International consensus on the management of metastatic gastric cancer: step by step in the foggy landscape : Bertinoro Workshop, November 2022.

BACKGROUND: Many gastric cancer patients in Western countries are diagnosed as metastatic with a median overall survival of less than twelve months using standard chemotherapy. Innovative treatments, like targeted therapy or immunotherapy, have recently proved to ameliorate prognosis, but a general agreement on managing oligometastatic disease has yet to be achieved. An international multi-disciplinary workshop was held in Bertinoro, Italy, in November 2022 to verify whether achieving a consensus on at least some topics was possible. METHODS: A two-round Delphi process was carried out, where participants were asked to answer 32 multiple-choice questions about CT, laparoscopic staging and biomarkers, systemic treatment for different localization, role and indication of palliative care. Consensus was established with at least a 67% agreement. RESULTS: The assembly agreed to define oligometastases as a "dynamic" disease which either regresses or remains stable in response to systemic treatment. In addition, the definition of oligometastases was restricted to the following sites: para-aortic nodal stations, liver, lung, and peritoneum, excluding bones. In detail, the following conditions should be considered as oligometastases: involvement of para-aortic stations, in particular 16a2 or 16b1; up to three technically resectable liver metastases; three unilateral or two bilateral lung metastases; peritoneal carcinomatosis with PCI ≤ 6. No consensus was achieved on how to classify positive cytology, which was considered as oligometastatic by 55% of participants only if converted to negative after chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: As assessed at the time of diagnosis, surgical treatment of oligometastases should aim at R0 curativity on the entire disease volume, including both the primary tumor and its metastases. Conversion surgery was defined as surgery on the residual volume of disease, which was initially not resectable for technical and/or oncological reasons but nevertheless responded to first-line treatment.

European clinical practice guidelines for the definition, diagnosis, and treatment of oligometastatic esophagogastric cancer (OMEC-4).

INTRODUCTION: The OligoMetastatic Esophagogastric Cancer (OMEC) project aims to provide clinical practice guidelines for the definition, diagnosis, and treatment of esophagogastric oligometastatic disease (OMD). METHODS: Guidelines were developed according to AGREE II and GRADE principles. Guidelines were based on a systematic review (OMEC-1), clinical case discussions (OMEC-2), and a Delphi consensus study (OMEC-3) by 49 European expert centers for esophagogastric cancer. OMEC identified patients for whom the term OMD is considered or could be considered. Disease-free interval (DFI) was defined as the time between primary tumor treatment and detection of OMD. RESULTS: Moderate to high quality of evidence was found (i.e. 1 randomized and 4 non-randomized phase II trials) resulting in moderate recommendations. OMD is considered in esophagogastric cancer patients with 1 organ with ≤ 3 metastases or 1 involved extra-regional lymph node station. In addition, OMD continues to be considered in patients with OMD without progression in number of metastases after systemic therapy. 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging is recommended for baseline staging and for restaging after systemic therapy when local treatment is considered. For patients with synchronous OMD or metachronous OMD and a DFI ≤ 2 years, recommended treatment consists of systemic therapy followed by restaging to assess suitability for local treatment. For patients with metachronous OMD and DFI > 2 years, upfront local treatment is additionally recommended. DISCUSSION: These multidisciplinary European clinical practice guidelines for the uniform definition, diagnosis and treatment of esophagogastric OMD can be used to standardize inclusion criteria in future clinical trials and to reduce variation in treatment.

Multicenter analysis on the value of standard (chemo)radiotherapy in elderly patients with locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction.

