A Case Series of Choroidal and Orbital Neuroendocrine Tumors: Metastasis: Two Patients Treated With Peptide Radionuclide Therapy.

ABSTRACT: Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are rare cancers with heterogeneous histologies, response to treatments, and prognoses. Majority of these cancers originate in the gastrointestinal tract and metastasize to the liver. We report the cases of 5 patients with low-grade NET disease with rare metastases to the choroids. Two of the patients were treated with peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (lutetium 177 [ 177 Lu]). This is the first report confirming peptide radionuclide therapy safety in patients with low-grade NET with ocular metastases.

Phase II trial of nivolumab and metformin in patients with treatment-refractory microsatellite stable metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical studies showed metformin reduces exhaustion of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and potentiates programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) blockade. We hypothesized that metformin with nivolumab would elicit potent antitumor and immune modulatory activity in metastatic microsatellite stable (MSS) colorectal cancer (CRC). We evaluated this hypothesis in a phase II study. METHODS: Nivolumab (480 mg) was administered intravenously every 4 weeks while metformin (1000 mg) was given orally, two times per day following a 14-day metformin only lead-in phase. Patients ≥18 years of age, with previously treated, stage IV MSS CRC, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0-1, having received no prior anti-PD-1 agent were eligible. The primary endpoint was overall response rate with secondary endpoints of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Correlative studies using paired pretreatment/on-treatment biopsies and peripheral blood evaluated a series of immune biomarkers in the tumor microenvironment and systemic circulation using ChipCytometry and flow cytometry. RESULTS: A total of 24 patients were enrolled, 6 patients were replaced per protocol, 18 patients had evaluable disease. Of the 18 evaluable patients, 11/18 (61%) were women and the median age was 58 (IQR 50-67). Two patients had stable disease, but no patients had objective response, hence the study was stopped for futility. Median OS and PFS was 5.2 months (95% CI (3.2 to 11.7)) and 2.3 months (95% CI (1.7 to 2.3)). Most common grade 3/4 toxicities: Anemia (n=2), diarrhea (n=2), and fever (n=2). Metformin alone failed to increase the infiltration of T-cell subsets in the tumor, but combined metformin and nivolumab increased percentages of tumor-infiltrating leukocytes (p=0.031). Dual treatment also increased Tim3+ levels in patient tissues and decreased naïve CD8+T cells (p=0.0475). CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab and metformin were well tolerated in patients with MSS CRC but had no evidence of efficacy. Correlative studies did not reveal an appreciable degree of immune modulation from metformin alone, but showed trends in tumorous T-cell infiltration as a result of dual metformin and PD-1 blockade despite progression in a majority of patients.

Phase II randomised, double-blind study of mFOLFIRINOX plus ramucirumab versus mFOLFIRINOX plus placebo in advanced pancreatic cancer patients (HCRN GI14-198).

BACKGROUND: Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-mediated signalling contributes to andgiogenesis and therapy resistance in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Ramucirumab (RAM) is a VEGFR2 monoclonal antibody. We conducted a randomised phase II trial to compare progression-free survival (PFS) between mFOLFIRINOX with or without RAM in first line therapy of metastatic PDAC. METHODS: This phase II randomised, multi-centre, placebo controlled, double-blinded, trial randomly assigned to recurrent/metastatic PDAC patients to either mFOLFIRINOX/RAM (Arm A) or mFOLFIRINOX/placebo (Arm B). The primary endpoint is PFS at 9 months, and the secondary endpoints include overall survival (OS), response rate and toxicity evaluation. RESULTS: A total of 86 subjects enrolled, 82 eligible (42 in Arm A versus 40 in Arm B). The mean age was comparable (61.7 versus 63.0, respectively). Majority were White (N = 69) and males (N = 43). The median PFS was 5.6 compared to 6.7 months, for Arm A and B, respectively. At 9 months, the PFS rates were 25.1% and 35.0% for Arms A and B, respectively (p = 0.322). The median OS in Arm A was 10.3 compared to 9.7 months for Arm B (p = 0.094). The disease response rate for Arm A was 17.7% compared to Arm B of 22.6%. FOLFIRINOX/RAM combination was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of RAM to FOLFIRINOX did not significantly impact PFS or OS. The combination was well tolerated (Funded by Eli Lilly; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02581215).

