Search

E Gabriela Chiorean,1 Daniel Von Hoff,2 Yin Wan,3 Sandra Margunato-Debay,4 Marc Botteman,3 David Goldstein5 1Medical Oncology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 2Oncology, Translational Genomics Research Institute and HonorHealth, Phoenix, AZ, 3Pharmerit International, Bethesda, MD, 4Celgene Corporation, Summit, NJ, USA; 5Department of Medical Oncology, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia Objectives: This analysis examined changes in Karnofsky performance status (KPS) as a surrogate for patient’s well-being during treatment with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine vs gemcitabine alone as first-line therapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC) in the Phase III MPACT trial.Participants and methods: Descriptive analyses were performed for KPS at three time points (3 and 6 months after randomization and 1 month before disease progression) and for time to any KPS deterioration. Time to definitive KPS deterioration (≥10-point KPS decrease from baseline) was calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method. A larger decrease from baseline (≥20 points) was investigated as a sensitivity analysis. A Cox proportional hazards model analyzed the effect of baseline factors (including treatment) potentially associated with time to definitive deterioration.Results: The two treatment arms had generally comparable time to any KPS deterioration, similar KPS at 3 and 6 months after randomization and at 1 month before disease progression, and no significant difference in time to definitive deterioration. Baseline KPS, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, age, liver metastases, and region had a significant effect on time to definitive KPS deterioration, but treatment arm did not.Conclusion: The increased survival observed with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine was not associated with adverse effects on performance status. Keywords: Karnofsky performance status, metastatic pancreatic cancer, chemotherapy, nab-paclitaxel, gemcitabine

Elena Gabriela Chiorean, Andrew L Coveler Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA Abstract: Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer death in the US and is expected to become the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the next decade. Despite 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin with irinotecan and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel significantly improving outcomes for metastatic cancer, refractory disease still poses significant challenges. Difficulties with early detection and the inherent chemo- and radio-resistant nature of this malignancy led to attempts to define the sequential biology of pancreatic cancer in order to improve survival outcomes. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is characterized by several germline or acquired genetic mutations, the most common being KRAS (90%), CDK2NA (90%), TP53 (75%–90%), DPC4/SMAD4 (50%). In addition, the tumor microenvironment, chemoresistant cancer stem cells, and the desmoplastic stroma have been the target of some promising clinical investigations. Among the core pathways reproducibly shown to lead the development and progression of this disease, DNA repair, apoptosis, G1/S cell cycle transition, KRAS, Wnt, Notch, Hedgehog, TGF-beta, and other cell invasion pathways, have been the target of “precision therapeutics”. No single molecularly targeted therapeutic though has been uniformly successful, probably due to the tumor heterogeneity, but biomarker research is evolving and it hopes to select more patients likely to benefit. Recent reports note activity with immunotherapies such as CD40 agonists, CCR2 inhibitors, cancer vaccines, and novel combinations against the immunosuppressive tumor milieu are ongoing. While many obstacles still exist, clearly we are making progress in deciphering the heterogeneity within pancreatic cancers. Integrating conventional and immunological targeting will be the key to effective treatment of this deadly disease. Keywords: pancreatic cancer, immunotherapies, signaling pathway inhibitors, targeted therapies

Background: Modulation of glucocorticoid receptor (GR) activity in tumor cells enhances chemotherapy efficacy. We evaluated the selective GR modulator relacorilant plus nab-paclitaxel in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) who had received at least 2 prior therapy lines., Patients and Methods: In this open-label, single-arm, phase III study, patients received once-daily oral relacorilant (100 mg, titrated to 150 mg in 25 mg increments/cycle) and nab-paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) on days 1, 8, and 15 of 28-day cycles. The primary efficacy endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), target gene modulation, and safety were also assessed., Results: Of 43 patients enrolled, 31 were evaluable for ORR (12 did not reach first postbaseline radiographic assessment). An interim analysis to assess whether ORR was ≥10% showed no confirmed responses and the study was discontinued. Two (6.5%) patients attained unconfirmed partial responses and 15 (48.4%) had stable disease. Fourteen of 31 (45.2%) patients had reductions in target lesion size, despite prior nab-paclitaxel exposure in 12 of the 14. Median PFS and OS were 2.4 