BACKGROUND: To assess the tolerability and oncological results of chemoradiation in elderly patients with locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction. METHODS: This multi-center retrospective analysis included 86 elderly patients (≥ 65 years) with esophageal or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (median age 73 years; range 65-92 years) treated with definitive or neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy. The treatment was performed at 3 large comprehensive cancer centers in Germany from 2006 to 2020. Locoregional control (LRC), progression-free survival (PFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), overall survival (OS), and treatment-associated toxicities according to CTCAE criteria v5.0 were analyzed, and parameters potentially relevant to patient outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients (38%) were treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery, while the remaining patients received definitive (chemo)radiation. The delivery of radiotherapy without dose reduction was possible in 80 patients (93%). In 66 patients (77%), concomitant chemotherapy was initially prescribed; however, during the course of therapy, 48% of patients (n = 32) required chemotherapy de-escalation due to treatment-related toxicities and comorbidities. Twenty-nine patients (34%) experienced higher-grade acute toxicities and 14 patients (16%) higher-grade late toxicities. The 2-year LRC, DMFS, PFS, and OS amounted to 72%, 49%, 46%, and 52%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery was shown to be associated with significantly better PFS (p = 0.006), DMFS (p = 0.006), and OS (p = 0.004) compared with all non-surgical treatments (pooled definitive radiotherapy and chemoradiation). No such advantage was seen over definitive chemoradiation. The majority of patients with neoadjuvant therapy received standard chemoradiotherapy without dose reduction (n = 24/33, 73%). In contrast, concurrent chemotherapy was only possible in 62% of patients undergoing definitive radiotherapy (n = 33/53), and most of these patients required dose-reduction or modification of chemotherapy (n = 23/33, 70%). CONCLUSIONS: In our analysis, omission of chemotherapy or adjustment of chemotherapy dose during definitive radiotherapy was necessary for the overwhelming majority of elderly esophageal cancer patients not eligible for surgery, and hence resulted in reduced PFS and OS. Therefore, optimization of non-surgical approaches and the identification of potential predictive factors for safe administration of concurrent chemotherapy in elderly patients with (gastro)esophageal adenocarcinoma is required.

First-Line Nivolumab Plus Chemotherapy for Advanced Gastric, Gastroesophageal Junction, and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: 3-Year Follow-Up of the Phase III CheckMate 649 Trial.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.We report 3-year efficacy and safety results from the phase III CheckMate 649 trial. Patients with previously untreated advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned to nivolumab plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy. Primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR) in patients whose tumors expressed PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) ≥5. With 36.2-month minimum follow-up, for patients with PD-L1 CPS ≥5, the OS hazard ratio (HR) for nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.61 to 0.81); 21% versus 10% of patients were alive at 36 months, respectively; the PFS HR was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.60 to 0.81); 36-month PFS rates were 13% versus 8%, respectively. The objective response rate (ORR) per BICR was 60% (95% CI, 55 to 65) with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus 45% (95% CI, 40 to 50) with chemotherapy; median duration of response was 9.6 months (95% CI, 8.2 to 12.4) versus 7.0 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 7.9), respectively. Nivolumab plus chemotherapy also continued to show improvement in OS, PFS, and ORR versus chemotherapy in the overall population. Adding nivolumab to chemotherapy maintained clinically meaningful long-term survival benefit versus chemotherapy alone, with an acceptable safety profile, supporting the continued use of nivolumab plus chemotherapy as standard first-line treatment for advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Health-Related Quality of Life With Nivolumab Plus Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy in Patients With Advanced Gastric/Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer or Esophageal Adenocarcinoma From CheckMate 649.

PURPOSE: In CheckMate 649, first-line nivolumab plus chemotherapy prolonged overall survival versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced/metastatic non-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJC) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). We present exploratory patient-reported outcomes (PROs). METHODS: In patients (N = 1,581) concurrently randomly assigned 1:1 to nivolumab plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy and in those with tumor PD-L1 expression at a combined positive score (CPS) of ≥5, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed using the EQ-5D and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gastric (FACT-Ga), which included the FACT-General (FACT-G) and Gastric Cancer subscale (GaCS). The FACT-G GP5 item assessed treatment-related symptom burden. Longitudinal changes in HRQoL were assessed using mixed models for repeated measures in the PRO analysis population (randomly assigned patients with baseline and ≥1 postbaseline assessments). Time to symptom or definitive deterioration analyses were also conducted. RESULTS: In the PRO analysis population (n = 1,360), PRO questionnaire completion rates were mostly >80% during treatment. Patient-reported symptom burden was not increased with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy. Mean improved changes from baseline were greater with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for FACT-Ga total, GaCS, and EQ-5D visual analog scale in patients with a CPS of ≥5; results were similar for the overall PRO analysis population. In CPS ≥5 and all randomly assigned populations, nivolumab plus chemotherapy reduced the risk of symptom deterioration versus chemotherapy, on the basis of FACT-Ga total score and GaCS; time to definitive deterioration was longer, and the risk of definitive deterioration in HRQoL was reduced with nivolumab plus chemotherapy across EQ-5D and most FACT-Ga measures (hazard ratio [95% CI] <1). CONCLUSION: Compared with chemotherapy alone, first-line nivolumab plus chemotherapy showed stable or better on-treatment HRQoL in patients with advanced/metastatic non-HER2-positive GC/GEJC/EAC and also showed decreased risk of definitive HRQoL deterioration.

