Trastuzumab plus pertuzumab for HER2-amplified advanced colorectal cancer: Results from the drug rediscovery protocol (DRUP).

BACKGROUND: In 2-5% of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC), human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2) is amplified or overexpressed. Despite prior evidence that anti-HER2 therapy confers clinical benefit (CB) in one-third of these patients, it is not approved for this indication in Europe. In the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), patients are treated with off-label drugs based on their molecular profile. Here, we present the results of the cohort 'trastuzumab/pertuzumab for treatment-refractory patients with RAS/BRAF-wild-type HER2amplified metastatic CRC (HER2+mCRC)'. METHODS: Patients with progressive treatment-refractory RAS/BRAF-wild-type HER2+mCRC with measurable disease were included for trastuzumab plus pertuzumab treatment. Primary endpoints of DRUP are CB (defined as confirmed objective response (OR) or stable disease (SD) ≥ 16 weeks) and safety. Patients were enrolled using a Simon-like 2-stage model, with 8 patients in stage 1 and 24 patients in stage 2 if at least 1/8 patients had CB. To identify biomarkers for response, whole genome sequencing (WGS) was performed on pre-treatment biopsies. RESULTS: CB was observed in 11/24 evaluable patients (46%) with HER2+mCRC, seven patients achieved an OR (29%). Median duration of response was 8.4 months. Patients had undergone a median of 3 prior treatment lines. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 4.3 months (95% CI 1.9-10.3) and 8.2 months (95% CI 7.2-14.7), respectively. No unexpected toxicities were observed. WGS provided potential explanations for resistance in 3/10 patients without CB, for whom WGS was available. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study confirm a clinically significant benefit of trastuzumab plus pertuzumab treatment in patients with HER2+mCRC.

Organoids as a biomarker for personalized treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer: drug screen optimization and correlation with patient response.

BACKGROUND: The inability to predict treatment response of colorectal cancer patients results in unnecessary toxicity, decreased efficacy and survival. Response testing on patient-derived organoids (PDOs) is a promising biomarker for treatment efficacy. The aim of this study is to optimize PDO drug screening methods for correlation with patient response and explore the potential to predict responses to standard chemotherapies. METHODS: We optimized drug screen methods on 5-11 PDOs per condition of the complete set of 23 PDOs from patients treated for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PDOs were exposed to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), irinotecan- and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. We compared medium with and without N-acetylcysteine (NAC), different readouts and different combination treatment set-ups to capture the strongest association with patient response. We expanded the screens using the optimized methods for all PDOs. Organoid sensitivity was correlated to the patient's response, determined by % change in the size of target lesions. We assessed organoid sensitivity in relation to prior exposure to chemotherapy, mutational status and sidedness. RESULTS: Drug screen optimization involved excluding N-acetylcysteine from the medium and biphasic curve fitting for 5-FU & oxaliplatin combination screens. CellTiter-Glo measurements were comparable with CyQUANT and did not affect the correlation with patient response. Furthermore, the correlation improved with application of growth rate metrics, when 5-FU & oxaliplatin was screened in a ratio, and 5-FU & SN-38 using a fixed dose of SN-38. Area under the curve was the most robust drug response curve metric. After optimization, organoid and patient response showed a correlation coefficient of 0.58 for 5-FU (n = 6, 95% CI -0.44,0.95), 0.61 for irinotecan- (n = 10, 95% CI -0.03,0.90) and 0.60 for oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (n = 11, 95% CI -0.01,0.88). Median progression-free survival of patients with resistant PDOs to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy was significantly shorter than sensitive PDOs (3.3 vs 10.9 months, p = 0.007). Increased resistance to 5-FU in patients with prior exposure to 5-FU/capecitabine was adequately reflected in PDOs (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Our study emphasizes the critical impact of the screening methods for determining correlation between PDO drug screens and mCRC patient outcomes. Our 5-step optimization strategy provides a basis for future research on the clinical utility of PDO screens.

