Systemic Therapy in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Patient Selection and Key Considerations.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Most patients with HCC have advanced disease at initial diagnosis, and sorafenib has been the only systemic treatment option for more than a decade in patients with advanced, unresectable HCC. However, there has been a dramatic change in the treatment algorithm in the last several years, given new drug approvals in the field. Most importantly, the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab has demonstrated clinically meaningful benefits in terms of response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival compared to sorafenib in the first-line setting. Recently a phase III trial showed that the combination of durvalumab with a single dose of tremelimumab improved overall survival compared to sorafenib, while durvalumab monotherapy was found to be noninferior to sorafenib, making it an attractive alternative single agent in selected patient populations. As immunotherapy makes its way into the therapeutic landscape of HCC, other novel targeted therapies, such as lenvatinib, cabozantinib, ramucirumab, and regorafenib, have also been approved by regulatory authorities for treatment of advanced, unresectable HCC. This review article focuses on the first-line systemic treatment options for HCC while addressing some of the most important questions aimed at optimization of HCC treatment.

Time to first treatment is an independent prognostic factor for Multiple Myeloma (MM).

INTRODUCTION: Multiple myeloma (MM) is an incurable plasma cell neoplasm. In this study, we aimed to analyze the impact of time to initiation of systemic therapy for MM on overall survival (OS). METHODS: We identified cases diagnosed with MM from the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2013. RESULTS: A total of 38,178 MM patients were included in the analysis. The median time to systemic therapy in our cohort was 17 days (range 0-120). The median OS for patients who initiated therapy > 30-days after diagnosis was longer than those who received it ≤ 7 days (46 vs. 27-month, p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, patients who received treatment ≤ 7 days from diagnosis had worse mortality compared with those receiving treatment > 30 days (HR 1.5; 95% CI 1.4-1.6). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, time to initiation of systemic therapy was an independent prognostic factor in MM. Similar to other lymphoid malignancies, this metric may be a surrogate for high-risk disease in MM, and future trials may need to investigate time-to-treatment as a factor to allow enrollment of potentially sick patients.

First-Line Targeted Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Role of Atezolizumab/Bevacizumab Combination.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an aggressive malignancy accounting for 90% of primary liver malignancies. Therapeutic options for HCC are primarily based on the baseline functional status, the extent of disease at presentation and the underlying liver function that is clinically evaluated by the Barcelona-Clinic Liver Cancer system and Child−Pugh score. In patients with advanced HCC, the United States Food and Drug Administration (US-FDA) approved systemic therapies include the combination of atezolizumab−bevacizumab, sorafenib, and lenvatinib in the first line setting while cabozantinib, regorafenib, ramucirumab (in patients with alfa-fetoprotein [AFP] > 400 ng/mL), pembrolizumab, nivolumab, and nivolumab-ipilimumab combination are reserved for patients who progressed on sorafenib. European Medical Agency (EMA) approved the use of atezolizumab−bevacizumab, sorafenib, and lenvatinib in the first line setting, while cabozantinib, regorafenib, and ramucirumab (in patients with alfa-fetoprotein [AFP] > 400 ng/mL) are approved for use in patients that progressed on first-line therapy. In the first line setting, sorafenib demonstrated a median overall survival (OS) benefit of 3 months as compared to that of best supportive care in randomized phase III trials, while lenvatinib was shown to be non-inferior to sorafenib. Recently, phase 3 studies with immunotherapeutic agents including atezolizumab plus a bevacizumab combination and tremelimumab plus durvalumab combination demonstrated a better OS and progression free survival (PFS) compared to sorafenib in the first-line setting, making them attractive first-line options in advanced HCC. In this review, we outlined the tumorigenesis and immune landscape of HCC in brief and discussed the role and rationale of combining immunotherapy and anti-VEGF therapy. We further expanded on potential limitations and the future directions of immunotherapy in combination with targeted agents in the management of advanced HCC.