The Oncology Biomarker Discovery framework reveals cetuximab and bevacizumab response patterns in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Precision medicine has revolutionised cancer treatments; however, actionable biomarkers remain scarce. To address this, we develop the Oncology Biomarker Discovery (OncoBird) framework for analysing the molecular and biomarker landscape of randomised controlled clinical trials. OncoBird identifies biomarkers based on single genes or mutually exclusive genetic alterations in isolation or in the context of tumour subtypes, and finally, assesses predictive components by their treatment interactions. Here, we utilise the open-label, randomised phase III trial (FIRE-3, AIO KRK-0306) in metastatic colorectal carcinoma patients, who received either cetuximab or bevacizumab in combination with 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid and irinotecan (FOLFIRI). We systematically identify five biomarkers with predictive components, e.g., patients with tumours that carry chr20q amplifications or lack mutually exclusive ERK signalling mutations benefited from cetuximab compared to bevacizumab. In summary, OncoBird characterises the molecular landscape and outlines actionable biomarkers, which generalises to any molecularly characterised randomised controlled trial.

Ramucirumab plus irinotecan / leucovorin / 5-FU versus ramucirumab plus paclitaxel in patients with advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction, who failed one prior line of palliative chemotherapy: the phase II/III RAMIRIS study (AIO-STO-0415).

BACKGROUND: Paclitaxel in combination with ramucirumab is the standard of care second-line therapy in gastro-esophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA). As the number of taxane pretreated patients in the perioperative or first-line setting is increasing, it is unknown whether these patients benefit from re-applying a taxane in using the combination of paclitaxel and ramucirumab. Furthermore, the rates of neurotoxicity with first-line FOLFOX or FLOT range from 30%-70%, making second-line taxane-containing therapy less suitable to a meaningful portion of patients. This patient group is likely to benefit from a taxane-free second-line chemotherapy regimen, such as FOLFIRI and ramucirumab (FOLFIRI-Ram). Therefore, the RAMIRIS phase III trial evaluates the effects of the regimen of FOLFIRI-Ram in the second-line treatment after a taxane-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced GEA. METHODS: The RAMIRIS trial is a randomized, open-label, multicenter phase II/III study comparing treatment of FOLFIRI-Ram (arm A) with paclitaxel and ramucirumab (arm B). The Phase II is already closed with 111 enrolled patients. In the phase III, 318 taxane-pretreated patients with advanced GEA will be recruited and randomized 1:1 to FOLFIRI (5-FU 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h i.v., irinotecan 180 mg/m2 i.v.; 5-FU 400 mg/m2 bolus; leucovorin 400 mg/m2 i.v.; on day 1 and 15, q28) with ramucirumab 8 mg/kg every two weeks (Arm A) or paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, 15, q28) with ramucirumab 8 mg/kg every two weeks (Arm B). The primary endpoints are overall survival (OS) and objective overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints are progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate and safety and quality of life as assessed by EORTC-QLQ-C30 questionnaire. DISCUSSION: The already completed RAMIRIS phase II demonstrated feasibility and efficacy of FOLFIRI-Ram. Especially docetaxel-pretreated patients seemed to markedly benefit from FOLFIRI-Ram, with favorable response- and PFS rates and lower toxicity. This offers a rationale for the phase III trial. If the RAMIRIS III trial transfers and confirms the results, they will affect the current treatment guidelines, recommending the combination therapy of FOLFIRI-Ram for taxane-pretreated patients with advanced GEA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03081143 Date of registration: 13.11.2015.