Predictive Genetic Biomarkers for the Development of Peritoneal Metastases in Colorectal Cancer.

Metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common cause of cancer-related mortality, of which peritoneal metastases (PMs) have the worse outcome. Metastasis-specific markers may help predict the spread of tumor cells and select patients for preventive strategies. This exploratory pilot study aimed to gain more insight into genetic alterations in primary CRC tumors, which might be a predictive factor for the development of PM. Forty patients with T3 stage CRC were retrospectively divided in three groups: without metachronous metastases during 5-year follow-up (M0, n = 20), with metachronous liver metastases (LM, n = 10) and with metachronous PM (PM, n = 10). Patients with synchronous metastases were excluded. Primary formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor samples were analyzed via comprehensive genome sequencing (TSO500 analysis) to identify DNA alterations and RNA fusion transcripts in 523 genes and 55 genes, respectively. Thirty-eight samples were included for final analysis. Four M0 tumors and one PM tumor were microsatellite instable. BRAF mutations were uniquely identified in three microsatellite-stable (MSS) PM tumors (37.5%, p = 0.010). RNA analysis showed an additional FAM198A-RAF1 fusion in one PM sample. BRAF p.V600E mutations were only present in PM patients with MSS tumors. Greater attention should be paid to BRAF-mutated tumors in relation to the development of metachronous PM.

Population-based impact of COVID-19 on incidence, treatment, and survival of patients with pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has put substantial strain on the healthcare system of which the effects are only partly elucidated. This study aimed to investigate the impact on pancreatic cancer care. METHODS: All patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer between 2017 and 2020 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients diagnosed and/or treated in 2020 were compared to 2017-2019. Monthly incidence was calculated. Patient, tumor and treatment characteristics were analyzed and compared using Chi-squared tests. Survival data was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Log-rank tests. RESULTS: In total, 11019 patients were assessed. The incidence in quarter (Q)2 of 2020 was comparable with that in Q2 of 2017-2019 (p = 0.804). However, the incidence increased in Q4 of 2020 (p = 0.031), mainly due to a higher incidence of metastatic disease (p = 0.010). Baseline characteristics, surgical resection (15% vs 16%; p = 0.466) and palliative systemic therapy rates (23% vs 24%; p = 0.183) were comparable. In 2020, more surgically treated patients received (neo)adjuvant treatment compared to 2017-2019 (73% vs 67%; p = 0.041). Median overall survival was comparable (3.8 vs 3.8 months; p = 0.065). CONCLUSION: This nationwide study found a minor impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pancreatic cancer care and outcome. The Dutch health care system was apparently able to maintain essential care for patients with pancreatic cancer.

Treatment and overall survival of four types of non-metastatic periampullary cancer: nationwide population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Periampullary adenocarcinoma consists of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC), distal cholangiocarcinoma (DC), ampullary cancer (AC), and duodenal adenocarcinoma (DA). The aim of this study was to assess treatment modalities and overall survival by tumor origin. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with non-metastatic periampullary cancer in 2012-2018 were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. OS was studied with Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariable Cox regression analyses, stratified by origin. RESULTS: Among the 8758 patients included, 68% had PDAC, 13% DC, 12% AC, and 7% DA. Resection was performed in 35% of PDAC, 56% of DC, 70% of AC, and 59% of DA. Neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant therapy was administered in 22% of PDAC, 7% of DC, 7% of AC, and 12% of DA. Three-year OS was highest for AC (37%) and DA (34%), followed by DC (21%) and PDAC (11%). Adjuvant therapy was associated with improved OS among PDAC (HR = 0.62; 95% CI 0.55-0.69) and DC (HR = 0.69; 95% CI 0.48-0.98), but not AC (HR = 0.87; 95% CI 0.62-1.22) and DA (HR = 0.85; 95% CI 0.48-1.50). CONCLUSION: This retrospective study identified considerable differences in treatment modalities and OS between the four periampullary cancer origins in daily clinical practice. An improved OS after adjuvant chemotherapy could not be demonstrated in patients with AC and DA.