Economic Cost and Sustainability of Oral Therapies in Precision Oncology.

PURPOSE: Precision oncology promises improved outcomes but the cost-effectiveness and accessibility of targeted therapies is debatable. We report price change patterns from 2015 to 2019 for several oral anticancer medications for common solid tumor malignancies. METHODS: We collected provider utilization and payment data from the public Medicare Part D database and extracted drug price information for commonly prescribed targeted oral anticancer agents for lung, breast, and prostate cancer. We then calculated median Pearson correlation coefficient values for various drugs (containing more than two data points) within each therapeutic class. We also calculated compound annual growth rates (CAGRs) for medication costs within each class and compared them with the consumer price index (CPI). RESULTS: Our study included six epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRi; one generic), five anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors (ALKi), two B-Raf inhibitors (BRAFi), three hormonal agents (one generic), three cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i), two poly-ADP-ribose inhibitors (PARPi), and seven antiandrogen agents (two generic). The median (range) Pearson correlation coefficient values for cost of drugs within each therapeutic class were 0.967 (0.915-0.978) for EGFRi, 0.981 (0.966-0.989) for ALKi, 0.996 for BRAFi, 0.994 (0.992-0.999) for CDK4/6i, 0.855 for PARPi, and 0.442 (-0.522 to 0.962) for antiandrogens. Therapies with two or fewer data points (generic erlotinib, dacomitinib, abiraterone, apalutamide, and darolutamide) were excluded. The median CAGRs in costs over the 5-year period were 4.56% (EGFRi), 6.40% (ALKi), 2.58% (BRAFi), 5.48% (hormonal agents), 5.21% (CDK4/6i), 27.29% (PARPi), and 34.8% (antiandrogens). The CPI over 5 years was 2.26%/year, and the average inflation rate was 1.90%/year. CONCLUSION: The median CAGR in costs for modern oral precision-driven cancer therapeutic classes mostly outpaced CPI and the average inflation. Increase in cost within the same class should be weighed against incremental clinical benefit for the patients to ensure that rising costs do not limit access to targeted therapies.

Trials, Tribunals, and Opportunities for Lung Cancer KRASG12C Brain Metastases.

The activity of KRAS inhibitors against brain metastases is relatively unexplored. The recent work on preclinical models and preliminary data from the ongoing KRYSTAL-1 phase Ib clinical trial support the potential of adagrasib (MRTX849) to penetrate the central nervous system and provide control of KRASG12C brain metastases. See related article by Sabari et al., p. 3318.

Change in Patients' Perceived Cognition Following Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy for Lymphoma.

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy can lead to durable responses in patients with relapsed/refractory hematologic malignancies. Immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) and cytokine release syndrome (CRS) are common and may place patients at risk for longer-term cognitive impairment. This study examined changes in cognition in the first year after CD19-directed CAR T-cell therapy for lymphoma, as well as CAR T-cell therapy-specific risk-factors (e.g., ICANS, CRS) and nonspecific risk factors (e.g., baseline quality of life, frailty) for worsening cognition. Patients' perceived cognition was assessed at baseline and at days 90 and 360. Clinical variables were abstracted from medical records. Piecewise mixed models were used to examine acute change (i.e., within 90 days) and longer-term change (i.e., from 90 days to 360 days) in cognition, as well as to explore risk factors for worsening cognition. Among 118 participants (mean age 61, 59% male), mean levels of perceived cognition did not change from baseline to day 90 (P> .05) but worsened from day 90 to day 360 in global cognition and in the domains of memory, language, organization, and divided attention (P< .05). Although statistically significant, changes were small (d values 0.15-0.28). Greater baseline fatigue, anxiety, and depression were associated with worse global cognition at day 90 (P< .01). Patients with more severe ICANS post-CART reported worse global cognition at day 360 (P< .05), although there were no differences in perceived cognition by severity of CRS (P> .05). Other putative risk factors were not associated with acute or longer-term changes in perceived cognition (P> .05). CAR T-cell therapy recipients reported delayed deterioration in several cognitive domains, although changes were small. These findings may be useful when educating future patients on what to expect when receiving CAR T-cell therapy.