Survival and Prognostic Factors in Patients With Pancreatic Colloid Carcinoma Compared With Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: Colloid carcinoma (CC) is a rare subtype of pancreatic carcinoma. The aims of the study are to characterize the clinicopathological features and to evaluate the overall survival (OS) of patients with CC. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with pancreatic CC and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) between 2004 and 2016 were identified from the National Cancer Database using International Classification of Disease-O-3 morphology (8480/3 and 8140/3) and topography (C25) codes. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were used to analyze OS. RESULTS: Fifty-six thousand eight hundred forty-six patients were identified. A total of 2430 patients (4.3%) were diagnosed with pancreatic CC. Males constituted 52.8% of CC and 52.2% of PDAC. Colloid carcinoma presented with pathological stage I disease more often (16.7% vs 5.9%) and stage IV disease less often (42.1% vs 52.4%) than PDAC (P < 0.001). Stage I CC received chemotherapy (36.0% vs 59.4%) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (4.4% vs 14.2%) less often compared with PDAC (P < 0.001). Statistically significant improved OS was seen among stage I, II, and IV CC compared with PDAC. CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatic CC presented as stage I disease more often compared with PDAC. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered more often in stage I PDAC compared with CC. Colloid carcinoma had improved OS compared with PDAC among all stages except stage III.

FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine-based Chemotherapy for Borderline Resectable and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Multi-institutional, Patient-Level, Meta-analysis and Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer often presents as locally advanced (LAPC) or borderline resectable (BRPC). Neoadjuvant systemic therapy is recommended as initial treatment. It is currently unclear what chemotherapy should be preferred for patients with BRPC or LAPC. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and multi-institutional meta-analysis of patient-level data regarding the use of initial systemic therapy for BRPC and LAPC. Outcomes were reported separately for tumor entity and by chemotherapy regimen including FOLFIRINOX (FIO) or gemcitabine-based. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies comprising 2930 patients were analyzed for overall survival (OS) calculated from the beginning of systemic treatment. OS for patients with BRPC was 22.0 months with FIO, 16.9 months with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (Gem/nab), 21.6 months with gemcitabine/cisplatin or oxaliplatin or docetaxel or capecitabine (GemX), and 10 months with gemcitabine monotherapy (Gem-mono) (p < 0.0001). In patients with LAPC, OS also was higher with FIO (17.1 months) compared with Gem/nab (12.5 months), GemX (12.3 months), and Gem-mono (9.4 months; p < 0.0001). This difference was driven by the patients who did not undergo surgery, where FIO was superior to other regimens. The resection rates for patients with BRPC were 0.55 for gemcitabine-based chemotherapy and 0.53 with FIO. In patients with LAPC, resection rates were 0.19 with Gemcitabine and 0.28 with FIO. In resected patients, OS for patients with BRPC was 32.9 months with FIO and not different compared to Gem/nab, (28.6 months, p = 0.285), GemX (38.8 months, p = 0.1), or Gem-mono (23.1 months, p = 0.083). A similar trend was observed in resected patients converted from LAPC. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with BRPC or LAPC, primary treatment with FOLFIRINOX compared with Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy appears to provide a survival benefit for patients that are ultimately unresectable. For patients that undergo surgical resection, outcomes are similar between GEM+ and FOLFIRINOX when delivered in the neoadjuvant setting.

Role of local therapy in the management of patients with metastatic anal squamous cell carcinoma: a National Cancer Database study.

