113, which demonstrated the non-inferiority of gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS) to gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) for chemotherapy-naïve advanced biliary tract cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In total, 354 (289 with measurable target lesions) patients enrolled in JCOG1113 were divided into ETS-unachieved and ETS-achieved groups (≥20% tumor reduction at week 6) and DpR-low and DpR-high groups (≥40% maximum shrinkage) until 12 weeks after enrollment. The impact of ETS and DpR on survival outcome was evaluated using the multivariable Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: The proportions of patients in the ETS-achieved and DpR-high groups were similar between the 2 treatment arms. The hazard ratios (HRs) of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the ETS-achieved group were 0.70 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.52-0.93) and 0.60 (95%CI, 0.44-0.81), respectively. The HRs of PFS and OS for the DpR-high group were 0.67 (95%CI, 0.48-0.94) and 0.64 (95%CI, 0.46-0.90), respectively. In the subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot analysis, most patients in the ETS-achieved group in the GC arm did not experience disease progression after 12 weeks from the landmark. CONCLUSION: As on-treatment markers, ETS and DpR were effective tools. ETS was clinically useful, because it can be used to evaluate the outcomes of treatment early at a specific time.

Liposomal irinotecan plus fluorouracil/leucovorin in older patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a single-center retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The global phase 3 NAPOLI -1 trial of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) demonstrated an overall survival (OS) benefit from using liposomal irinotecan and 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV) after treatment with gemcitabine (GEM) compared to 5-FU/LV alone. However, the efficacy and safety of this regimen in older patients are not well studied. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective study to compare the therapeutic efficacy of nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV between older and younger patients with cutoff ages of 70 and 75 years, respectively. We included patients with a prior history of one or more GEM-based regimens for locally advanced or metastatic PDAC and were treated with nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV. RESULTS: Of the 115 patients, 54 (47.0%) and 24 (20.9%) were aged ≥ 70 and ≥ 75 years, respectively. The median OS and progression-free survival (PFS) of the entire cohort were 8.5 and 3.6 months, respectively. No significant differences were observed in OS and PFS hazard ratios using age cutoffs of 70 (P = 0.90 and 0.99, respectively) and 75 (P = 0.90 and 0.76, respectively) years. Additionally, no significant differences were found in the incidence of treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) between patients aged ≥ 70 and < 70 years or those aged ≥ 75 and < 75 years. Other than hematological toxicity, no trAEs higher than Grade 4 were observed in either age group. CONCLUSION: The efficacy and safety of nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV for patients with PDAC are not significantly different for those aged ≥ 70 years compared to younger patients.

Feasibility of S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy after major hepatectomy for biliary tract cancers: An exploratory subset analysis of JCOG1202.

INTRODUCTION: Major hepatectomy (MH) may produce the impaired liver function and affect the feasibility of adjuvant chemotherapy in terms of early period after the surgery, but there have not been detailed investigations. JCOG1202 (UMIN000011688) is a randomized phase III trial demonstrating the superiority of adjuvant S-1 chemotherapy for biliary tract cancer (BTC). The aim of this study is to examine the influence of MH for BTC on adjuvant S-1. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of the total 424 patients, 207 received S-1 (S-1 arm) while the remaining 217 were not. We compared MH with non-major hepatectomy (NMH) for BTC. RESULTS: In the S-1 arm, 42 had undergone MH, and 165 had undergone NMH. MH had similar pretreatment features to NMH, including the proportion of biliary reconstruction, to NMH, except for a lower platelet count (17.7 vs. 23.4 × 104/mm3, p < 0.0001) and lower serum albumin level (3.5 vs. 3.8 g/dL, p < 0.0001). The treatment completion proportion tended to be lower for MH than for NMH (59.5 % vs. 75.8 %; risk ratio, 0.786 [95 % confidence interval, 0.603-1.023], p = 0.0733), and the median dose intensity was lower as well (88.7 % vs. 99.6 %, p = 0.0358). The major reasons for discontinuation were biliary tract infections and gastrointestinal disorders after MH. The frequency of grade 3-4 biliary tract infection was 19.0 % in MH vs. 4.2 % in NMH. CONCLUSION: The treatment completion proportion and dose intensity were lower in MH than in NMH. Caution should be exercised against biliary tract infections and gastrointestinal disorders during adjuvant S-1 after MH for BTC.