Digital Guardian Angel Supported by an Artificial Intelligence System to Improve Quality of Life, Well-being, and Health Outcomes of Patients With Cancer (ONCORELIEF): Protocol for a Single Arm Prospective Multicenter Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: According to Europe's Beating Cancer Plan, the number of cancer survivors is growing every year and is now estimated at over 12 million in Europe. A main objective of the European Commission is to ensure that cancer survivors can enjoy a high quality of life, underlining the role of digital technology and eHealth apps and tools to achieve this. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study is the development of a user-centered artificial intelligence system to facilitate the input and integration of patient-related biopsychosocial data to improve posttreatment quality of life, well-being, and health outcomes and examine the feasibility of this digitally assisted workflow in a real-life setting in patients with colorectal cancer and acute myeloid leukemia. METHODS: A total of 60 patients with colorectal cancer and 30 patients with acute myeloid leukemia will be recruited from 2 clinical centers: Universitätsmedizin der Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz (Mainz, Germany) and IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori "Dino Amadori" (IRST, Italy). Psychosocial data (eg, emotional distress, fatigue, quality of life, subjective well-being, sleep problems, and appetite loss) will be collected by questionnaires via a smartphone app, and physiological data (eg, heart rate, skin temperature, and movement through step count) will be collected by a customizable smart wrist-worn sensor device. Each patient will be assessed every 2 weeks over their 3-month participation in the ONCORELIEF study. Inclusion criteria include patients with the diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia or colorectal cancer, adult patients aged 18 years and older, life expectancy greater than 12 months, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤2, and patients who have a smartphone and agree to use it for the purpose of the study. Exclusion criteria include patients with a reduced cognitive function (such as dementia) or technological illiteracy and other known active malignant neoplastic diseases (patients with a medical history of treated neoplastic disease are included). RESULTS: The pilot study started on September 1, 2022. As of January 2023, we enrolled 33 patients with colorectal cancer and 7 patients with acute myeloid leukemia. As of January 2023, we have not yet started the data analysis. We expect to get all data in June 2023 and expect the results to be published in the second semester of 2023. CONCLUSIONS: Web-based and mobile apps use methods from mathematical decision support and artificial intelligence through a closed-loop workflow that connects health professionals and patients. The ONCORELIEF system has the potential of continuously identifying, collecting, and processing data from diverse patient dimensions to offer health care recommendations, support patients with cancer to address their unmet needs, and optimize survivorship care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) 00027808; https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00027808. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/45475.

Definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer: A Delphi consensus study in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Local treatment improves the outcomes for oligometastatic disease (OMD, i.e. an intermediate state between locoregional and widespread disseminated disease). However, consensus about the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer is lacking. The aim of this study was to develop a multidisciplinary European consensus statement on the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer. METHODS: In total, 65 specialists in the multidisciplinary treatment for oesophagogastric cancer from 49 expert centres across 16 European countries were requested to participate in this Delphi study. The consensus finding process consisted of a starting meeting, 2 online Delphi questionnaire rounds and an online consensus meeting. Input for Delphi questionnaires consisted of (1) a systematic review on definitions of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer and (2) a discussion of real-life clinical cases by multidisciplinary teams. Experts were asked to score each statement on a 5-point Likert scale. The agreement was scored to be either absent/poor (<50%), fair (50%-75%) or consensus (≥75%). RESULTS: A total of 48 experts participated in the starting meeting, both Delphi rounds, and the consensus meeting (overall response rate: 71%). OMD was considered in patients with metastatic oesophagogastric cancer limited to 1 organ with ≤3 metastases or 1 extra-regional lymph node station (consensus). In addition, OMD was considered in patients without progression at restaging after systemic therapy (consensus). For patients with synchronous or metachronous OMD with a disease-free interval ≤2 years, systemic therapy followed by restaging to consider local treatment was considered as treatment (consensus). For metachronous OMD with a disease-free interval >2 years, either upfront local treatment or systemic treatment followed by restaging was considered as treatment (fair agreement). CONCLUSION: The OMEC project has resulted in a multidisciplinary European consensus statement for the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma and squamous cell cancer. This can be used to standardise inclusion criteria for future clinical trials.

Chemoradiotherapy in geriatric patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus: Multi-center analysis on the value of standard treatment in the elderly.

Background and purpose: To evaluate the tolerability and outcomes of chemoradiation in elderly patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Materials and methods: This multi-center retrospective analysis included 161 patients with SCC of the esophagus with a median age of 73 years (range 65-89 years) treated with definitive or neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy between 2010 and 2019 at 3 large comprehensive cancer centers in Germany. Locoregional control (LRC), progression-free survival (PFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), overall survival (OS), and treatment-associated toxicities were analyzed, and parameters determining patient outcomes and treatment tolerance were assessed. Results: The delivery of radiotherapy without dose reduction was possible in 149 patients (93%). In 134 patients (83%), concomitant chemotherapy was initially prescribed; however, during the course of therapy, 41% of these patients (n = 55) required chemotherapy de-escalation due to treatment-related toxicities. Fifty-two patients (32%) experienced higher-grade acute toxicities, and 22 patients (14%) higher-grade late toxicities. The 2-year LRC, DMFS, PFS, and OS rates amounted to 67.5%, 33.8%, 31.4%, and 40.4%, respectively. Upon multivariate analysis, full-dose concomitant chemotherapy (vs. no or modified chemotherapy) was associated with significantly better DMFS (p=0.005), PFS (p=0.005) and OS (p=0.001). Furthermore, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by tumor resection (vs. definitive chemoradiotherapy or definitive radiotherapy alone) significantly improved PFS (p=0.043) and OS (p=0.049). We could not identify any clinico-pathological factor that was significantly associated with LRC. Furthermore, definitive (chemo)radiotherapy, brachytherapy boost and stent implantation were significantly associated with higher-grade acute toxicities (p<0.001, p=0.002 and p=0.04, respectively). The incidence of higher-grade late toxicities was also significantly associated with the choice of therapy, with a higher risk for late toxicities when treatment was switched from neoadjuvant to definitive (chemo)radiotherapy compared to primary definitive (chemo)radiotherapy (p<0.001). Conclusions: Chemoradiation with full-dose and unmodified concurrent chemotherapy has a favorable prognostic impact in elderly ESCC patients; however, about half of the analyzed patients required omission or adjustment of chemotherapy due to comorbidities or toxicities. Therefore, the identification of potential predictive factors for safe administration of concurrent chemotherapy in elderly ESCC patients requires further exploration to optimize treatment in this vulnerable patient cohort.