months (95% CI, 1.4-4.2) and 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.8-4.9), respectively. The most common adverse events were fatigue and nausea. RNA analysis confirmed that relacorilant plus nab-paclitaxel suppressed 8 cortisol target genes of interest., Conclusion: Relacorilant plus nab-paclitaxel showed modest antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with mPDAC, with no new safety signals. Studies of this combination in other indications with a high unmet medical need are ongoing., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: The phase 1b KEYNOTE-651 study evaluated pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in microsatellite stable or mismatch repair-proficient metastatic colorectal cancer., Patients and Methods: Patients with microsatellite stable or mismatch repair-proficient metastatic colorectal cancer received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks plus 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (previously untreated; cohort B) or 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan (previously treated with fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin; cohort D) every 2 weeks. Primary end point was safety; investigator-assessed objective response rate per RECIST v1.1 was secondary and biomarker analysis was exploratory., Results: Thirty-one patients were enrolled in cohort B and 32 in cohort D; median follow-up was 30.2 and 33.5 months, respectively. One dose-limiting toxicity (grade 3 small intestine obstruction) occurred in cohort D. In cohort B, grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 18 patients (58%), most commonly neutropenia and decreased neutrophil count (n = 5 each). In cohort D, grade 3 or 4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 17 patients (53%), most commonly neutropenia (n = 7). No grade 5 treatment-related AEs occurred. Objective response rate was 61% in cohort B (KRAS wildtype: 71%; KRAS mutant: 53%) and 25% in cohort D (KRAS wildtype: 47%; KRAS mutant: 6%). In both cohorts, PD-L1 combined positive score and T-cell-inflamed gene expression profiles were higher and HER2 expression was lower in responders than nonresponders. No association between tumor mutational burden and response was observed., Conclusion: Pembrolizumab plus 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin/5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan demonstrated an acceptable AE profile. Efficacy data appeared comparable with current standard of care (including by KRAS mutation status). Biomarker analyses were hypothesis-generating, warranting further exploration., Gov Identifier: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT03374254., Competing Interests: Disclosure R. Kim reports honoraria from Taiho; advisory/consultancy roles with Bayer Servier, Ipsen, and Roche; and speakers bureau for Eisai, Pfizer, and Incyte. M. Tehfe reports advisory/consultancy roles with Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, BMS, Taiho, and Pfizer; and speakers bureau for BMS and Taiho. P. Kavan reports advisory/consultancy role with Merck; expert testimony for Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA; and an institutional educational grant to their institution. J. S. Kortmansky reports research funding to their institution from Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, and Genentech. E. X. Chen reports advisory/consultancy roles from AstraZeneca, Eisai, and GSK and research funding to their institution from AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, BMS, Novartis, Roche, Zymeworks, and 1Globe. C. H. Lieu reports advisory/consultancy roles with Natera; and research funding to their institution from Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA. M. Fakih reports advisory/consultancy roles with AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, Mirati, Nouscom, PsiOxus, Roche/Genentech, and Taiho. K. Spencer reports advisory/consultancy roles with QED Therapeutics, Helsinn, Lynx Group, and Caris. Q. Zhao reports stock ownership at Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA. R. Predoiu, C. Li, P. Leconte, and D. Adelberg report employment with Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA. P. Leconte and D. Adelberg report stock ownership at Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA. E. G. Chiorean reports advisory/consultancy roles with Astellas, Bayer, Cardiff, Foundation, G1 Therapeutics, Ipsen, Noxxon, Novartis, Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, Pfizer, and Stemline; research funding to their institution from Aadi, Biosplice, BioMed Valley, Boehringer Ingelheim, Clovis, Corcept, Erasca, Fibrogen, Lona, Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, Novartis, Rafael, and Stemline; and travel/accommodations from G1 Therapeutics. J. Chaves and L. Wong report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cohorts A, C, and E of the phase Ib KEYNOTE-651 study evaluated pembrolizumab + binimetinib ± chemotherapy in microsatellite stable/mismatch repair-proficient metastatic colorectal cancer., Patients and Methods: Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks plus binimetinib 30 mg twice daily alone (cohort A; previously treated with any chemotherapy) or with 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (cohort C; previously