Optimal first-line treatment strategies of systemic therapy for unresectable gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors based on the opinions of Japanese experts.

There are several options for systemic therapy of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NEN), including somatostatin analogues (SSA), molecular-targeted agents, cytotoxic agents, and peptide receptor radionuclide therapy. However, the effectiveness of each agent varies according to the primary site. Although SSA and everolimus are key drugs used for systemic therapy of neuroendocrine tumors arising from the gastrointestinal tract (GI-NET), the optimal strategy for selecting among these modalities remains unexplored. Japanese experts on GI-NET discussed and determined optimal first-line treatment strategies based on the results of previously reported pivotal trials. The consensus was reached that tumor aggressiveness and prognosis can be predicted using hepatic tumor load and Ki-67 labeling index, which are thought to be clinically important factors when selecting systemic therapy for unresectable GI-NET. SSA therapy is considered appropriate for patients with a low hepatic tumor load and low Ki-67 value and everolimus for those with contraindications to SSA therapy. There was also agreement that the treatment strategy should be determined according to whether the origin is in the midgut, considering the biological differences. Based on this strategy, the experts have tentatively created treatment maps and applied them in representative cases of unresectable GI-NET. Japanese experts proposed tentative maps for optimal first-line treatment in patients with unresectable GI-NET. Further investigation is warranted to validate the usefulness of these maps.

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.

Is surgical resection justified for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with distant abdominal organ metastasis? A position paper by experts in pancreatic surgery at the Joint Meeting of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) & the Japan Pancreas Society (JPS) 2022 in Kyoto.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a typical refractory malignancy, and many patients have distant organ metastases at diagnosis, such as liver metastasis and peritoneal dissemination. The standard treatment for unresectable PDAC with distant organ metastasis (UR-M) is chemotherapy, but the prognosis remained poor. However, with recent dramatic developments in chemotherapy, the prognosis has gradually improved, and some patients have experienced marked shrinkage or disappearance of their metastatic lesions. With this trend, attempts have been made to resect a small number of metastases (so-called oligometastases) in combination with the primary tumor or to resect the primary and metastatic tumor in patients with a favorable response to anti-cancer treatment after a certain period of time (so-called conversion surgery). An international consensus meeting on surgical treatment for UR-M PDAC was held during the Joint Congress of the 26th Meeting of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) and the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Japan Pancreas Society (JPS) in Kyoto in July 2022. The presenters showed their indications for and results of surgical treatment for UR-M PDAC and discussed their advantages and disadvantages with the experts. Although these reports were limited to a small number of patients, findings suggest that these surgical treatments for patients with UR-M PDAC who have had a significant response to chemotherapy may contribute to a prognosis of prolonged survival. We hope that this article summarizing the discussion and agreements at the meeting will serve as the basis for future trials and guidelines.

A Multicenter Survey on Eligibility for a Randomized Phase III Trial of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Resected Biliary Tract Cancer (JCOG1202, ASCOT).