A plain language summary of the CheckMate 649 study: nivolumab in combination with chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone for untreated advanced or metastatic cancer of the stomach or esophagus.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of the 1-year results of a clinical research study known as CheckMate 649 published in The Lancet in June 2021. The 2-year results on the participants' health and overall quality of life from the same study are in a second publication in Nature in March 2022. Until recently, chemotherapy was the only first treatment option for people with advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma who had not been treated before. Patients receiving chemotherapy lived on average for less than 1 year. Nivolumab is an immunotherapy that works by activating a person's immune system to fight back against cancer cells. The goal of CheckMate 649 was to find out if the combination of nivolumab and chemotherapy would help patients with advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma live longer and without their cancer getting worse. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Results from the final analysis are reported here. Of 1581 people who took part in the study, 789 received nivolumab and chemotherapy and 792 received chemotherapy. Researchers found that, on average, participants who received nivolumab and chemotherapy lived longer overall than those who received chemotherapy alone. The length of time participants lived without their cancer getting worse was also longer on average with nivolumab and chemotherapy than chemotherapy treatment alone. However, more participants in the nivolumab and chemotherapy group had side effects than those in the chemotherapy group. The three most common side effects in both types of treatment were nausea (urge to vomit), diarrhea and peripheral neuropathy. Participants who received nivolumab and chemotherapy had a lower risk of their cancer symptoms worsening and reported that they were 'less bothered' from side effects of treatment than those receiving chemotherapy alone. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: The nivolumab and chemotherapy combination is considered a new standard treatment option and is approved in several countries as a treatment for adults who have not been treated before for their advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal cancer based on results from CheckMate 649. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02872116 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

INTEGRATE II: randomised phase III controlled trials of regorafenib containing regimens versus standard of care in refractory Advanced Gastro-Oesophageal Cancer (AGOC): a study by the Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group (AGITG).

BACKGROUND: Advanced gastro-oesophageal cancer (AGOC) carries a poor prognosis. No standard of care treatment options are available after first and second-line therapies. Regorafenib is an oral multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting angiogenic, stromal, and oncogenic receptor tyrosine kinases. Regorafenib 160 mg daily prolonged progression free survival compared to placebo (INTEGRATE, phase 2). Regorafenib 80 mg daily in combination with nivolumab 3 mg/kg showed promising objective response rates (REGONIVO). METHODS/DESIGN: INTEGRATE II (INTEGRATE IIa and IIb) platform comprises two international phase III randomised controlled trials (RCT) with 2:1 randomisation in favor of experimental intervention. INTEGRATE IIa (double-blind) compares regorafenib 160 mg daily on days 1 to 21 of each 28-day cycle to placebo. INTEGRATE IIb (open label) compares REGONIVO, regorafenib 90 mg days 1 to 21 in combination with intravenous nivolumab 240 mg days 1 and 15 each 28-day cycle with investigator's choice of chemotherapy (control). Treatment continues until disease progression or intolerable adverse events as per protocol. Eligible participants include adults with AGOC who have failed two or more lines of treatment. Stratification is by location of tumour (INTEGRATE IIa only), geographic region, prior VEGF inhibitor and prior immunotherapy use (INTEGRATE IIb only). Primary endpoint is overall survival. Secondary endpoints are progression free survival, objective response rate, quality of life, and safety. Tertiary/correlative objectives include biomarker and pharmacokinetic evaluation. DISCUSSION: INTEGRATE II provides a platform to evaluate the clinical utility of regorafenib alone, as well as regorafenib in combination with nivolumab in treatment of participants with refractory AGOC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: INTEGRATE IIa prospectively registered 1 April 2016 Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN12616000420448 (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02773524). INTEGRATE IIb prospectively registered 10 May 2021 ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04879368.

