Clinical course of small gastric subepithelial lesion less than 20 mm diagnosed by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are treated as malignant gastric subepithelial lesions (SELs), and resection is recommended. However, small gastric SELs < 20 mm with no malignant features are monitored without histopathological examination, and the frequency of malignancy is unknown. This study aimed to clarify the clinicopathological findings and clinical course of gastric SELs < 20 mm measured by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients with small gastric SELs < 20 mm diagnosed using EUS at a tertiary referral center between 2009 and 2021. The clinical course after diagnosis using EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) was reviewed. RESULTS: Among 333 patients with small gastric SELs, 104 patients with 105 lesions underwent EUS-FNA. The pathological diagnosis was confirmed in 87 patients. GISTs were the most common pathology (47%). Among the 87 patients, 43 underwent therapeutic interventions, including tumor resection and chemotherapy. In groups of tumor resection, the pathological tumor size on the resected specimen was significantly larger than the size measured by EUS (19.5 mm vs 15.0 mm, P < 0.001), and 37% of resected SELs were 20 mm or over. No recurrence was observed after tumor resection during a mean follow-up period of 40 months. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 40% of small gastric SELs were malignant tumors, such as GIST, with most of them requiring treatment. Additionally, considering that the EUS measurement is 5 mm smaller than the pathological tumor diameter, further examinations, such as systematic EUS-FNA, may be required for SEL, including those smaller than 20 mm.

Current status of the cost burden of first-line systemic treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in Japan, 2021-22.

BACKGROUND: Although recent advances in systemic therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have led to prolonged patient survival, the high costs of the drugs place a heavy burden on both patients and society. The objectives of this study were to examine the treatment regimens used as first-line systemic treatment for patients with advanced HCC in Japan and to estimate the treatment costs per regimen. METHODS: For this study, we aggregated the data of patients who had received first-line systemic treatment for advanced HCC between July 2021 and June 2022. The treatment cost per month of each regimen was estimated based on standard usage, assuming an average weight of 60 kg for male patients. The data were categorized by the treatment regimen, and the treatments were categorized based on the cost into very high-cost (≥1 000 000 Japanese yen [JPY]/month), high-cost (≥500 000 JPY/month) and other (<500 000 JPY/month) treatments. RESULTS: Of the total of 552 patients from 24 institutions whose data were analyzed in this study, 439 (79.5%) received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, 98 (17.8%) received lenvatinib and 15 (2.7%) received sorafenib as the first-line treatment. The treatment cost per month for each of the above regimens was as follows: atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, 1 176 284 JPY; lenvatinib, 362 295 JPY and sorafenib, 571 644 JPY. In total, 82.2% of patients received high-cost regimens, and the majority of these patients received a very high-cost regimen of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. CONCLUSIONS: Advances in systemic therapies for HCC have led to prolonged patient survival. However, the treatment costs are also increasing, imposing a burden on both the patients and society.

Influence of major hepatectomy on gemcitabine-based chemotherapy for recurrent biliary tract cancer after surgery: a subgroup analysis of JCOG1113.

BACKGROUND: Major hepatectomy (MH) can increase the risk of adverse events (AEs) owing to impaired drug metabolism due to decreased liver volume and surgical injury. Thus, we performed this subgroup analysis using data from JCOG1113, a phase III trial comparing gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS) and gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) in patients with advanced and recurrent biliary tract cancer (BTC), to evaluate the effect of MH on the safety and efficacy of GC and GS regimens in patients with recurrent BTC. METHODS: Of the 354 patients with advanced BTC enrolled in JCOG1113, 76 patients with postoperative recurrence (30 in the MH group and 46 in the non-MH group) were analyzed. RESULTS: Grade ≥ 3 platelet count decreased in both arms was more frequent in the MH group than in non-MH group (GC, 0.0 vs. 17.6%; GS, 3.9 vs. 15.4%). However, in the MH group, the white blood cell decreased (GC, 55.0 vs. 38.5%; GS, 23.1 vs. 7.7%) and anemia (GC, 15.0 vs. 11.8%; GS, 23.1 vs. 7.7%) were less common than in the non-MH group. The MH and non-MH groups showed no significant difference in overall survival (OS) in both GC [median OS, 23.0 in MH vs. 16.9 months in non-MH (hazard ratio, 0.857; 95% CI 0.387-1.899)], and GS [median OS, 21.5 vs. 14.9 months (hazard ratio, 0.670; 95% CI 0.310-1.447)] arms. CONCLUSIONS: The safety and efficacy of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were comparable between patients who underwent MH and those who underwent other surgeries.