untreated) or 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan (cohort E; previously treated with 1 line of therapy including fluoropyrimidine + oxaliplatin-based regimen) every 2 weeks. Binimetinib dose-escalation to 45 mg twice daily was planned in all cohorts using a modified toxicity probability interval design (target dose-limiting toxicity [DLT], 30%). The primary endpoint was safety; investigator-assessed objective response rate was secondary., Results: In cohort A, 1/6 patients (17%) had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg; none occurred in 14 patients with 45 mg. In cohort C, 3/9 patients (33%) had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg; dose was not escalated to 45 mg. In cohort E, 1/5 patients (20%) had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg; 5/10 patients (50%) had DLTs with 45 mg. Enrollment was stopped in cohort E binimetinib 45 mg and deescalated to 30 mg; 2/4 additional patients (50%) had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg (total 3/9 [33%] had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg). Objective response rate was 0% in cohort A, 9% in cohort C, and 15% in cohort E., Conclusion: Per DLT criteria, binimetinib + pembrolizumab (cohort A) was tolerable, binimetinib + pembrolizumab + 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (cohort C) did not qualify for binimetinib dose escalation to 45 mg, and binimetinib + pembrolizumab + 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan (cohort E) required binimetinib dose reduction from 45 to 30 mg. No new safety findings were observed across cohorts. There was no apparent additive efficacy when binimetinib + pembrolizumab was added to chemotherapy. Data did not support continued enrollment in cohorts C and E., Competing Interests: Disclosure E. X. Chen reports advisory/consultancy roles from AstraZeneca, Eisai, and GSK; research funding to their institution from AstraZeneca, Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, BMS, Novartis, Roche, Zymeworks, and 1Globe. P. Kavan reports advisory/consultancy role with Merck; Expert Testimony for Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA; and an institutional educational grant to their institution. M. Tehfe reports advisory/consultancy roles with Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, BMS, Taiho, and Pfizer; and speaker bureau for BMS and Taiho. J. S. Kortmansky reports research funding to their institution from Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA and Genentech. M. B. Sawyer reports honoraria from Ipsen, BMS, Mylan, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Eisai, Sandoz, Celgene, Servier, Novartis, Leo, Taiho, and Shire; advisory/consultancy roles with AstraZeneca, Leo, and Immuneering; expert testimony for AstraZeneca; research funding to their institution from AstraZeneca and BMS; and travel/accommodation expenses from Ipsen. E. G. Chiorean reports advisory/consultancy roles with Astellas, Bayer, Cardiff, Foundation, G1 Therapeutics, Ipsen, Noxxon, Novartis, Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, Pfizer, and Stemline; research funding to their institution from Aadi, Biosplice, BioMed Valley, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Clovis, Corcept, Erasca, Fibrogen, Lona, Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, Novartis, Rafael, and Stemline; and travel/accommodation from G1 Therapeutics. C. H. Lieu reports research funding to their institution from Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA. M. Fakih reports advisory/consultancy roles with AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, Mirati, Nouscom, PsiOxus, Roche/Genentech, and Taiho. K. Spencer reports advisory/consultancy roles from QED Therapeutics, Helsinn, Lynx Group, and Caris. C. Li, P. Leconte, and D. Adelberg report employment with Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA; P. Leconte and D. Adelberg report stock ownership at Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA. R. Kim reports honoraria from Taiho; advisory/consultancy roles with Bayer Servier, Ipsen and Roche; and speaker bureau for Eisai, Pfizer, and Incyte. B. Polite, L. Wong, and J. Chaves report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) is a challenging disease that presents at an advanced stage and results in many symptoms that negatively influence patients' quality of life and reduce their ability to receive effective treatment. Early implementation of expert multidisciplinary care with nutritional support, exercise, and palliative care for both early-stage and advanced disease promises to maintain or improve the patients' physical, social, and psychological well-being, decrease aggressive interventions at the end of life, and ultimately improve survival. Moreover, advances in treatment strategies in the neoadjuvant and metastatic setting combined with novel therapeutic agents targeting the key drivers of the disease are leading to improvements in the care of patients with pancreatic cancer. Here, we emphasize the multidisciplinary supportive and therapeutic care of patients with PDA, review current guidelines and new developments of neoadjuvant and perioperative treatments for localized disease, as well as the treatment standards and the evolving field of precision oncology and immunotherapies for advanced PDA.