Futibatinib for FGFR2-Rearranged Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Alterations in fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) have emerged as promising drug targets for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, a rare cancer with a poor prognosis. Futibatinib, a next-generation, covalently binding FGFR1-4 inhibitor, has been shown to have both antitumor activity in patients with FGFR-altered tumors and strong preclinical activity against acquired resistance mutations associated with ATP-competitive FGFR inhibitors. METHODS: In this multinational, open-label, single-group, phase 2 study, we enrolled patients with unresectable or metastatic FGFR2 fusion-positive or FGFR2 rearrangement-positive intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and disease progression after one or more previous lines of systemic therapy (excluding FGFR inhibitors). The patients received oral futibatinib at a dose of 20 mg once daily in a continuous regimen. The primary end point was objective response (partial or complete response), as assessed by independent central review. Secondary end points included the response duration, progression-free and overall survival, safety, and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: Between April 16, 2018, and November 29, 2019, a total of 103 patients were enrolled and received futibatinib. A total of 43 of 103 patients (42%; 95% confidence interval, 32 to 52) had a response, and the median duration of response was 9.7 months. Responses were consistent across patient subgroups, including patients with heavily pretreated disease, older adults, and patients who had co-occurring TP53 mutations. At a median follow-up of 17.1 months, the median progression-free survival was 9.0 months and overall survival was 21.7 months. Common treatment-related grade 3 adverse events were hyperphosphatemia (in 30% of the patients), an increased aspartate aminotransferase level (in 7%), stomatitis (in 6%), and fatigue (in 6%). Treatment-related adverse events led to permanent discontinuation of futibatinib in 2% of the patients. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Quality of life was maintained throughout treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In previously treated patients with FGFR2 fusion or rearrangement-positive intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, the use of futibatinib, a covalent FGFR inhibitor, led to measurable clinical benefit. (Funded by Taiho Oncology and Taiho Pharmaceutical; FOENIX-CCA2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02052778.).

Standard diametric versus volumetric early tumor shrinkage as a predictor of survival in metastatic colorectal cancer: subgroup findings of the randomized, open-label phase III trial FIRE-3 / AIO KRK-0306.

OBJECTIVES: Early tumor shrinkage (ETS) quantifies the objective response at the first assessment during systemic treatment. In metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), ETS gains relevance as an early available surrogate for patient survival. The aim of this study was to increase the predictive accuracy of ETS by using semi-automated volumetry instead of standard diametric measurements. METHODS: Diametric and volumetric ETS were retrospectively calculated in 253 mCRC patients who received 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) combined with either cetuximab or bevacizumab. The association of diametric and volumetric ETS with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) was compared. RESULTS: Continuous diametric and volumetric ETS predicted survival similarly regarding concordance indices (p > .05). In receiver operating characteristics, a volumetric threshold of 45% optimally identified short-term survivors. For patients with volumetric ETS ≥ 45% (vs < 45%), median OS was longer (32.5 vs 19.0 months, p < .001) and the risk of death reduced for the first and second year (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.25, p < .001, and HR = 0.39, p < .001). Patients with ETS ≥ 45% had a reduced risk of progressive disease only for the first 6 months (HR = 0.26, p < .001). These survival times and risks were comparable to those of diametric ETS ≥ 20% (vs < 20%). CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of ETS in predicting survival was not increased by volumetric instead of diametric measurements. Continuous diametric and volumetric ETS similarly predicted survival, regardless of whether patients received cetuximab or bevacizumab. A volumetric ETS threshold of 45% and a diametric ETS threshold of 20% equally identified short-term survivors. KEY POINTS: • ETS based on volumetric measurements did not predict survival more accurately than ETS based on standard diametric measurements. • Continuous diametric and volumetric ETS predicted survival similarly in patients receiving FOLFIRI with cetuximab or bevacizumab. • A volumetric ETS threshold of 45% and a diametric ETS threshold of 20% equally identified short-term survivors.