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

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

Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Gemcitabine plus Nab-Paclitaxel versus Gemcitabine Alone in Older Adults with Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) has been a standard treatment for unresectable pancreatic cancer (uPC); however, the current treatment status and usefulness in older adults with uPC remain unclear. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the patient background and compare the efficacy and safety of GnP versus other treatments in older adults with uPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective observational study, we enrolled 233 eligible patients aged ≥76 years with pathologically proven, clinically uPC, and no history of chemotherapy from 55 Japanese centers during September 2018-September 2019. The main endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety. Geriatric assessments were performed upon registration and after 3 months. To adjust for confounders, we conducted propensity score-matched analyses. RESULTS: GnP, gemcitabine alone (Gem), best supportive care, and other therapies were administered to 116, 72, 16, and 29 patients, respectively. In the propensity score-matched analysis, 42 patients each were selected from the GnP and Gem groups. The median OS was longer in the GnP group than in the Gem group (12.2 vs. 9.4 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.65; 95% CI, 0.37-1.13). The median PFS was significantly longer in the GnP group than in the Gem group (9.2 vs. 3.7 months; HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.23-0.64). The incidence of severe adverse events was higher with GnP than with Gem; however, the difference was not significant. CONCLUSION: GnP is more efficacious than Gem in patients aged ≥76 years with uPC despite demonstrating a higher incidence of severe adverse events.

Efficacy of chemotherapy for patients with metastatic or recurrent pancreatic adenosquamous carcinoma: A multicenter retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Pancreatic adenosquamous carcinoma (PASC) is a rare variant of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The usual treatment for metastatic or recurrent PASC is systemic chemotherapy in accordance with the PDAC treatment strategy. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of chemotherapy, especially the benefit of recent combination therapies, in patients with metastatic or recurrent PASC. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective analysis of 116 patients with metastatic or recurrent PASC treated with first-line chemotherapy between April 2001 and December 2017 at 24 Japanese institutions. RESULTS: Combination chemotherapies included gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel (GnP, n = 28), fluorouracil/leucovorin + irinotecan + oxaliplatin (FFX, n = 10), gemcitabine + S-1 (GS, n = 10), and others (n = 9). Monotherapies included gemcitabine (n = 51) and S-1 (n = 8). The median overall survival (OS) was 6.5, 7.3, and 4.3 months for the whole cohort, the combination therapy group, and the monotherapy group, respectively. Multivariate analysis indicated that combination therapy showed a better trend in OS than monotherapy (hazard ratio = 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-1.20). GnP or FFX were selected in 58.7% of patients after FFX was approved in Japan, and revealed a median OS, median progression-free survival, and objective response rate of 7.3 months, 2.8 months, and 26.9% in GnP and 7.2 months, 2.3 months, and 20.0% in FFX respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that combination therapy may be more effective than monotherapy. GnP and FFX showed similar and clinically meaningful efficacy for patients with metastatic or recurrent PASC.

Randomized Phase II Study of Gemcitabine Monotherapy vs. Gemcitabine with an EPA-Enriched Oral Supplement in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer is often associated with cachexia. It had been reported that eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) improve cachexia. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine with an EPA-enriched oral supplement in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: This open-label phase II study consisted of patients (pts) who were randomly categorized into the EPA group (1,000 mg/m2 gemcitabine was administered on day 1, 8, and 15, every 4 weeks while an EPA-enriched oral supplement (prosure®, EPA 1.056 mg per pack) was taken daily at the maximum of two packs or the gemcitabine monotherapy group with an allocation ratio of 2:1. The primary endpoint was the evaluation of the 1-year survival estimating 10% addition. RESULTS: Randomized 68 pts were examined (EPA: 45, gemcitabine: 23). The 1-year survival probability of the EPA group was 35% while the gemcitabine group was 19%. The median survival times were 8.2 and 9.7 mo, respectively. The hazard ratio for EPA group was 0.79 [95% CI 0.46-1.37]; (P = 0.40). The toxicities were mild and insignificant in both groups. More beneficial effects of EPA in survival were observed in men, pancreatic body-tail and low C-reactive protein patients. CONCLUSION: An EPA-enriched oral supplement may be effective in advanced pancreatic cancer.