Real-world evidence of adjuvant gemcitabine plus capecitabine vs gemcitabine monotherapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

The added value of capecitabine to adjuvant gemcitabine monotherapy (GEM) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) was shown by the ESPAC-4 trial. Real-world data on the effectiveness of gemcitabine plus capecitabine (GEMCAP), in patients ineligible for mFOLFIRINOX, are lacking. Our study assessed whether adjuvant GEMCAP is superior to GEM in a nationwide cohort. Patients treated with adjuvant GEMCAP or GEM after resection of PDAC without preoperative treatment were identified from The Netherlands Cancer Registry (2015-2019). The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), measured from start of chemotherapy. The treatment effect of GEMCAP vs GEM was adjusted for sex, age, performance status, tumor size, lymph node involvement, resection margin and tumor differentiation in a multivariable Cox regression analysis. Secondary outcome was the percentage of patients who completed the planned six adjuvant treatment cycles. Overall, 778 patients were included, of whom 21.1% received GEMCAP and 78.9% received GEM. The median OS was 31.4 months (95% CI 26.8-40.7) for GEMCAP and 22.1 months (95% CI 20.6-25.0) for GEM (HR: 0.71, 95% CI 0.56-0.90; logrank P = .004). After adjustment for prognostic factors, survival remained superior for patients treated with GEMCAP (HR: 0.73, 95% CI 0.57-0.92, logrank P = .009). Survival with GEMCAP was superior to GEM in most subgroups of prognostic factors. Adjuvant chemotherapy was completed in 69.5% of the patients treated with GEMCAP and 62.7% with GEM (P = .11). In this nationwide cohort of patients with PDAC, adjuvant GEMCAP was associated with superior survival as compared to GEM monotherapy and number of cycles was similar.

Trends in Use and Perceptions About Triplet Chemotherapy Plus Bevacizumab for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

Importance: Triplet chemotherapy with fluorouracil, folinic acid, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan plus bevacizumab (FOLFOXIRI-B) is an effective first-line treatment option for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, the degree of implementation of FOLFOXIRI-B in daily practice is unknown. Objectives: To evaluate the current adoption rate of FOLFOXIRI-B in patients with mCRC and investigate the perspectives of medical oncologists toward this treatment option. Design, Setting, and Participants: This 1-week, multicenter, cross-sectional study in the Netherlands used a flash mob design, which facilitates ultrafast data generation (flash) through the engagement of numerous researchers (mob). During the study week (March 1-5, 2021), patient data were retrieved from electronic health records of 47 hospitals on patients with mCRC who were referred to a medical oncologist between November 1, 2020, and January 31, 2021. Interviews were simultaneously conducted with 101 medical oncologists from 52 hospitals who regularly treat patients with mCRC. Exposure: First-line systemic treatment as determined by the treating physician. Main Outcomes and Measures: The FOLFOXIRI-B prescription rate was the main outcome. Current practice was compared with prescription rates in 2015 to 2018. Eligibility for treatment with FOLFOXIRI-B was estimated. An exploratory outcome was medical oncologists' reported perspectives on FOLFOXIRI-B. Results: A total of 5948 patients in the Netherlands (median age [interquartile range], 66 [57-73] years; 3503 [59%] male; and 3712 [62%] with left-sided or rectal tumor) were treated with first-line systemic therapy for synchronous mCRC. A total of 282 patients with mCRC underwent systemic therapy during the study period (2021). Of these 282 patients, 199 (71%) were treated with intensive first-line therapy other than FOLFOXIRI-B, of whom 184 (65%) were treated with oxaliplatin doublets with or without bevacizumab; 14 (5%) with irinotecan doublets with or without bevacizumab, panitumumab, or cetuximab; and 1 (0.4%) with irinotecan with bevacizumab. Fifty-four patients (19%) were treated with fluoropyrimidine monotherapy with or without bevacizumab, 1 patient (0.4%) with panitumumab monotherapy, and 3 (1%) with immune checkpoint inhibitors. In total, 25 patients (9%; 95% CI, 6%-12%) were treated with first-line FOLFOXIRI-B compared with 142 (2%; 95% CI, 2%-3%) in 2015 to 2018. During the study period, 21 of 157 eligible patients (13.4%) in the Netherlands were treated with FOLFOXIRI-B. A total of 87 medical oncologists (86%) reported discussing FOLFOXIRI-B as a treatment option with eligible patients. A total of 47 of 85 (55%) generally communicated a preference for a chemotherapy doublet to patients. These oncologists reported a significantly lower awareness of guidelines and trial results. Toxic effects were the most reported reason to prefer an alternative regimen. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that FOLFOXIRI-B prescription rates have marginally increased in the last 5 years. Considering that most medical oncologists discuss this treatment option, the prescription rate found in this study was below expectations. Awareness of guidelines and trial data seems to contribute to the discussion of available treatment options by medical oncologists, and the findings of this study suggest a need for repeated and continuing medical education.