Background: About 10-20% of patients with anal squamous cell carcinoma (SCCa) present with metastatic disease and are usually treated with systemic chemotherapy. However, primary tumor control is crucial as local failure is associated with significant morbidity. Using the largest cohort to date, we report the impact of local therapy on survival among patients with metastatic anal SCCa. Methods: Data were collected from US hospitals that contributed to the National Cancer Database (NCDB) between 2004 and 2015. Patients who did not receive palliative systemic chemotherapy were excluded from analysis. Univariate (UVA) and multivariable analyses (MVA) were performed to identify factors associated with patient outcome. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the association between tumor/patient characteristics and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 1,160 patients were identified over the 12 years of study. Median age was 57 years. Majority were female (64.9%), non-Hispanic Whites (79.1%) and had Charlson-Deyo Score of 0 (83.6%). Most common metastatic sites were liver (25.9%), lung (11.6%) and bone (8.5%). More than 79% of the patients had received radiation to the primary site, and 10.4% underwent surgical resection for local control. Use of local therapy correlated closely with OS on MVA (HR 0.66; 0.55-0.79; P<0.001), with a 12-month and 5-year OS rates of 72.8% and 25.7% respectively, compared with 61.1% and 14.6% for patients treated with chemotherapy only. Poor prognostic factors included male gender (HR 1.44; 1.24-1.67; P<0.001), age >70 years (HR 1.28; 1.02-1.62; P=0.034), lack of health insurance (HR 1.32; 1.02-1.71; P=0.034), and cloacogenic zone location (HR 4.02; 1.43-11.30; P=0.008). There was no benefit from abdominoperineal resection (mOS =19.7 months; HR 1.05; 0.48-2.29; P=0.909), but both local resection of the primary (mOS =24.8 months, HR 0.48; 0.29-0.80; P=0.005) and palliative radiation (mOS =22.6 months; HR 0.66; 0.55-0.79; P<0.001) were associated with improved OS. Conclusions: In addition to systemic therapy, resection of the primary tumor or palliative radiation improved OS in patients with anal SCCa. Patients unlikely to benefit from local control were those >70 years of age, male, lack of health insurance and cloacogenic carcinoma.

A randomized phase 2 trial of nivolumab, gemcitabine, and cisplatin or nivolumab and ipilimumab in previously untreated advanced biliary cancer: BilT-01.

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine and cisplatin has limited benefit as treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). The addition of an anti-programmed death receptor (PD-1)/PD-ligand (L1) antibody to either systemic chemotherapy or anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA4) antibody has shown benefit in multiple solid tumors. METHODS: In this phase 2 trial, patients 18 years or older with advanced BTC without prior systemic therapy and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status 0-1 were randomized across six academic centers. Patients in Arm A received nivolumab (360 mg) on day 1 along with gemcitabine and cisplatin on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks for 6 months followed by nivolumab (240 mg) every 2 weeks. Patients in Arm B received nivolumab (240 mg) every 2 weeks and ipilimumab (1 mg/kg) every 6 weeks. RESULTS: Of 75 randomized patients, 68 received therapy (Arm A = 35, Arm B = 33); 51.5% women with a median age of 62.5 years. The observed primary outcome of 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rates in the evaluable population was 59.4% in Arm A and 21.2% in Arm B. The median PFS and overall survival (OS) in Arm A were 6.6 and 10.6 months, and in Arm B 3.9 and 8.2 months, respectively, in patients who received any treatment. The most common treatment-related grade 3 or higher hematologic adverse event was neutropenia in 34.3% (Arm A) and nonhematologic adverse events were fatigue (8.6% Arm A) and elevated transaminases (9.1% Arm B). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of nivolumab to chemotherapy or ipilimumab did not improve 6-month PFS. Although median OS was less than 12 months in both arms, the high OS rate at 2 years in Arm A suggests benefit in a small cohort of patients.