Background & Aims: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) is a highly lethal disease characterized by a spatially heterogeneous tumor microenvironment. Within the PDA microenvironment, cells organize into communities where cell fate is influenced by neighboring cells of diverse ontogeny and function. However, it remains unclear how cell neighborhoods in the tumor microenvironment evolve with treatment and impact clinical outcomes., Methods: Here, using automated chromogenic multiplex immunohistochemistry and unsupervised computational image analysis of human PDA tumors, we investigated cell neighborhoods in surgically resected tumors from patients with chemotherapy-naïve PDA (n = 59) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy-treated PDA (n = 57). Single cells were defined by lineage markers (CD3, CD8, Foxp3, CD68, CK19), proliferation (Ki67), and neighboring cells., Results: Distinct intratumoral immune and tumor cell subsets were defined by neighboring cells. Higher content of stromal-associated macrophages was seen in chemotherapy-naïve tumors from long-term survivors (overall survival >3 years) compared with short-term survivors (overall survival <1 year), whereas immune-excluded tumor cells were higher in short-term survivors. Chemotherapy-treated vs -naïve tumors showed lower content of tumor-associated T cells and macrophages but similar densities of stromal-associated immune cells. However, proliferating tumor cell subsets with immune-rich neighborhoods were higher in chemotherapy-treated tumors. In a blinded analysis of tumors from patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, a composite index comprising lower quantities of immune-excluded tumor cells and higher spatially distinct immune cell subsets was associated with prolonged survival., Conclusions: Together, these data provide new insights into discrete cell communities in PDA and show their clinical relevance., (Copyright © 2024 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Neoadjuvant therapy (NT) is increasingly used for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), and yet reasons for not undergoing subsequent pancreatectomy are poorly understood. Given the importance of completing multimodality therapy, we investigated factors associated with failure to undergo surgical resection following NT for PDAC., Methods: SWOG S1505 was a multicenter phase II randomized trial of preoperative mFOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel prior to planned pancreatectomy for patients with potentially resectable PDAC. Associations between clinical, demographic, and hospital-level characteristics and receipt of surgical resection were estimated via multiple logistic regression. Differences in overall survival from 18 weeks postrandomization (scheduled time of surgery) according to resection status were assessed via Cox regression models., Results: Among 102 eligible patients, 73 (71.6%) underwent successful pancreatectomy, whereas 29 (28.4%) did not, primarily because of progression (n=11; 10.8%) or toxicity during NT (n=9; 8.8%). Weight loss during NT (odds ratio [OR], 0.34; 95% CI, 0.11-0.93) and the hospital's city size (small: OR, 0.24 [95% CI, 0.07-0.80] and large: OR, 0.28 [95% CI, 0.10-0.79] compared with midsize) were significantly associated with a lower probability of surgical resection in adjusted models, whereas age, sex, race, body mass index, performance status, insurance type, geographic region, treatment arm, tumor location, chemotherapy delays/modifications, and hospital characteristics were not. Surgical resection following NT was associated with improved overall survival (median, 23.8 vs 10.8 months; P<.01) even after adjusting for grade 3-5 adverse events during NT, performance status, and body mass index (hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.32-0.95)., Conclusions: Failure to undergo resection following NT was relatively common among patients with potentially resectable PDAC and associated with worse survival. Although few predictive factors were identified in this secondary analysis of the SWOG S1505 randomized trial, further research must focus on risk factors for severe toxicities during NT that preclude surgical resection so that patient-centered interventions can be delivered or alternate treatment sequencing can be recommended.

Background: Sarcopenic obesity and muscle attenuation have been associated with survival in patients with borderline resectable and advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA); however, these relationships are unknown for patients with resectable PDA. This study examined the associations between skeletal muscle and adipose tissue as measured on baseline computed tomography (CT) and the overall survival (OS) of participants with resectable PDA in a secondary analysis of the Southwest Oncology Group S1505 clinical trial (identifier: NCT02562716)., Methods: The S1505 phase II clinical trial enrolled patients with resectable PDA who were randomized to receive modified FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel as perioperative chemotherapy, followed by surgical resection. Baseline axial CT images at the L3 level were analyzed with externally validated software, and measurements were recorded for skeletal muscle area and skeletal muscle density, visceral adipose tissue area (VATA) and density, and subcutaneous adipose tissue area and density. The relationships between CT metrics and OS were analyzed using Cox regression models, with adjustment for baseline participant characteristics., Results: Of 98 eligible participants with available baseline abdominal CT, 8 were excluded because of imaging quality (eg, orthopedic hardware), resulting in 90 evaluable cases: 51 men (57.0%; mean age, 63.2 years [SD, 8.5]; mean body mass index [BMI], 29.3 kg/m 2 [SD, 6.4]), 80 White (89.0%), 6 Black (7.0%), and 4 unknown race (4.0%). Sarcopenia was present in 32 participants (35.9%), and sarcopenic obesity was present in 10 participants (11.2%). Univariable analyses for the 6 variables of interest indicated that the standardized mean difference (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57-0.98; P = .04) was statistically significantly associated with OS. In models adjusted for sex, race, age, BMI, performance score, contrast use, sarcopenia, and sarcopenic obesity, VATA was statistically significantly associated with OS (HR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.00-2.51; P = .05). No difference was observed in OS between participants according to sarcopenic obesity or sarcopenia categories. The median OS estimates were 25.1 months for participants without sarcopenic obesity, 18.6 months for participants with sarcopenic obesity, 23.6 months for participants without sarcopenia, and 27.9 months for participants with sarcopenia., Conclusion: This was the first study to systematically evaluate body composition parameters in a prospective multicenter trial of patients with resectable PDA who received perioperative chemotherapy. Visceral adipose tissue was associated with survival; however, there was no association between OS and sarcopenia or sarcopenic obesity. Further studies should evaluate these findings in more detail., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDAC) are characterized by frequent cell cycle pathways aberrations. This study evaluated safety and efficacy of abemaciclib, a cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor, as monotherapy or in combination with PI3K/mTOR dual inhibitor LY3023414 or TGFβ inhibitor galunisertib versus standard of care (SOC) chemotherapy in patients with pretreated metastatic PDAC., Methods: This Phase 2 open-label study enrolled patients with metastatic PDAC who progressed after 1-2 prior therapies. Patients were enrolled in a safety lead-in (abemaciclib plus galunisertib) followed by a 2-stage randomized design. Stage 1 randomization was planned 1:1:1:1 for abemaciclib, abemaciclib plus LY3023414, abemaciclib plus galunisertib, or SOC gemcitabine or capecitabine. Advancing to Stage 2 required a disease control rate (DCR) difference ≥0 in abemaciclib-containing arms versus SOC. Primary objectives for Stages 1 and 2 were DCR and progression-free survival (PFS), respectively. Secondary objectives included response rate, overall survival, safety, and pharmacokinetics., Results: One hundred and six patients were enrolled. Abemaciclib plus galunisertib did not advance to Stage 1 for reasons unrelated to safety or efficacy. Stage 1 DCR was 15.2% with abemaciclib monotherapy, 12.1% with abemaciclib plus LY3023414, and 36.4% with SOC. Median PFS was 1.7 months (95% CI: 1.4-1.8), 1.8 months (95% CI: 1.3-1.9), and 3.3 months (95% CI: 1.1-5.7), respectively. No arms advanced to Stage 2. No new safety signals were identified., Conclusion: In patients with pretreated metastatic PDAC, abemaciclib-based therapy did not improve DCRs or PFS compared with SOC chemotherapy. No treatment arms advanced to Stage 2. Abemaciclib remains investigational in patients with PDAC., (© 2023 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Oxaliplatin is a key chemotherapeutic agent in the treatment of local and metastatic gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies. Dose density and treatment adherence can be limited by chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). Early research suggests CIPN incidence and severity may be mitigated by acupuncture, but rigorous data in GI oncology patients is limited. Here, we describe the protocol of a randomized, waitlist-controlled pilot study testing the use of preemptive of acupuncture plus acupressure to decrease CIPN and chemotherapy-related toxicities., Methods: Patients with a GI malignancy (n = 56) with planned 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and oxaliplatin IV (FOLFOX, FOLFIRINOX) every 2 weeks are being recruited. Additional concurrent anti-neoplastic agents may be used. Enrolled patients are randomized 1:1 to a 3-month intervention of Arm A: acupuncture with acupressure and standard-of-care treatment, or Arm B: standard-of-care alone. In Arm A, on days 1 and 3 of each chemotherapy cycle a standardized acupuncture protocol is administered and patients are taught self-acupressure to perform daily between chemotherapy treatments. Patients in both arms are given standard-of-care oral and peripheral (hands/feet) ice chip cryotherapy during oxaliplatin administration. CIPN and other symptoms are assessed at baseline, 6 weeks, and 3 months from registration. The primary endpoint is CIPN severity at 3 months (EORTC-CIPN 20). Additional endpoints evaluate CIPN incidence (CTCAE, Neuropen, tuning fork); incidence of pain, fatigue, nausea, oral dysesthesia, and anxiety; and feasibility (recruitment, retention, adherence, acceptability). If warranted, trial results will inform the design of a multi-center trial to expand testing of the intervention to a larger patient cohort., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Ampullary cancers refer to tumors originating from the ampulla of Vater (the ampulla, the intraduodenal portion of the bile duct, and the intraduodenal portion of the pancreatic duct), while periampullary cancers may arise from locations encompassing the head of the pancreas, distal bile duct, duodenum, or ampulla of Vater. Ampullary cancers are rare gastrointestinal malignancies, and prognosis varies greatly based on factors such as patient age, TNM classification, differentiation grade, and treatment modality received. Systemic therapy is used in all stages of ampullary cancer, including neoadjuvant therapy, adjuvant therapy, and first-line or subsequent-line therapy for locally advanced, metastatic, and recurrent disease. Radiation therapy may be used in localized ampullary cancer, sometimes in combination with chemotherapy, but there is no high-level evidence to support its utility. Select tumors may be treated surgically. This article describes NCCN recommendations regarding management of ampullary adenocarcinoma.

