Search

Background: The goal of this study was to characterize the efficacy and safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) versus conventionally fractionated radiation therapy with concurrent chemotherapy (CFRT) for the definitive treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer. The primary outcome measure was efficacy, defined by 2-year overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were incidence of any grade 3/4 toxicity and 1-year OS.Methods: A PICOS/PRISMA/MOOSE selection protocol was used to identify eligible studies. Inclusion criteria were: 1) patients diagnosed with locally advanced N0-1 M0 pancreatic cancer; 2) CFRT 1.8 to 2.0 Gy/fraction with chemotherapy per protocol or SBRT ≥5 Gy/fraction in ≤5 fractions; 3) either no control group or another definitive chemotherapy or radiation therapy arm; 4) at least 1 of the outcome measures reported; and 5) single or multi-arm phase 2/3 prospective study for CFRT and/or phase 1/2 or retrospective study for SBRT. Neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant chemotherapy was prescribed per protocol specifications. Weighted random effects meta-analyses were conducted using the DerSimonian and Laird method to characterize summary effect sizes for each outcome.Results: A total of 470 studies were initially screened; of these, 9 studies assessed SBRT and 11 studies assessed CFRT. For SBRT, the median dose was 30 Gy, and the most common regimen was 30 Gy/5 fractions. For CFRT, doses ranged from 45 to 54 Gy in 1.8- to 2.0-Gy fractions, with the majority of studies delivering 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions with concurrent gemcitabine. The random effects estimate for 2-year OS was 26.9% (95% CI, 20.6%-33.6%) for SBRT versus 13.7% (95% CI, 8.9%-19.3%) for CFRT and was statistically significant in favor of SBRT. The random effects estimate for 1-year OS was 53.7% (95% CI, 39.3%-67.9%) for SBRT versus 49.3% (95% CI, 39.3%-59.4%) for CFRT, and was not statistically significant. The random effects estimate for acute grade 3/4 toxicity was 5.6% (95% CI, 0.0%-20.0%) for SBRT versus 37.7% (95% CI, 24.0%-52.5%) for CFRT and was statistically significant in favor of SBRT. The random effects estimate for late grade 3/4 toxicity was 9.0% for SBRT (95% CI, 3.3%-17.1%) versus 10.1% (95% CI, 1.8%-23.8%) for CFRT, which was not statistically significant.Conclusion: These results suggest that SBRT for LAPC may result in a modest improvement in 2-year OS with decreased rates of acute grade 3/4 toxicity and no change in 1-year-OS or late toxicity. Further study into the use of stereotactic body radiation therapy for these patients is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Both gemcitabine and bendamustine have been evaluated in patients with recurrent/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma but to the authors' knowledge not as a doublet. The authors completed a phase 1/2 trial to identify the optimal dose and frequency of administration and to assess the efficacy of this combination in patients with recurrent/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma.Methods: Patients were treated up to a maximum dose of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 on day 1) and bendamustine (120 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2), which was determined to be the recommended phase 2 dose, administered every 21 days for up to 6 cycles. Patients could discontinue study therapy after 2 cycles to proceed with autologous or allogeneic stem cell transplantation.Results: No dose-limiting toxicities were identified, but 4 patients experienced grade 3 to 5 pulmonary adverse events (toxicity was graded according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 4]). A total of 26 patients were enrolled having completed a median of 4 prior lines of therapy (range, 1-7 lines), including 13 patients at the recommended phase 2 dose, in whom the overall response rate was 69% and the complete response rate was 46%. The median progression-free survival for the phase 2 patients was 11 months (95% CI, 3 months to not reached), and the median overall survival for this group had not been reached at the time of last follow-up (95% CI, 4 months to not reached).Conclusions: This doublet was found to be tolerable and effective, but patients must be monitored closely for pulmonary toxicity. The authors currently are evaluating this doublet in combination with nivolumab. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Intimal sarcoma (InS) is an exceedingly rare neoplasm with an unfavorable prognosis, for which new potentially active treatments are under development. We report on the activity of anthracycline-based regimens, gemcitabine-based regimens, and pazopanib in patients with InS.Methods: Seventeen sarcoma reference centers in Europe, the United States, and Japan contributed data to this retrospective analysis. Patients with MDM2-positive InS who were treated with anthracycline-based regimens, gemcitabine-based regimens, or pazopanib between October 2001 and January 2018 were selected. Local pathological review was performed to confirm diagnosis. Response was assessed by RECIST1.1. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were computed by Kaplan-Meier method.Results: Seventy-two patients were included (66 anthracycline-based regimens; 26 gemcitabine-based regimens; 12 pazopanib). In the anthracycline-based group, 24 (36%) patients were treated for localized disease, and 42 (64%) patients were treated for advanced disease. The real-world overall response rate (rwORR) was 38%. For patients with localized disease, the median RFS was 14.6 months. For patients with advanced disease, the median PFS was 7.7 months. No anthracycline-related cardiac toxicity was reported in patients with cardiac InS (n = 26). For gemcitabine and pazopanib, the rwORR was 8%, and the median PFS was 3.2 and 3.7 months, respectively.Conclusion: This retrospective series shows the activity of anthracycline-based regimens in InS. Of note, anthracyclines were used in patients with cardiac InS with no significant cardiac toxicity. The prognosis in patients with InS remains poor, and new active drugs and treatment strategies are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Ontuxizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody, targets endosialin (tumor endothelial marker 1 [TEM-1] or CD248), which is expressed on sarcoma cells and is believed to be involved in tumor angiogenesis. This is the first trial to evaluate ontuxizumab in patients with sarcoma.Methods: Part 1 was an open-label, dose-finding, safety lead-in: 4, 6, or 8 mg/kg with gemcitabine and docetaxel (G/D; 900 mg/m2 gemcitabine on days 1 and 8 and 75 mg/m2 docetaxel on day 8). In part 2, patients were randomized in a double-blind fashion in 2:1 ratio to ontuxizumab (8 mg/kg) or a placebo with G/D. Randomization was stratified by 4 histological cohorts.Results: In part 2 with 209 patients, no significant difference in progression-free survival between ontuxizumab plus G/D (4.3 months; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.7-6.3 months) and the placebo plus G/D (5.6 months; 95% CI, 2.6-8.3 months) was observed (P = .67; hazard ratio [HR], 1.07; 95% CI, 0.77-1.49). Similarly, there was no significant difference in median overall survival between the 2 groups: 18.3 months for the ontuxizumab plus G/D group (95% CI, 16.2-21.1 months) and 21.1 months for the placebo plus G/D group (95% CI, 14.2 months to not reached; P = .32; HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.82-1.82). No significant differences between the treatment groups occurred for any efficacy parameter by sarcoma cohort. The combination of ontuxizumab plus G/D was generally well tolerated.Conclusions: Ontuxizumab plus G/D showed no enhanced activity over chemotherapy alone in soft-tissue sarcomas, whereas the safety profile of the combination was consistent with G/D alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The standard of care for patients with resected stage I to stage III pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is adjuvant gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. The role of adjuvant treatment in patients with subcentimeter, stage IA PDAC is unknown. The current study evaluated the effect of adjuvant treatment on survival outcomes among patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer/International Union Against Cancer stage IA (T1N0) resected PDAC using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB).Methods: A retrospective review of the NCDB was conducted for patients diagnosed with T1 (tumor limited to the pancreas and measuring ≤2 cm in greatest dimension), lymph node-negative (N0), resected PDAC between 2004 and 2013. Patient demographics, histology, adjuvant treatment, and survival trends were examined. Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank tests were performed to determine the unadjusted association between overall survival (OS), tumor size, and treatment.Results: A total of 876 patients met the inclusion criteria. The patients had a mean age of 66.2 years (range, 32-90 years); approximately 83.3% were white (730 patients) and 53.1% were female (465 patients). Approximately 45.9% of the patients had moderately differentiated tumor histology (402 patients); 70.0% (613 patients) had tumors measuring 1 to 2 cm (T1c) and 30.0% (263 patients) had tumors measuring <1 cm (T1a/T1b). Approximately 94.2% of patients had negative surgical margins (815 patients) and 46.9% (410 patients) received adjuvant therapy. The median OS was significantly different for patients who received adjuvant therapy compared with patients who did not (70.7 months vs 46.9 months; P = .0001). For patients with tumors measuring <1 cm, survival was not found to be significantly different between patients who received adjuvant treatment compared with those who did not (not reached vs 85.3 months; P = .54). In the multivariable analysis, none of the covariates (treatment group, Charlson-Deyo Score, age, insurance, and facility status) demonstrated significant differences for patients with tumors measuring <1 cm.Conclusions: The current study is the first to demonstrate no survival benefit for adjuvant therapy in patients with resected subcentimeter PDAC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is associated with poor survival. This study compared the outcomes of patients with unresectable ICC treated with hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) plus systemic chemotherapy (SYS) with the outcomes of patients treated with SYS alone.Methods: Consecutive patients with ICC were retrospectively reviewed. Clinicopathologic data were reviewed. Survival rates were compared by Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank testing.Results: Between January 2000 and August 2012, 525 patients with ICC were evaluated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and 236 patients with unresectable tumors (locally advanced or metastatic) were analyzed. Disease was confined to the liver in 104 patients, who underwent treatment with combined HAI and SYS (n = 78 or 75%) or SYS alone (n = 26 or 25%). The response rate in the combined group was better than the rate in the group receiving SYS alone, although this did not reach statistical significance (59% vs 39%, P = .11). Overall survival for the combined group was longer than overall survival for the patients who received SYS alone (30.8 vs 18.4 months, P < .001), and this difference was maintained when patients with portal lymph node disease were included in the survival analysis (29.6 months with HAI and SYS [n = 93] vs 15.9 months with SYS [n = 74], P < .001). Eight patients who initially presented with unresectable tumors responded enough to undergo complete resection and had a median overall survival of 37 months (range, 10.4-92.3 months).Conclusions: In patients with unresectable ICC confined to the liver or with limited regional nodal disease, a combination of SYS and HAI chemotherapy is associated with greater survival than SYS alone. Cancer 2016;122:758-765. © 2015 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is a rare and lethal disease with few therapeutic options. Preclinical data suggest that the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) pathway could be involved in its progression.Methods: This open-label, randomized phase 2 trial recruited chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced BTC displaying a wild-type (WT) KRAS status. Patients were randomized to gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) ) and oxaliplatin (100 mg/m(2) ) with (arm A) or without (arm B) panitumumab (6 mg/kg) for up to 12 cycles. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) analyzed in an intention-to-treat fashion.Results: Eighty-nine patients (45 in arm A and 44 in arm B) were enrolled between June 2010 and September 2013. After a median follow-up of 10.1 months, the median PFS was 5.3 months (95% confidence interval, 3.3-7.2 months) in arm A and 4.4 months (95% confidence interval, 2.6-6.2 months) in arm B (P = .27). No survival differences were observed: the median overall survival was 9.9 months in arm A and 10.2 months in arm B (P = .42). In a subgroup analysis, no differences in PFS according to the site of the primary tumor were observed; patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma treated with panitumumab may have had a survival benefit in comparison with the control group (15.1 vs 11.8 months, P = .13). As for safety, skin toxicity was the main adverse event in arm A (80% of the patients). A higher incidence of diarrhea (55.5% vs 31.8%), mucositis (22.2% vs 13.6%), and constipation (24.4% vs 15.9%) was seen in arm A.Conclusions: These results confirm the marginal role of anti-EGFR therapy even for WT KRAS-selected BTC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is associated with an aggressive biology and a poor prognosis. Poor-risk RCC is defined by clinical prognostic factors and demonstrates similarly aggressive behavior. No standard treatment exists for patients with sarcomatoid RCC, and treatment options for patients with poor-risk disease are of limited benefit. The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy of antiangiogenic therapy in combination with cytotoxic chemotherapy in clinically aggressive RCC.Methods: This was a phase 2, single-arm trial of sunitinib and gemcitabine in patients with sarcomatoid or poor-risk RCC. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included the time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS), safety, and biomarker correlatives.Results: Overall, 39 patients had sarcomatoid RCC, and 33 had poor-risk RCC. The ORR was 26% for patients with sarcomatoid RCC and 24% for patients with poor-risk RCC. The median TTP and OS for patients with sarcomatoid RCC were 5 and 10 months, respectively. For patients with poor-risk disease, the median TTP and OS were 5.5 and 15 months, respectively. Patients whose tumors had >10% sarcomatoid histology had a higher clinical benefit rate (ORR plus stable disease) than those with ≤10% sarcomatoid histology (P = .04). The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events included neutropenia (n = 20), anemia (n = 10), and fatigue (n = 7).Conclusions: These results suggest that antiangiogenic therapy and cytotoxic chemotherapy are an active and well-tolerated combination for patients with aggressive RCC. The combination may be more efficacious than either therapy alone and is currently under further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Gemcitabine incorporation into DNA enhances cleavage complexes in vitro when combined with topoisomerase I inhibitors and demonstrates synergy in cancer cells when given with irinotecan. Topoisomerase I inhibitors require that topoisomerase I interacts with DNA to exert activity.Methods: Patients who had received previous anthracycline therapy or were not candidates for anthracycline therapy received gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg/m2 intravenously over 30 minutes followed by irinotecan at a dose of 100 mg/m2 over 90 minutes on Days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. The primary endpoint was improvement in response from that historically observed with gemcitabine (from 25% to 45%) as measured by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Correlative studies included characterization of cellular levels and nuclear distribution of topoisomerase I and pharmacokinetic analysis of gemcitabine and irinotecan.Results: Forty-nine patients were assessed for response. The response rate was approximately 25% (all partial responses [PRs], 12 patients; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 13-39). Six patients had stable disease (SD) for > or =6 months for a clinical benefit rate (PR + SD) of 39%. The median time to disease progression was 3.7 months (95% CI, 2.5 months-4.6 months), and median survival was 11.6 months (95% CI, 8.9 months-15 months). Toxicities included neutropenia, nausea, and vomiting. Seven of 9 tissue biopsies were assessable for topoisomerase I. Tumors with the 2 lowest nuclear to cytoplasmic ratios demonstrated no response to irinotecan.Conclusions: Gemcitabine and irinotecan are active in metastatic breast cancer, but response did not meet predetermined response parameters, and the null hypothesis was accepted. Topoisomerase I localization can be measured in metastatic breast cancer. Further validation is needed to determine whether this assay can predict response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy improves survival in muscle-invasive urothelial cancer, with MVAC (methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin) considered the standard regimen. Gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) has similar efficacy and less toxicity than MVAC in metastatic disease, but is untested as neoadjuvant treatment.Methods: The authors retrospectively evaluated patients with muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma who received neoadjuvant GC before radical cystectomy between November 2000 and December 2006 at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Post-therapy pathological downstaging to either residual disease at cystectomy (pT0) or no residual muscle-invasion (Results: Four cycles of neoadjuvant GC were given over 12 weeks (n=42). Thirty-nine (93%) of 42 patients received 4 cycles, with a median 91% drug delivery for cisplatin and 90% for gemcitabine. The pT0 proportion was 26% (95% confidence interval [CI], 14-42), and no residual muscle-invasive disease proportion (Conclusions: Neoadjuvant GC is feasible and allows for timely drug delivery. The proportion of GC-treated patients whose primary tumors were downstaged, with prolonged disease-free survival and minimal or no residual disease, was similar to MVAC-treated patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]