Survival Outcomes of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Elderly Patients with Stage III Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The survival impact of multi-agent (MAC) compared with single-agent (SAC) adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) in elderly patients with stage III colon cancer (CC) remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare survival outcomes of MAC and SAC in this population utilizing the National Cancer Database (NCDB). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients aged ≥70 years with pathological stage III CC diagnosed in 2004-2015 were identified in the NCDB. Univariate and multivariable analyses were conducted, and Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify associations between MAC vs. SAC and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Among 41 707 elderly patients (≥70 years old) with stage III CC, about half (n = 20 257; 48.5%) received AC; the majority (n = 12 923, 63.8%) received MAC. The median age was 79 (range 70-90). The majority were female (n = 11 201, 55.3%), Caucasians (88%) and had moderately differentiated tumor grade (n = 12 619, 62.3%), tumor size >4 cm (11 785, 58.2%), and negative surgical margins (18 496, 91.3%). Low-risk stage III CC constituted 50.6% (n = 10 264) of the study population. High-risk stage III CC was associated with worse OS compared with low-risk disease (HR 0.35, 0.34-0.36, P < .001). Multi-agent chemotherapy was associated with a better 5-year OS compared with SAC (P < .001). High-risk stage III patients who received MAC vs. SAC had an OS of 4.2 vs. 3.4 years, respectively (P < .001). Low-risk stage III patients who received MAC vs. SAC had a median OS of 8.5 vs. 7 years (P < .001). In univariate and multivariable analyses, male sex, positive surgical margin, insurance and facility types, age, year of diagnosis, tumor size, and Charlson-Deyo score of >2 were associated with worse OS (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Any adjuvant chemotherapy has a trend of survival benefits. Multi-agent chemotherapy seems to have an enhanced benefit in the 70-75 age group. Multi-agent chemotherapy seemed to have similar efficacy as SAC in those aged >76 years.

Predictive and Prognostic Effects of Primary Tumor Size on Colorectal Cancer Survival.

BACKGROUND: Pathologic staging is crucial in colorectal cancer (CRC). Unlike the majority of solid tumors, the current staging model does not use tumor size as a criterion. We evaluated the predictive and prognostic impact of primary tumor size on all stages of CRC. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database (NCDB), we conducted an analysis of CRC patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 who underwent resection of their primary cancer. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify predictive and prognostic factors, Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models for association between tumor size and survival. RESULTS: About 61,000 patients met the inclusion criteria. Median age was 63 years and majority of the tumors were colon primary (82.7%). AJCC stage distribution was: I - 20.1%; II - 32.1%; III - 34.7% and IV - 13.1%. The prognostic impact of tumor size was strongly associated with survival in stage III disease. Compared to patients with tumors <2cm; those with 2-5cm (HR 1.33; 1.19-1.49; p<0.001), 5-10cm (HR 1.51 (1.34-1.70; p<0.001) and >10cm (HR 1.95 (1.65-2.31; p<0.001) had worse survival independent of other variables. Stage II treated without adjuvant chemotherapy had comparable survival outcomes (HR 1.09; 0.97-1.523; p=0.148) with stage III patients who did, while Stage II patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy did much better than both groups (HR 0.76; 0.67-0.86; p<0.001). Stage III patients who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy had the worst outcomes among the non-metastatic disease subgroups (HR 2.66; 2.48-2.86; p<0.001). Larger tumors were associated with advanced stage, MSI high, non-rectal primary and positive resection margins. CONCLUSIONS: Further studies are needed to clarify the role of tumor size in prognostic staging models, and how to incorporate it into therapy decisions.