Background: Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1), an interferon-inducible enzyme, contributes to tumor immune intolerance. Immune checkpoint inhibition may increase interferon levels; combining IDO1 inhibition with immune checkpoint blockade represents an attractive strategy. Epigenetic agents trigger interferon responses and may serve as an immunotherapy priming method. We evaluated whether epigenetic therapy plus IDO1 inhibition and immune checkpoint blockade confers clinical benefit to patients with advanced solid tumors., Methods: ECHO-206 was a Phase I/II study where treatment-experienced patients with advanced solid tumors (N = 70) received azacitidine plus an immunotherapy doublet (epacadostat [IDO1 inhibitor] and pembrolizumab). Sequencing of treatment was also assessed. Primary endpoints were safety/tolerability (Phase I), maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or pharmacologically active dose (PAD; Phase I), and investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR; Phase II)., Results: In Phase I, no dose-limiting toxicities were reported, the MTD was not reached; a PAD was not determined. ORR was 5.7%, with four partial responses. The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (42.9%) and nausea (42.9%). Twelve (17.1%) patients experienced ≥1 fatal AE, one of which (asthenia) was treatment-related., Conclusions: Although the azacitidine-epacadostat-pembrolizumab regimen was well tolerated, it was not associated with substantial clinical response in patients with advanced solid tumors previously exposed to immunotherapy., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) is highly aggressive and has few treatment options. To personalize therapy, it is critical to delineate molecular subtypes and understand inter- and intra-tumoral heterogeneity. Germline testing for hereditary genetic abnormalities is recommended for all patients with PDA and somatic molecular testing is recommended for all patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. KRAS mutations are present in 90% of PDA, while 10% are KRAS wild type and are potentially targetable with epidermal growth factor receptor blockade. KRAS G12C inhibitors have shown activity in G12C-mutated cancers, and novel G12D and pan-RAS inhibitors are in clinical trials. DNA damage repair abnormalities, germline or somatic, occur in 5-10% of patients and are likely to benefit from DNA damaging agents and maintenance therapy with poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors. Fewer than 1% of PDA harbor microsatellite instability high status and are susceptible to immune checkpoint blockade. Albeit very rare, occurring in <1% of patients with KRAS wild-type PDAs, BRAF V600E mutations, RET and NTRK fusions are targetable with cancer agnostic Food and Drug Administration-approved therapies. Genetic, epigenetic, and tumor microenvironment targets continue to be identified at an unprecedented pace, enabling PDA patients to be matched to targeted and immune therapeutics, including antibody-drug conjugates, and genetically engineered chimeric antigen receptor or T-cell receptor - T-cell therapies. In this review, we highlight clinically relevant molecular alterations and focus on targeted strategies that can improve patient outcomes through precision medicine., Competing Interests: Zhen DB: research funding: Astra Zeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cornerstone, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Legend, Merck, Roche; scientific advisory boards: Ipsen, QED Therapeutics, Cornerstone Safyan RA: no conflicts of interest Konnick E: no conflicts of interest Nguyen R: no conflicts of interest Pritchard C: no conflicts of interest Chiorean EG: research funding AADi, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Clovis, Fibrogen, Merck, Lonza, BioMed Valley, Erasca, Roche, Novartis; scientific advisory boards: Astellas, Ipsen, Pfizer, G1 Therapeutics, Merus, BMS, Foundation One., (© The Author(s), 2023.)

Objectives: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) is the third most common cause of cancer death in the United States. Most patients who undergo resection develop recurrence. Standard treatment confers a median overall survival (OS) of 24 months. Exposure to alternate regimens may prevent chemoresistance. This study evaluated multiagent perioperative therapy for potentially resectable PDA patients to improve OS., Methods: A single center, phase 2, trial of patients with resectable or borderline resectable PDA. Patients received neoadjuvant therapy with induction chemotherapy (gemcitabine, docetaxel, capecitabine) for 3 cycles, chemoradiation (intensity-modulated radiation therapy with capecitabine and oxaliplatin) followed by surgery, and 2 months of adjuvant gemcitabine and oxaliplatin and 2 months of gemcitabine. The primary endpoint was OS. The secondary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS)., Results: Thirty-two eligible patients were enrolled. Twenty-two patients underwent surgical resection. After a median follow-up of 56.8 months, mOS was 31.