Study protocol for the OligoMetastatic Esophagogastric Cancer (OMEC) project: A multidisciplinary European consensus project on the definition and treatment for oligometastatic esophagogastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: A uniform definition and treatment for oligometastatic esophagogastric cancer is currently lacking. However, a comprehensive definition of oligometastatic esophagogastric cancer is necessary to initiate studies on local treatment strategies (e.g. metastasectomy or stereotactic radiotherapy) and new systemic therapy agents in this group of patients. For this purpose, the OligoMetastatic Esophagogastric Cancer (OMEC) project was established. The OMEC-project aims to develop a multidisciplinary European consensus statement on the definition, diagnosis, and treatment for oligometastatic esophagogastric cancer and provide a framework for prospective studies to improve outcomes of these patients. METHODS: The OMEC-project consists of five studies, including 1) a systematic review on definitions and outcomes of oligometastatic esophagogastric cancer; 2) real-life clinical scenario discussions in multidisciplinary expert teams to determine the variation in the definition and treatment strategies; 3) Delphi consensus process through a starting meeting, two Delphi questionnaire rounds, and a consensus meeting; 4) publication of a multidisciplinary European consensus statement; and 5) a prospective clinical trial in patients with oligometastatic esophagogastric cancer. DISCUSSION: The OMEC project aims to establish a multidisciplinary European consensus statement for oligometastatic esophagogastric cancer and aims to initiate a prospective clinical trial to improve outcomes for these patients. Recommendations from OMEC can be used to update the relevant guidelines on treatment for patients with (oligometastatic) esophagogastric cancer.

Health literacy in gastrointestinal diseases: a comparative analysis between patients with liver cirrhosis, inflammatory bowel disease and gastrointestinal cancer.

Currently, there are only few data on health literacy in patients with chronic gastrointestinal diseases such as gastrointestinal cancer, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and, in particular, liver cirrhosis available. Moreover, head-to-head comparisons between patients with these different diseases are lacking. In this study, 379 patients were enrolled. Of these, 102 patients had gastrointestinal cancer, 86 had IBD, and 191 had cirrhosis. Health literacy was quantified using the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ) developed by Osborne et al. (Swinburne University, Australia) and was compared between these three groups. Patients with cancer had the best health literacy across all nine subscales of the HLQ, while patients with cirrhosis had the poorest. In detail, patients with cirrhosis had significantly poorer health literacy than patients with cancer or IBD in subscales such as "feeling understood and supported by healthcare providers", "having sufficient information to manage my health", "appraisal of health information", "ability to actively engage with healthcare providers" or "understanding health information well enough to know what to do" (p < 0.05 for cirrhosis versus IBD or cancer, respectively). In conclusion, health literacy differs remarkably between patients with chronic gastrointestinal diseases such as cirrhosis, IBD or gastrointestinal cancers.

Morbidity and Mortality of Neutropenic Patients in Visceral Surgery: A Narrative Review.

Leukocytes are essential for the function of the immune system and cell-cell interaction in the human body, but hematological diseases as well as chemotherapeutic treatments due to cancer lead to occasionally or even permanent leukocyte deficiency. Normally, more than 50% of leukocytes are neutrophilic granulocytes, and leukopenia is, therefore, mostly characterized by a decrease in neutrophilic granulocytes. The consequence of neutropenia is increased susceptibility to infection, but also healing disorders are suggestable due to the disturbed cell-cell interaction. While there is no surgical treatment for leucocyte disorders, patients suffering from neutropenia are sometimes in need of surgery for other reasons. Less is known about the morbidity and mortality of this patients, which is why this narrative review critically summarizes the results of recent research in this particular field. The results of this review suggest that neutropenic patients in need of emergency surgery have a higher mortality risk compared to non-neutropenic patients. In contrast, in elective surgery, there was not a clear tendency for a higher mortality risk of neutropenic patients. The role of neutrophilic granulocytes in inflammation and immunity in surgical patients is emphasized by the results, but most of the evaluated studies showed methodological flaws due to small sample sizes or risk of bias. Further research has to evaluate the risk for postoperative complications, particularly of infectious complications such as surgical site infections, in neutropenic patients undergoing elective surgery, and should address the role of neutrophilic function in postoperative morbidity and mortality.

In vitro Characterization of Enhanced Human Immune Responses by GM-CSF Encoding HSV-1-Induced Melanoma Cells.