High-Risk Features Are Prognostic in dMMR/MSI-H Stage II Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: High-risk features, such as T4 disease, bowel obstruction, poorly/undifferentiated histology, lymphovascular, perineural invasion, and <12 lymph nodes sampled, indicate poor prognosis and define high-risk stage II disease in proficient mismatch repair stage II colon cancer (CC). The prognostic role of high-risk features in dMMR/MSI-H stage II CC is unknown. Similarly, the role of adjuvant therapy in high-risk stage II CC with dMMR/MSI-H (≥1 high-risk feature) has not been studied in prospective trials. The aim of this analysis of the National Cancer Database is to evaluate the prognostic value of high-risk features in stage II dMMR/MSI-H CC. METHODS: Univariate (UVA) and multivariate (MVA) Cox proportional hazards (Cox-PH) models were built to assess the association between clinical and demographic characteristics and overall survival. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were generated with log-rank tests to evaluate the association between adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk and low-risk cohorts separately. RESULTS: A total of 2,293 stage II CC patients have dMMR/MSI-H; of those, 29.5% (n = 676) had high-risk features. The high-risk dMMR/MSI-H patients had worse overall survival [5-year survival and 95%CI, 73.2% (67.3-78.1%) vs. 80.3% (76.7-83.5%), p = 0.0001]. In patients with stage II dMMR/MSI-H CC, the high-risk features were associated with shorter overall survival (OS) along with male sex, positive carcinoembryonic antigen, Charlson-Deyo score >1, and older age. Adjuvant chemotherapy administration was associated with better OS, regardless of the high-risk features in dMMR/MSI-H (log-rank test, p = 0.001) or not (p = 0.0006). When stratified by age, the benefit of chemotherapy was evident only in patients age ≥65 with high-risk features. CONCLUSION: High-risk features are prognostic in the setting of dMMR/MSI-H stage II CC. Adjuvant chemotherapy may improve survival specifically in patients ≥65 years and with high-risk features.

Evaluating the impact of the Patient Preference Assessment Tool on clinicians' recommendations for phase I oncology clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: Many groups recommend assessment of patient preferences particularly for patients with advanced, incurable cancer. We, therefore, developed the Patient Preference Assessment Tool (PPAT) to ascertain patient preferences in order to inform clinician recommendations and improve shared decision-making. The aim of this study is to assess the PPAT's impact on clinicians' strength of recommendations for phase I oncology clinical trials. METHODS: Clinicians recorded the strength of their recommendation on a Likert scale before viewing the patient's PPAT. After viewing the PPAT, the clinician discussed the clinical trial with the patient and then recorded the strength of recommendation again. If there was a change, the clinician noted the reason for the change: clinical findings or patient preference. Clinicians were interviewed about the acceptability of the tool. Our threshold for determining if a change in recommendation due to the PPAT was significant was 20%, given the multiple factors influencing a clinician's recommendation. We also noted the type of phase I conversation observed based on classifications defined in prior work-priming, treatment-options, trial logistics, consent. RESULTS: N = 29. The strength of the clinicians' recommendations changed due to patient preferences in 7 of 29 (24%) of the conversations. The seven changes due to preferences were all in the 23 treatment-options conversations, for an impact rate of 30% in this type of conversation. 82% of clinicians found the PPAT useful. CONCLUSION: The PPAT was impactful in an academic setting, exceeding our 20% impact threshold. This tool helps achieve the important goal of incorporating patient preferences into shared decision-making about clinical trials.