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.2-58.1) for all patients, 58.1 months (95% CI, 31.6 to NR) for those who completed surgery. The mRFS was 31.3 months (95% CI, 12.5 to NR)., Conclusions: Perioperative therapy with GTX, chemoradiotherapy, and adjuvant GemOx/Gem resulted in promising survival of 58 months for patients who underwent resection and may represent another treatment option for PDA., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: KRAS variant alleles may have differential biological properties which impact prognosis and therapeutic options in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDA)., Materials and Methods: We retrospectively identified patients with advanced PDA who received first-line therapy and underwent blood and/or tumor genomic sequencing at the University of Washington between 2013 and 2020. We examined the incidence of KRAS mutation variants with and without co-occurring PI3K or other genomic alterations and evaluated the association of these mutations with clinicopathological characteristics and survival using a Cox proportional hazards model., Results: One hundred twenty-six patients had genomic sequencing data; KRAS mutations were identified in 111 PDA and included the following variants: G12D (43)/G12V (35)/G12R (23)/other (10). PI3K pathway mutations (26% vs. 8%) and homologous recombination DNA repair (HRR) defects (35% vs. 12.5%) were more common among KRAS G12R vs. non-G12R mutated cancers. Patients with KRAS G12R vs. non-G12R cancers had significantly longer overall survival (OS) (HR 0.55) and progression-free survival (PFS) (HR 0.58), adjusted for HRR pathway co-mutations among other covariates. Within the KRAS G12R group, co-occurring PI3K pathway mutations were associated with numerically shorter OS (HR 1.58), while no effect was observed on PFS., Conclusions: Patients with PDA harboring KRAS G12R vs. non-G12R mutations have longer survival, but this advantage was offset by co-occurring PI3K alterations. The KRAS/PI3K genomic profile could inform therapeutic vulnerabilities in patients with PDA., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have not yielded significant efficacy in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA), despite the role of the innate and adaptive immune systems on progression and survival. However, recently identified pathways have identified new targets and generated promising clinical investigations into promoting an effective immune-mediated antitumor response in PDA., Areas Covered: We review biological mechanisms associated with immunotherapy resistance and outline strategies for therapeutic combinations with established and novel therapies in PDA., Expert Opinion: Pancreatic cancers rarely benefit from treatment with ICI due to an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME). New understandings of factors associated with the suppressive TME include low- and poor-quality neoantigens, constrained effector T cells infiltration, and the presence of a dense, suppressive myeloid cell population. These findings have been translated into new clinical investigations evaluating novel therapies in combination with ICI and/or standard systemic chemotherapy and radiotherapy. The epithelial, immune, and stromal compartments are intricately related in PDA, and the framework for successful targeting of this disease requires a comprehensive and personalized approach.

Purpose: PARP inhibitors synergize with topoisomerase inhibitors, and veliparib plus modified (m) FOLFIRI (no 5-FU bolus) had preliminary activity in metastatic pancreatic cancers. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of second-line treatment with veliparib and mFOLFIRI versus FOLFIRI (control) for metastatic pancreatic cancer., Patients and Methods: This randomized phase II clinical trial led by the SWOG Cancer Research Network enrolled patients between September 1, 2016 and December 13, 2017. The median follow-up was 9 months (IQR 1-27). BRCA1/2 and homologous recombination DNA damage repair (HR-DDR) genetic defects were tested in blood and tumor biopsies. Patients received veliparib 200 mg twice daily, days 1-7 with mFOLFIRI days 3-5, or FOLFIRI in 14-day cycles., Results: After 123 of planned 143 patients were accrued, an interim futility analysis indicated that the veliparib arm was unlikely to be superior to control, and the study was halted. Median overall survival (OS) was 5.4 versus 6.5 months (HR, 1.23; P = 0.28), and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.1 versus 2.9 months (HR, 1.39; P = 0.09) with veliparib versus control. Grade 3/4 toxicities were more common with veliparib (69% vs. 58%, P = 0.23). For cancers with HR-DDR defects versus wild-type, median PFS and OS were 7.3 versus 2.5 months ( P = 0.05) and 10.1 versus 5.9 months ( P = 0.17), respectively, with FOLFIRI, and 2.0 versus 2.1 months ( P = 0.62) and 7.4 versus 5.1 months ( P = 0.10), respectively, with veliparib plus mFOLFIRI., Conclusions: Veliparib plus mFOLFIRI did not improve survival for metastatic pancreatic cancer. FOLFIRI should be further studied in pancreatic cancers with HR-DDR defects., (©2021 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: CD40 activation is a novel clinical opportunity for cancer immunotherapy. Despite numerous active clinical trials with agonistic CD40 monoclonal antibodies (mAb), biological effects and treatment-related modulation of the tumor microenvironment (TME) remain poorly understood., Patients and Methods: Here, we performed a neoadjuvant clinical trial of agonistic CD40 mAb (selicrelumab) administered intravenously with or without chemotherapy to 16 patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) before surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy and CD40 mAb., Results: The toxicity profile was acceptable, and overall survival was 23.4 months (95% confidence interval, 18.0-28.8 months). Based on a novel multiplexed immunohistochemistry platform, we report evidence that neoadjuvant selicrelumab leads to major differences in the TME compared with resection specimens from treatment-naïve PDAC patients or patients given neoadjuvant chemotherapy/chemoradiotherapy only. For selicrelumab-treated tumors, 82% were T-cell enriched, compared with 37% of untreated tumors ( P = 