BACKGROUND: The Adjuvant S-1 for Cholangiocarcinoma Trial (JCOG1202, [ASCOT]) was a multicenter, randomized controlled trial aimed at investigating the efficacy and safety of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) with S-1 for resected biliary tract cancer (BTC). This trial reported that overall survival was prolonged with AC compared with observation. METHODS: With the aim of increasing enrollment, the present survey biannually recorded the number of patients eligible for enrollment into ASCOT and reasons for ineligibility among patients who had undergone surgery for BTC from April 2015 to September 2017 at 36 institutions participating in ASCOT. RESULTS: Of 2039 patients who underwent surgery for BTC, 211 (10.3%) were already enrolled, 166 (8.1%) were eligible but had not been enrolled, and 1662 (81.5%) were ineligible. Among ineligible patients, the predominant reasons for ineligibility were patient refusal (n = 332, 20.0%), pathologic stage (pT1N0; n = 248, 14.9%), age (≥ 81 years; n = 196, 11.8%), and prolonged postoperative complications (n = 176, 10.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing surgery for BTC are a heterogeneous cohort comprising patients with earlier pathologic stage, advanced age, and prolonged postoperative complications. These factors should be considered during the design of future clinical trials of perioperative treatments for resectable BTC.

Comprehensive review of undifferentiated carcinoma of the pancreas: from epidemiology to treatment.

Undifferentiated carcinoma (UC) of the pancreas is a rare subtype of pancreatic cancer displaying no definitive direction of differentiation. UC has been reported as a highly aggressive malignant neoplasm, with a median overall survival of <1 year, except for several surgical series. On the other hand, UC tissue sometimes contains non-neoplastic osteoclast-like giant cells (OGCs), and such cases have been reported to have relatively longer survival. Thus, the World Health Organization (WHO) classification histologically distinguishes UC with OGCs (UCOGCs) from UC, and UCs were subclassified into three subtypes: anaplastic UC, sarcomatoid UC and carcinosarcoma. However, still less is known about UC due to its rarity, and such situations lead to further difficulties in treatment for UC. To date, only surgical resection can offer curative treatment for patients with UC, and no clear evidence for chemotherapy exists for them. However, a retrospective cohort study and case reports showed that relatively promising results paclitaxel-containing regimens for treatment of patients with unresectable UC. Furthermore, high programmed cell death protein 1 expression has been reported in sarcomatoid UCs and UCOGCs, and promising responses to anti-programmed death-ligand 1 therapy have been described in case reports of UCOGCs. Recent advances in chemotherapeutic agents and molecular technologies are opening up the possibilities for expanded treatments.

Effect of systemic inflammatory response on induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer: an exploratory subgroup analysis on systemic inflammatory response in JCOG1106.

OBJECTIVE: JCOG1106, a randomized phase II trial conducted to compare chemoradiotherapy (S-1 concurrent radiotherapy) with (Arm B) or without (Arm A) induction chemotherapy using gemcitabine in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer, showed a more favorable long-term survival in Arm A. This study was aimed at exploring whether some subgroups classified by the systemic inflammatory response might derive greater benefit from either treatment. METHODS: All subjects eligible for JCOG1106 were included in this analysis (n = 51/49 in Arm A/B). This exploratory subgroup analysis was performed by Cox regression analysis to investigate the impact of the systemic inflammatory response, as assessed based on the serum C-reactive protein, serum albumin (albumin), Glasgow Prognostic Score and derived neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, at the baseline on overall survival. P values <0.1 for the interaction were regarded as denoting significant association. RESULTS: Glasgow prognostic score showed significant treatment interactions for overall survival. Hazard ratios of Arm B to Arm A were 1.35 (95% confidence interval, 0.82-2.23) in the Glasgow Prognostic Score 0 (C-reactive protein ≤10 mg/L and albumin ≥35 g/L) (n = 44/34 in Arm A/B) and 0.59 (95% confidence interval, 0.24-1.50) in the Glasgow Prognostic Score 1/2 (C-reactive protein >10 mg/L and/or albumin <35 g/L) (n = 7/15) (P-interaction = 0.06). C-reactive protein alone and albumin alone also showed significant treatment interactions for overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Survival benefits of induction chemotherapy in chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer were observed in patients with elevated Glasgow Prognostic Score, high C-reactive protein and low albumin. These results suggest that systemic inflammatory response might be considered to apply induction chemotherapy preceding chemoradiotherapy.