Multicenter, Open-Label, Phase I Study of DSP-7888 Dosing Emulsion in Patients with Advanced Malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Wilms' tumor 1 (WT1) is overexpressed in various malignancies. DSP-7888 Dosing Emulsion, also known as ombipepimut-S (United States Adopted Name; International Nonproprietary Name: adegramotide/nelatimotide), is an investigational therapeutic cancer vaccine comprising two synthetic peptides derived from WT1 to promote both cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CTL) and helper T-lymphocyte-mediated immune responses against WT1-expressing tumors. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to report the results from a phase I dose-escalation study (NCT02498665) that evaluated DSP-7888, administered either intradermally (ID) or subcutaneously (SC), in patients with recurrent or advanced malignancies associated with overexpression of WT1. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this phase I dose-escalation study, patients with recurrent or advanced malignancies associated with overexpression of WT1 who progressed on, were intolerant to, or not a candidate for standard therapy or who presented with a malignancy that had no definite standard therapy received escalating doses of ID or SC DSP-7888 in a rolling-six study design. DSP-7888 3.5, 10.5, or 17.5 (ID only) mg was administered until disease progression or other discontinuation event. Primary objectives were safety, tolerability, and identification of the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Overall survival (OS) and WT1-specific CTL induction were included as secondary and exploratory objectives, respectively. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients received either ID (3.5 mg, n = 4; 10.5 mg, n = 3; 17.5 mg, n = 3) or SC DSP-7888 (3.5 mg, n = 9; 10.5 mg, n = 5). No dose-limiting toxicity was observed. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse event was injection site reactions (ID, 100% [10/10]; SC, 35.7% [5/14]); all were grade 1 or 2. Four patients (ID 17.5 mg, n = 1; SC 3.5 mg, n = 1; SC 10.5 mg, n = 2) had stable disease, 16 had progressive disease, and four were not evaluable. Median (95% confidence interval) OS duration was 180.0 (136.0-494.0) days. Among evaluable patients, WT1-specific CTL induction was observed in 66.7% (6/9) and 41.7% (5/12) of those administered ID and SC DSP-7888, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: DSP-7888 Dosing Emulsion was well tolerated, with no dose-limiting toxicities, in patients with recurrent or advanced malignancies. Higher WT1-specific CTL induction activity was noted with ID compared with SC administration; because of this, the ID route was selected for further evaluation in the clinical program. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02498665.

Survival Outcomes of Acinar Cell Pancreatic Cancer: A National Cancer Database Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Acinar cell pancreatic carcinomas (ACPCs) are rare neoplasms accounting for 1% to 2% of pancreatic tumors in adults. The objective of this study is to evaluate the benefit of chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting in resected ACPC and in the palliative setting for metastatic ACPC. METHODS: Data were obtained from all US hospitals that contributed to the National Cancer Database between 2004 and 2014. Cases were identified using the histology code 8550. RESULTS: A total of 593 patients with ACPC were identified. The mean age was 64.4 years (range, 18-90 years), with a male preponderance (72.8%, n = 432). Localized stage disease comprised 52.3% (n = 310) of patients. Among localized ACPC patients, 88.0% (n = 191) underwent surgery and 50.6% (n = 91) received adjuvant chemotherapy. The 5-year overall survival in those who received adjuvant treatment was slightly higher than those who did not receive adjuvant treatment (46.7% vs 44.8%, P = 0.3271). Among advanced-stage ACPC patients, 67.6% received chemotherapy, which translated into improved 5-year overall survival compared with no chemotherapy (8.1% vs 0%, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy in the palliative setting for advanced-stage ACPC patients was associated with improved survival. Adjuvant therapy did not translate into significant survival benefit.

Impact of Tumor Side on Clinical Outcomes in Stage II and III Colon Cancer With Known Microsatellite Instability Status.

BACKGROUND: Tumor sidedness as a prognostic factor in advanced stage colon cancer (CC) is well established. The impact of tumor sidedness on the clinical outcomes of stage II and III CC has not been well studied. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was utilized to identify patients with pathological stage II and III primary adenocarcinoma of the colon from 2010 to 2015 using ICD-O-3 morphology and topography codes: 8140-47, 8210-11, 8220-21, 8260-63, 8480-81, 8490 and C18.0, 18.2,18.3, 18.5,18.6, 18.7. Univariate (UVA) and multivariable (MVA) survival analyses and Kaplan-Meier Curves with Log-rank test were utilized to compare overall survival (OS) based on tumor location and treatment received. RESULTS: A total of 35,071 patients with stage II (n = 17,629) and III (n = 17,442) CC were identified. 51.3% female; 81.5% Caucasian; median age 66 (range, 18-90). Majority of stage II and III tumors were right sided, 61.2% (n = 10,794) and 56.0% (n = 9,763). Microsatellite instability high (MSI-H) was more common in stage II compared to III, 23.3% (n = 4,115) vs 18.2% (n = 3,171) (p < 0.0001). In stage II MSI-H CC right was more common than left, 78.3% (n = 3223) vs 21.7% (n = 892). There was no significant difference in survival between stage II MSI-H left vs right (5-year OS 76.2 vs 74.7%, p = 0.1578). Stage II MSS CC right was more common than left, 56.0% (n = 7571) vs 44.0% (n = 5943), and survival was better in the left vs right (5-year OS 73.2 vs 70.8%, p = 0.0029). Stage III MSI-H CC was more common in the right than in the left, 75.6% (n = 2,397) vs 24.4% (n = 774) and survival was better in the left (5-year OS 62.5 vs 56.5%, p = 0.0026). Stage III MSS CC was more common in the right than in the left, 51.6% (n = 7,366) vs 48.4% (n = 6,905), and survival was better in the left vs right (5-year OS 67.0 vs 54.4%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Survival was better in left sided tumors compared to right in stage II MSS, stage III MSS, and stage III MSI-H CC.