Purpose: We studied the innate and adaptive immune response against melanoma cells after JS-1 (wild-type herpes simplex virus 1, wt HSV-1) or Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) infection and evaluated the antitumoral efficacy in human melanoma cells. We analyzed the putative synergistic biological and immunological effects of JS-1 or T-VEC combined with cytostatic drugs in human tumor and immune cells. T-VEC is a genetically modified strain of HSV-1. Genetic modifications (insertion of the granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) gene) were made to attenuate the virus and increase selectivity for cancer cells. In addition to the direct oncolytic effect, we investigated the immune stimulatory effects of T-VEC by comparing it with JS-1. JS-1 is identical T-VEC except for the inserted GM-CSF gene. Materials and Methods: We analyzed the effects of T-VEC and JS-1 with cytostatic drugs in human tumor-immune cell coculture experiments. After coculture, the surface markers CD80, CD83 and CD86 were measured by fluorescence-activated cell sorting and the cytokines, interleukin (IL)-2, IL-6, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α and GM-CSF, by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Furthermore, we analyzed the potential of the viruses to induce T cell activation, measured on the basis of CD4, CD8 and CD69. Analysis of these markers and cytokines allows for conclusions to be drawn concerning the maturation of dendritic cells (DCs) and the immunostimulatory effects of the treatment. Results: We documented increased activation of human cytotoxic T lymphocytes after infection by both HSV-1 strains and treatment with cytostatic drugs without significant differences between T-VEC and JS-1. Conclusion: We demonstrated an immune response as a result of infection with both viruses, but T-VEC was in vitro not stronger than JS-1. The immunostimulatory effects of the viruses could be partially increased by chemotherapy, providing a rationale for future preclinical studies designed to explore T-VEC in combined regimens.

What is the gender representation in authorship in later phase systemic clinical trials in biliary tract cancer (BTC)? - a retrospective review of the published literature.

OBJECTIVES: Female physicians in medicine are increasing, but disparities in female authorship exist. The aim of this study was to characterise factors associated with female first (FF) and female senior (SF) authorship in later phase systemic oncological clinical trials in biliary tract cancer (BTC) and identify any changes over time. SETTING: Embase/Medline identified trial publications in BTC (2000-2020) were included. χ2 tests and log regression were used (assessed factors associated with FF and SF authorship, including changes over time (STATA V.16)). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: FF and SF authorship in later phase systemic oncological clinical trials in BTC. SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Any changes over time? RESULTS: Of 501 publications, 163 met inclusion criteria. The median percentage of female author representation in publications was 25%; there were no female authors in 13% of publications. Geographic location of the home institution of the first and senior authors was Asia (42%/42%), Europe (29%/29%), USA (24%/22%) and other (4%/6%), respectively. Overall, FF and SF author representation was 20% and 10%, respectively. The median position of the first female author was second in all the publication author lists. The phase of trial, journal-impact factor, industry funding or whether the study met its primary endpoint did not impact FF/SF author representation. More SF authors had home institutions in 'other' geographic locations (40% in 10 trials) (p=0.02) versus Asia (6%), Europe (8%) and USA (14%). There were no significant changes in FF/SF representation over time (p=0.61 and p=0.33 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: FF and SF author representation in later phase systemic clinical trial publications in BTC is low and has not changed significantly over time. The underlying reasons for this imbalance need to be better understood and addressed.

Recent progress and current challenges of immunotherapy in advanced/metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma.

The new era of immunotherapy is successfully implemented in the treatment of metastatic/locally advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma (EGAC), as it has been investigated in combinations with/without chemotherapy in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (Her2)-positive and Her2-negative tumors. Recent approvals of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) enrich the therapeutic landscape in nearly every therapeutic line. Based on CHECKMATE-649, the combination of nivolumab and chemotherapy in first-line therapy of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-L1)-positive patients with advanced gastroesophageal junction cancer (GEJC), esophageal cancer (EC), and gastric cancer (GC) was approved in Europe for PD-L1 combined positivity score (CPS) ≥ 5 patients and independently from PD-L1 score in the USA and Asia. Based on KEYNOTE-590, patients with advanced GEJC and EC qualify for the combination of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in Europe (CPS ≥ 10) and the USA. For Her2-positive patients, trastuzumab with first-line chemotherapy plus pembrolizumab has beneficial response rates and resulted in approval in the USA (KEYNOTE-811). In third-line therapy, superior overall survival (OS) was achieved by the administration of nivolumab (approval in Japan, ATTRACTION-02), and pembrolizumab shows a positive effect on the duration of response (KEYNOTE-059). Questions of resistance to immunotherapy or the role of gender in response to ICI need to be clarified. This review provides an overview of the current approvals of ICI in advanced EGAC and reflects results of relevant phase II/III trials with focus on possible biomarkers, including PD-L1 CPS and microsatellite-instability (MSI) status.