Change in Neurocognitive Performance Among Patients with Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma in the First Year after Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell Therapy.

The success of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy in treating patients with relapsed/refractory hematologic malignancies is leading to a growing number of survivors treated with this regimen. To our knowledge, no previous studies have examined neurocognitive performance in adult CAR T cell therapy recipients, despite high rates of neurotoxicity and cytokine release syndrome (CRS) in the acute treatment period. This study examined changes in neurocognitive performance in the first year after CAR T cell therapy for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Putative risk factors for worsening neurocognitive performance (eg, neurotoxicity, CRS) were explored as well. Neurocognition was assessed before initiation of CAR T cell therapy and at 30, 90, and 360 days post-treatment. Clinical variables were abstracted from medical records. Mixed models were used to examine change in total neurocognitive performance (TNP) and cognitive domains (ie, attention, executive function, verbal ability, immediate and delayed memory, and visuospatial abilities). Among 117 participants (mean age, 61 years; 62% male), TNP and executive function declined slightly on average from baseline to day 90 and then improved from day 90 to day 360 (P < .04). Small but significant linear declines in visuospatial ability on average were also observed over time (P = .03). Patients who had 4 or more lines of previous therapy and those with worse neurotoxicity (but not CRS) demonstrated worse TNP. CAR T cell therapy recipients reported transient or persistent deterioration in several cognitive domains, although changes were slight. These findings may be useful when educating future patients on what to expect when receiving CAR T cell therapy.

Alliance A011801 (compassHER2 RD): postneoadjuvant T-DM1 + tucatinib/placebo in patients with residual HER2-positive invasive breast cancer.

This report describes the rationale, purpose and design of A011801 (CompassHER2 RD), an ongoing prospective, multicenter, Phase III randomized trial. Eligible patients in the United States (US) and Canada with high-risk (defined as ER-negative and/or node-positive) HER2-positive (HER2+) residual disease (RD) after a predefined course of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and HER2-directed treatment are randomized 1:1 to adjuvant T-DM1 and placebo, versus T-DM1 and tucatinib. Patients have also received adjuvant radiotherapy and/or endocrine therapy, if indicated per standard of care guidelines. The primary objective of the trial is to determine if the invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) with T-DM1 plus tucatinib is superior to iDFS with T-DM1 plus placebo; other outcomes of interest include overall survival (OS), breast cancer-free survival (BCFS), distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS), brain metastases-free survival (BMFS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Correlative biomarker, quality of life (QoL) and pharmacokinetic (PK) end points are also evaluated.

Lay abstract In this research study (A011801; CompassHER2 RD), patients with early stage HER2-positive breast cancer who already received treatment with chemotherapy and anti-HER2 targeted therapies followed by surgery are mainly enrolled. If cancer is still present in the breast and/or lymph nodes at the time of surgery, there is a higher risk of a recurrence in the future, and enrollment on A011801 is an option. Usually, if there is tumor remaining after chemotherapy and anti-HER2 targeted therapies, the main treatment is the use of an FDA-approved intravenous drug called T-DM1. Additional treatment may also include radiotherapy and/or medications to block the activity of estrogen. The usual treatment approach reduces the likelihood of breast cancer recurring in the future. This study has been performed to answer the following question: Is the combination of T-DM1 and a newer drug tucatinib better than usual treatment with T-DM1 alone at preventing cancer from returning? Study participants will receive treatment with T-DM1 and placebo (a pill that looks like the study drug but contains no medication) or T-DM1 and tucatinib, for up to 14 cycles, unless their breast cancer returns or the side effects become too severe. Research bloods are taken on study along with standard blood work, and we also request a stored tumor sample from the original biopsy and from the breast cancer surgery for research purposes. Optional Quality of Life Questionnaires are also included in the trial. After the study, participants finish T-DM1 and placebo, or T-DM1 and tucatinib, and their doctor will continue to follow their condition with clinic visits every 6 months for 10 years and watch for side effects and for signs of breast cancer recurring. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04457596 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Management of well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors.