A population-based study on incidence, treatment, and survival in ampullary cancer in the Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION: Ampullary cancer is rare and as a result epidemiological data are scarce. The aim of this population-based study was to determine the trends in incidence, treatment and overall survival (OS) in patients with ampullary adenocarcinoma in the Netherlands between 1989 and 2016. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with ampullary adenocarcinoma were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Incidence rates were age-adjusted to the European standard population. Trends in treatment and OS were studied over (7 years) period of diagnosis, using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses for OS and stratified by the presence of metastatic disease. RESULTS: In total, 3840 patients with ampullary adenocarcinoma were diagnosed of whom, 55.0% were male and 87.1% had non-metastatic disease. The incidence increased from 0.59 per 100,000 in 1989-1995 to 0.68 per 100,000in 2010-2016. In non-metastatic disease, the resection rate increased from 49.5% in 1989-1995 to 63.9% in 2010-2016 (p < 0.001). The rate of adjuvant therapy increased from 3.1% to 7.9%. In non-metastatic disease, five-year OS (95% CI) increased from 19.8% (16.9-22.8) in 1989-1995 to 29.1% (26.0-31.2) in 2010-2016 (logrank p < 0.001). In patients with metastatic disease, median OS did not significantly improve (from 4.4 months (3.6-5.0) to 5.9 months (4.7-7.1); logrank p = 0.06). Cancer treatment was an independent prognostic factor for OS among all patients. CONCLUSION: Both incidence and OS of ampullary cancer increased from 1989 to 2016 which is most likely related to the observed increased resection rates and use of adjuvant therapy.

Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometric assay for the PARP-1 inhibitor olaparib in combination with the nitrogen mustard melphalan in human plasma.

A bioanalytical assay for the new poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 inhibitor olaparib in combination with melphalan was developed and validated. For the quantitative assay, human plasma samples were pre-treated on ice using protein precipitation with 2% (v/v) acetic acid in acetonitrile containing erlotinib and melphalan-d8 as internal standards. The extract was diluted with water and injected into the chromatographic system. This system consisted of a sub-2 µm particle, trifunctional bonded octadecyl silica column with an isocratic elution using 0.01% (v/v) of formic acid in a mixture of water and methanol. The eluate was transferred into the electrospray interface with positive ionization and the analyte was detected in the selected reaction monitoring mode of a triple quadrupole mass spectrometer. The assay was validated in a 10-5000 ng/ml calibration range for both drugs. The lowest level of this range corresponded to the lower limit of quantification. Within day precisions were 3.0-9.3%, between day precisions 6.0-9.8% and accuracies were between 101 and 110% for the whole calibration range. After validation the assay was used to assess the pharmacokinetics of olaparib in a patient with metastatic breast carcinoma. In addition, systemic exposure of melphalan was monitored in patients subjected to isolated hepatic perfusion with this drug. Both applications show that the new assay can be applied for human pharmacokinetic studies for both drugs.