Impact of high-risk features for stage II adenocarcinoma of the appendix.

BACKGROUND: Clinico-pathological high-risk features are frequently utilized in adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) decisions in stage II colorectal cancer and their utility in stage II appendiceal adenocarcinoma (AA) is not established. The aim of this study is to determine the impact of high-risk features in clinical outcomes and whether high risk features are predictive of AC benefit in stage II AA. METHODS: Patients with pathological stage II AA between 2010 and 2015 were identified from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) using ICD-O-3 morphology and topography codes: 8140, 8480 and C18.1. High risk stage II AA was defined as having at least one of the following clinicopathological features: T4 tumor, <12 lymph nodes examined, poorly differentiated histology, positive margins, or lymphovascular invasion. Patients with none of these features were defined as low-risk. RESULTS: A total of 1040 patients with pathological stage II AA were identified. 51.0% males, 84.5% Caucasian; median age 61 (range, 19-90). 46.4% were determined to have high-risk stage II AA. High-risk status was associated with worse OS compared to low-risk in univariate (HR 1.55; 95% CI 1.18-2.02; p = 0.001) and multivariable analyses (HR 1.36; 95% CI 1.03-1.79; p = 0.028). High-risk stage II AA patients had significantly worse 5-year OS compared to low-risk patients (67.1% vs. 74.5%, p = 0.0013). AC was administered in 34.4% (n = 166) of high-risk patients and in 36.5% (n = 203) of low-risk patients. Among high-risk patients, AC was not associated with better OS in univariate (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.59-1.26; p = 0.448) and multivariable analyses (HR 1.35; 95% CI 0.90-2.04; p = 0.151) compared to no AC. Similarly, among low-risk patients, AC was not associated with better OS in univariate (HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.60-1.39; p = 0.679) and multivariable analyses (HR 1.27; 95% CI 0.81-2.02; p = 0.299) compared to no AC. For high-risk patients, 5-year OS was 68.3% in patients that received AC vs. 66.5% in patients that did not (p = 0.722). For low-risk patients, 5-year OS was 74.0% in patients that received AC vs. 76.3% in patients that did not (p = 0.813). CONCLUSION: High-risk stage II AA patients had significantly worse 5-year OS compared to low-risk patients. AC did not improve survival regardless of high-risk features in stage II AA in this retrospective study. A prospective randomized clinical trial would be required to determine the impact of high-risk features on AC in stage II AA.

Role of Resection of the Primary in Metastatic Well-Differentiated Neuroendocrine Tumors.

OBJECTIVE: Resection of the primary (RP) in metastatic neuroendocrine tumor (NET) is controversial. The aim was to evaluate survival outcomes for RP in metastatic NET patients. METHODS: Data were obtained from US hospitals at the National Cancer Database between 2004 and 2014. χ2, analysis of variance tests, univariate, and multivariate cox proportional hazards models were evaluated. Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests conducted to compare the survival difference of patient characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 2361 patients were identified. The mean age was 62.1 years (standard deviation, 13 years), male-to-female ratio 1:1; 33% were small intestine, 26.3% pancreas, and 24.4% lung; 69.6% were well-differentiated; and 42.5% underwent RP. The 5-year overall survival (OS) was significantly improved for patients who underwent RP in small intestine (5-year OS, 63.9% vs 44.2%), lung (5-year OS, 65.4% vs 20.2%), and pancreas tumors (5-year OS, 75.6% vs 30.6%). On multivariate analysis, RP (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.73; P < 0.001), female, year of diagnosis 2010-2014, margin, Charlson-Deyo score less than 2, and age less than 51 years, were associated with better OS. CONCLUSIONS: Resection of the primary in metastatic well-differentiated NET is associated with improved OS compared with no RP.