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are a heterogeneous group of epithelial neoplasms with predominantly neural and endocrine differentiation that have the ability to produce peptide hormones and other biologically active substances. The histologic characterization of NETs based on differentiation and grading is crucial to determining prognosis and treatment. Surgery still offers the best chance of cure for patients with NETs, and tumor resection is the preferred approach when possible. For locally advanced or metastatic disease, approaches to treatment can vary widely depending on the extent of disease and goals of therapy. A better understanding of the biology of NETs acquired over the last decade has facilitated the development of targeted therapies, such as everolimus and a variety of tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Furthermore, the field of theranostics has led to dramatic improvements in our diagnostic and treatment abilities. Chemotherapy has a role in the treatment of NETs, evidenced by the benefit shown with the combination of temozolomide and capecitabine to treat pancreatic NETs. Somatostatin analogues are a mainstay of treatment because they reduce secretory products and have antiproliferative effects on NET cells. In this work, we aim to review the landscape for the diagnosis and treatment of well-differentiated NETs.

FGFR Inhibitors in Oncology: Insight on the Management of Toxicities in Clinical Practice.

Fibroblast Growth Factor receptor (FGFR) pathway aberrations have been implicated in approximately 7% of the malignancies. As our knowledge of FGFR aberrations in cancer continues to evolve, FGFR inhibitors emerged as potential targeted therapeutic agents. The promising results of pemigatinib and infigratinib in advanced unresectable cholangiocarcinoma harboring FGFR2 fusions or rearrangement, and erdafitinib in metastatic urothelial carcinoma with FGFR2 and FGFR3 genetic aberrations, lead to their accelerated approval by the United States (USA) FDA. Along with these agents, many phase II/III clinical trials are currently evaluating the use of derazantinib, infigratinib, and futibatinib either alone or in combination with immunotherapy. Despite the encouraging results seen with FGFR inhibitors, resistance mechanisms and side effect profile may limit their clinical utility. A better understanding of the unique FGFR-inhibitor-related toxicities would invariably help us in the prevention and effective management of FGFR-inhibitor-induced adverse events thereby enhancing their clinical benefit. Herein, we summarized the physiology of FGF/FGFR signaling and briefly discussed the possible mechanisms that could lead to FGFR inhibitor resistance and side effects. In addition, we proposed treatment guidelines for the management of FGFR-inhibitor-associated toxicities. This work would invariably help practicing oncologists to effectively manage the unique toxicities of FGFR inhibitors.

Outcomes of COVID-19 in Patients With Cancer: A Closer Look at Pre-Emptive Routine Screening Strategies.

PURPOSE: The benefit of routine pre-emptive screening for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infections in patients with cancer before cancer-directed therapies is unclear. Herein, we characterize the outcomes of a cohort of patients with cancer who were diagnosed with COVID-19 by routine screening (RS) in comparison with those diagnosed on the basis of clinical suspicion or exposure history (nonroutine screening [NRS]). METHODS: A multisite prospective observational study was conducted at three major and five satellite campuses of the Mayo Clinic Cancer Center between March 18 and July 31, 2020. The primary outcome was COVID-19-related hospital admission. Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit admissions and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Five thousand four hundred fifty-two patients underwent RS in the outpatient setting only, and 44 (0.81%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. RS detected 19 additional patients from the scheduled inpatient admissions for surgical or interventional procedures or inpatient chemotherapy. One hundred sixty-one patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 on the basis of NRS. COVID-19-related hospitalization rate (17.5% v 26.7%; P = .14), intensive care unit admission (1.6% v 5.6%; P = .19), and mortality (4.8% v 3.7%; P = .72) were not significantly different between the RS and NRS groups. In the multivariable analysis, age ≥ 60 years (odds ratio, 4.4; P = .023) and an absolute lymphocyte count ≤ 1.4 × 109/L (odds ratio, 9.2; P = .002) were independent predictors of COVID-19-related hospital admission. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 positivity rate was low on the basis of RS. Comparing the hospital admission and mortality outcomes with the NRS cohort, there were no significant differences. The value of routine pre-emptive screening of asymptomatic patients with cancer for COVID-19 remains low.