Endoscopic duodenal stent placement versus gastrojejunostomy for unresectable pancreatic cancer patients with duodenal stenosis before introduction of initial chemotherapy (GASPACHO study): a multicenter retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic duodenal stent placement is an alternative technique to gastrojejunostomy for gastric outlet obstruction due to pancreatic cancer. We compared the efficacy of endoscopic duodenal stent placement with that of gastrojejunostomy for treating patients with pancreatic cancer who are candidates for intensive combination chemotherapies as the first line of treatment. METHODS: This retrospective observational study included 100 patients from 18 institutions in Japan. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) cytologically or histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the pancreas, (2) good performance status, (3) gastric outlet obstruction scoring system score of 0-1 and (4) no history of treatment for pancreatic cancer. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the background characteristics of patients in the endoscopic duodenal stent placement (n = 57) and gastrojejunostomy (n = 43) groups. The median overall survival in the endoscopic duodenal stent placement and gastrojejunostomy groups was 5.9 and 6.0 months, respectively. Clinical success was achieved in 93 cases; the median time to food intake resumption was significantly shorter in the endoscopic duodenal stent placement group (median: 3 days, n = 54) than in the gastrojejunostomy group (median: 5 days, n = 43). Chemotherapy was introduced in 63% of the patients in both groups after endoscopic duodenal stent placement or gastrojejunostomy. Chemotherapy was started earlier in the endoscopic duodenal stent placement group (median: 14 days) than in the gastrojejunostomy (median: 32 days) group. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic duodenal stent placement showed similar or better clinical outcomes than gastrojejunostomy. Thus, it might be a promising option in patients with good performance status.

Tissue harmonic versus contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography for the diagnosis of pancreatic tumors: Prospective multicenter study.

OBJECTIVES: This prospective multicenter study aimed to assess and compare the accuracy of tissue harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography (TH-EUS) and contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography (CH-EUS) for differentiating pancreatic carcinoma from other pancreatic tumors. METHODS: Consecutive patients with solid pancreatic tumors were prospectively enrolled between August 2013 and December 2014. To assess the accuracy of TH-EUS and CH-EUS, we compared four parameters of TH-EUS (fuzzy edge, irregular periphery, hypoechogenicity, and heterogeneous internal echogenicity) and four parameters of CH-EUS (hypoenhancement and heterogeneous enhancement in the early and late phases, respectively) to investigate which parameter of each method was most suitable to diagnose pancreatic carcinomas. Interobserver agreement and the diagnostic ability of pancreatic carcinoma using TH-EUS and CH-EUS were assessed and compared. RESULTS: A total of 204 patients were enrolled. For the diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma, interobserver agreement by experts and nonexperts was 0.33-0.50 and 0.35-0.50 for TH-EUS, respectively, and 0.72-0.74 and 0.20-0.54 for CH-EUS, respectively. Irregular periphery was the most accurate diagnostic parameter among TH-EUS findings for differentiating pancreatic carcinomas, with sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 95.0%, 42.9%, and 78.9%, respectively. Late phase hypoenhancement was the most accurate diagnostic parameter among CH-EUS findings for differentiating pancreatic carcinomas, with sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 90.8%, 74.6%, and 85.8%, respectively. The accuracy of CH-EUS (late phase hypoenhancement) for diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma was significantly higher than that of TH-EUS (irregular periphery) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In comparison with TH-EUS, CH-EUS increased the diagnostic ability and reproducibility for the diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma. UMIN (000011124).

Quantitative monitoring of circulating tumor DNA in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer undergoing chemotherapy.

According to cancer genome sequences, more than 90% of cases of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) harbor active KRAS mutations. Digital PCR (dPCR) enables accurate detection and quantification of rare mutations. We assessed the dynamics of circulating tumor DNA (ct-DNA) in patients with advanced PDAC undergoing chemotherapy using dPCR. KRAS G12/13 mutation was assayed by dPCR in 47 paired tissue- and ct-DNA samples. The 21 patients were subjected to quantitative ct-DNA monitoring at 4 to 8-week intervals during chemotherapy. KRAS mutation was detected in 45 of those 47 patients using tissue DNA. In the KRAS mutation-negative cases, next-generation sequencing revealed KRAS Q61K and NRAS Q61R mutations. KRAS mutation was detected in 23/45 cases using ct-DNA (liver or lung metastasis, 18/19; mutation allele frequency [MAF], 0.1%-31.7%; peritoneal metastasis, 3/9 [0.1%], locally advanced, 2/17 [0.1%-0.2%]). In the ct-DNA monitoring, the MAF value changed in concordance with the disease state. In the 6 locally advanced cases, KRAS mutation appeared concurrently with liver metastasis. Among the 6 cases with liver metastasis, KRAS mutation disappeared during the duration of stable disease or a partial response, and reappeared at the time of progressive disease. The median progression-free survival was longer in cases in which KRAS mutation disappeared after an initial course of chemotherapy than in those in which it was continuously detected (248.5 vs 50 days, P < .001). Therefore, ct-DNA monitoring enables continuous assessment of disease state and could have prognostic utility during chemotherapy.