Perioperative therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: Pattern of use and survival outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Multimodality therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is currently considered the standard of care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of perioperative therapy on surgical resection in mCRC. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was analyzed for affected patients between 2004 and 2013. Univariate and multivariate analyses were done to identify factors associated with patient outcomes. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were used for the association between patient characteristics and survival. RESULTS: About 61,940 patients with mCRC were identified. Mean age = 63.4 years (SD ± 14). About 69% had a colon primary and 32% had only one metastatic site. Only 49% of those who underwent surgery for both primary and metastatic sites received postoperative chemotherapy (p < .001). Negative prognostic factors included no chemotherapy received (hazard ratio [HR], 2.32; 2.27-2.37; p < .001), more than three metastatic sites (HR, 2.28; 2.09-2.48; p < .001), year of diagnosis between 2004 and 2008 (HR, 1.71; 1.15-1.20; p < .001) and colon tumor location with right worse than left-sided (HR, 1.21; 1.19-1.24; p < .001). Five-year overall survival for resection of the primary and metastatic site (28.2%) was higher than for no surgical treatment (4.7%). CONCLUSION: Perioperative therapy was associated with improved survival, following resection of metastatic sites or primary tumor.

Is adjuvant chemotherapy beneficial for stage II-III goblet cell carcinoid/goblet cell adenocarcinoma of the appendix?

BACKGROUND: Goblet cell carcinoma (GCC), formerly known as goblet cell carcinoid, of the appendix constitutes less than 14% of all primary appendiceal neoplasms. Surgical resection is the main treatment and the role of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) is not established. This study aims to evaluate the impact of AC in stage II-III appendiceal GCC. METHODS: Patients with pathological stage II and III GCC who underwent surgical resection between 2006 and 2015 were identified from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) using ICD-O-3 morphology and topography codes: 8243/3 (goblet cell carcinoid) and C18.1. Patients treated with neoadjuvant systemic and/or radiation therapy and adjuvant radiation were excluded. Univariate and multivariable analyses were conducted, and Kaplan-Meier Curves were used to compare overall survival (OS) based on treatment received with Log-rank test. RESULTS: A total of 619 patients were identified. 54.4% males and 89.0% Caucasian; median age 56 (range, 23-90) years. Distribution across pathological stages II-III was 82.7% (N = 512) and 17.3% (N = 107) respectively. AC was administered in 9.4% (N = 48) of stage II and 47.7% (N = 51) of stage III patients. For stage II patients, AC was not associated with better OS in univariate (HR 0.32; 95% CI 0.04-2.34; p = 0.261) or multivariable analyses (HR 0.29; 95% CI 0.04-2.12; p = 0.221). By contrast, in stage III patients, AC was associated with better OS in univariate (HR 0.35; 95% CI 0.17-0.71; p = 0.004) and multivariable analyses (HR 0.25; 95% CI 0.07-0.88; p = 0.031). In the entire cohort 5-year OS for patients that received AC was 85.5% (74.0%, 92.1%) versus 82.7% (77.5%, 86.8%) (p = 0.801) with no AC. For stage II patients, 5-year OS was 96.9% with AC vs. 89.1% with no AC (p = 0.236). For stage III patients, 5-year OS was 77.1% with AC vs. 42.8% with no AC (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: AC was associated with improved OS in patients with pathological stage III GCC of the appendix, but not with pathological stage II.