Aspirin and Statin Use and the Risk of Gallbladder Cancer.

Aspirin and statin drugs have been associated with reduced risk of several gastrointestinal cancers, but their association with gallbladder cancer (GBC) has not been well established. We evaluated the association of aspirin and statins with the risk of GBC. Patients with GBC managed at Mayo Clinic between 2000 and 2019 were matched 1:2 with a general patient pool by age and sex. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess associations between GBC and aspirin or statin use. The analysis included 795 cases and 1590 controls, with a median age of 67 years. Aspirin or statin use alone or in combination was higher in controls (p < 0.001). Univariate analysis showed that the use of aspirin [odds ratio (OR): 0.11; 95%CI: 0.08-0.15] or statins (OR: 0.29; 95%CI: 0.20-0.40) and their combined use (OR: 0.18; 95%CI: 0.13-0.24) was associated with lower risk of GBC. Multivariable analysis revealed that aspirin (OR: 0.12; 95%CI: 0.09-0.16) and combined statins and aspirin (OR: 0.46; 95%CI: 0.31-0.67) were associated with lower risk of GBC. Aspirin alone or in combination with statins is associated with a strongly reduced risk of GBC. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these results and to elucidate their mechanisms.

Quality of life in caregivers of patients receiving chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy.

OBJECTIVE: Informal family caregivers provide critical support for patients receiving chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. However, caregivers' experiences are largely unstudied. This study examined quality of life (QOL; physical functioning, pain, fatigue, anxiety, and depression), caregiving burden, and treatment-related distress in caregivers in the first 6 months after CAR T-cell therapy, when caregivers were expected to be most involved in providing care. Relationships between patients' clinical course and caregiver outcomes were also explored. METHODS: Caregivers completed measures examining QOL and burden before patients' CAR T-cell therapy and at days 90 and 180. Treatment-related distress was assessed at days 90 and 180. Patients' clinical variables were extracted from medical charts. Change in outcomes was assessed using means and 99% confidence intervals. Association of change in outcomes with patient clinical variables was assessed with backward elimination analysis. RESULTS: A total of 99 caregivers (mean age 59, 73% female) provided data. Regarding QOL, pain was significantly higher than population norms at baseline but improved by day 180 (p < .01). Conversely, anxiety worsened over time (p < .01). Caregiver burden and treatment-related distress did not change over time. Worsening caregiver depression by day 180 was associated with lower patient baseline performance status (p < .01). Worse caregiver treatment-related distress at day 180 was associated with lower performance status, intensive care unit admission, and lack of disease response at day 90 (ps < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Some CAR T-cell therapy caregivers experience pain, anxiety, and burden, which may be associated patients' health status. Further research is warranted regarding the experience of CAR T-cell therapy caregivers.

Systemic therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: targeted therapies.

Therapeutic options for advanced, unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have changed dramatically over the last 3 years. While surgical resection, orthotropic liver transplantation, and localized therapeutic options such as ablation, radiation therapy, and embolization remain therapeutics of choice in localized disease, systemic therapy is the only option in advanced, metastatic HCC. Since the United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) approval of sorafenib in 2008, targeted therapies such as sunitinib, tivantinib, brivanib, erlotinib, and linifanib; monoclonal antibody- bevacizumab showed no meaningful improvement in treatment of HCC. However, with improved understanding on the molecular pathophysiology and tumor heterogeneity of HCC, we have made progress in expanding the therapeutic options in advanced HCC. Targeted therapy with lenvatinib, cabozantinib, and regorafenib; monoclonal antibody ramucirumab; immunotherapies nivolumab and pembrolizumab have demonstrated promising results in the clinical trials. The current work outlines the molecular mechanisms and tumorigenesis of HCC, a detailed discussion of the trial results of the approved therapies in HCC, future perspectives and potential options to overcome the challenges of systemic therapy in HCC.

Epigenetic modulation of immunotherapy cofactors to enhance tumor response in lung cancer.

Immunotherapy with a checkpoint inhibitor has revolutionized the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Replacing cytotoxic chemotherapy in some settings, immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors enables many patients to live longer with much fewer side effects. Nonetheless, immunotherapy alone only works for about one-fifth of unselected patients and despite the durability of response, treatment will eventually fail. There are several important cofactors within the tumor microenvironment which can contribute to the efficacy of immunotherapy. These include T-cells, chemokines, and antigen presentations. Preliminary research has shown that these cofactors can be altered by epigenetic modulation. Specifically, hypomethylating agents or histone deacetylase inhibitors can lead to changes in the compositions and characteristics within the tumor microenvironment in a way that enhances the efficacy of checkpoint inhibitor. In recent clinical trials of combined immuno-epigenetic therapy, tumor responses were observed among patients who were previously resistant or refractory to immunotherapy. Furthermore, biological correlative studies also confirmed the mechanism of action of these agents, especially among patients who derived benefit. Nonetheless, at present, the efficacy in terms of tumor response seems modest and side effects, though mostly not serious, can result in treatment interruption or interfere with the quality of life.

Prevention and treatment of FGFR inhibitor-associated toxicities.

Fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors have shown promising results in terms of objective response rates in phase I/II trials in various malignancies that harbor FGFR genetic aberrations. The class of medications brings in the concept of 'personalized' treatment by targeting susceptible FGFR genetic alterations in some rare but dismal cancers such as cholangiocarcinoma. Despite the fact that FGFR inhibitors are well-tolerated, these drugs are associated with toxicities that are distinct from that of other small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors. These toxicities can result in dose reductions, interruptions, and even drug discontinuation as reported in the clinical trials. The prevention and effective management of the FGFR inhibitor-associated toxicities will allow patients to stay on these medications without the therapy interruptions. The current work is focused on summarizing the available literature on unique FGFR inhibitor-associated toxicities with a special emphasis in managing the unique adverse events.

Survival and prognostic factors in patients with rectal squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the rectum is a rare form of gastrointestinal malignancy. The current knowledge on the natural history is primarily derived from case series. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB), we determined the prognostic factors and overall survival (OS) outcomes of rectal SCC reported to NCDB between 2004 and 2015. Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used to perform OS analysis. Propensity matched analysis was undertaken to compare the OS outcomes between rectal and anal SCC. RESULTS: Of the 3405 cases included in our analysis, 67% were female. Median age at diagnosis was 61 years and did not differ by sex. In stages I-III, patients who received definitive chemoradiation only (108 months) had a better median OS as compared to surgery alone (76 months) (p = 0.012). On multivariate analysis, age <60 years, female sex, and receipt of chemoradiation with or without surgery were independent predictors of better OS in stage I-III disease. Administration of chemoradiation was associated with better OS in stage IV disease. On propensity matched analysis comparing outcomes to anal SCC, OS of rectal SCC was inferior (79 months) to anal SCC (113 months) (p < 0.001), no such difference in OS was noted in the cohorts that received surgery plus post-surgical chemoradiation (p = 0.12). CONCLUSION: Outcomes of rectal SCC were dependent upon age, sex, comorbidity score, and therapy received. Chemoradiation alone or in combination with surgery was associated with a better median OS in patients with stages I-III.