0.004) and 23% of chemotherapy/chemoradiation-treated tumors ( P = 0.012). T cells in both the TME and circulation were more active and proliferative after selicrelumab. Tumor fibrosis was reduced, M2-like tumor-associated macrophages were fewer, and intratumoral dendritic cells were more mature. Inflammatory cytokines/sec CXCL10 and CCL22 increased systemically after selicrelumab., Conclusions: This unparalleled examination of CD40 mAb therapeutic mechanisms in patients provides insights for design of subsequent clinical trials targeting CD40 in cancer., (©2021 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) is the most common regorafenib-induced adverse event and is in need of effective prevention and palliation., Materials and Methods: The Regorafenib Dose Optimization Study (ReDOS), a four-arm, previously published trial with a 1:1:1:1 randomization scheme, was analyzed in a manner in keeping with the original protocol to assess whether clobetasol 0.05% cream (a corticosteroid) applied to the palms and soles twice per day for 8 weeks was more effective when prescribed preemptively (before the development of HFSR) versus reactively (after the development of HFSR). Patients were assessed during the first two cycles of regorafenib., Results: Sixty-one patients received preemptive clobetasol, and 55 received reactive clobetasol. Groups were balanced on demographics. Over the first two cycles, no evidence of HFSR occurred in 30% with preemptive clobetasol versus 13% with reactive clobetasol (p = .03). During the first cycle, 54% and 45% of patients had no HFSR with preemptive and reactive clobetasol, respectively (p = .35). During the second cycle, 33% and 15% had no HFSR with preemptive and reactive clobetasol, respectively (p = .02). During the second cycle, rates of grade 1, 2, and 3 HFSR were 30%, 8%, and 3%, respectively, with preemptive clobetasol and 43%, 18%, and 7%, respectively, with reactive clobetasol (p = .12). Patient-reported outcomes showed HFSR compromised nearly all activities of daily living with worse quality of life in patients who received reactive versus preemptive clobetasol. No clobetasol-induced adverse events were reported., Conclusion: Preemptive clobetasol might lessen regorafenib-induced hand-foot reactions compared with reactive therapy. Further confirmatory studies are needed in a larger patient cohort., Implications for Practice: Regorafenib causes hand-foot skin reactions. Preemptive clobetasol, a high-potency topical corticosteroid, appears to lessen the severity of this adverse event. Although further study is needed, the favorable adverse event profile of this intervention might prompt clinicians to discuss this option with their patients., (© 2021 AlphaMed Press.)

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death among men and women in the United States. A major challenge in treatment remains patients' advanced disease at diagnosis. The NCCN Guidelines for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma provides recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up for patients with pancreatic cancer. Although survival rates remain relatively unchanged, newer modalities of treatment, including targeted therapies, provide hope for improving patient outcomes. Sections of the manuscript have been updated to be concordant with the most recent update to the guidelines. This manuscript focuses on the available systemic therapy approaches, specifically the treatment options for locally advanced and metastatic disease.

Importance: Clinical outcomes after curative treatment of resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) remain suboptimal. To assess the potential of early control of systemic disease with multiagent perioperative chemotherapy, we conducted a prospective trial., Objective: To determine 2-year overall survival (OS) using perioperative chemotherapy for resectable PDA., Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a randomized phase 2 trial of perioperative chemotherapy with a pick-the-winner design. It was conducted across the National Clinical Trials Network, including academic and community centers all across the US. Eligibility required patients with Zubrod Performance Score of 0 or 1, confirmed tissue diagnosis of PDA, and resectable disease per Intergroup criteria., Interventions: Perioperative (12 weeks preoperative, 12 weeks postoperative) chemotherapy with either fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFIRINOX, arm 1) or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (arm 2)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 2-year overall survival (OS), using a pick-the-winner design; for 100 eligible patients, accrual up to 150 patients was planned to account for cases deemed ineligible at central radiology review., Results: From 2015 to 2018, 147 patients were enrolled; 43 patients (29%) had ineligible disease, beyond resectability criteria, at central radiology review. There were 102 eligible and evaluable patients, 55 in arm 1 and 47 in arm 2, of whom the median (range) age was 66 (44-76) and 64 (46-76) years, respectively; 36 patients (65%) in arm 1 and 24 (51%) in arm 2 were men. In arm 1, 34 (62%) had Zubrod Performance Score of 0, while in arm 2, 31 (66%) did; and 44 (80%) in arm 1 and 39 (83%) in arm 2 had head tumors. Of 102 patients, 84% and 85% completed preoperative chemotherapy, 73% and 70% underwent resection, and 49% and 40% completed all treatment. Adverse events were expected hematologic toxic effects, fatigue, and gastrointestinal toxicities. Two-year OS was 47% (95% CI, 31%-61%) for arm 1 and 48% (95% CI, 31%-63%) for arm 2; median OS was 23.2 months (95% CI, 17.6-45.9 months) and 23.6 months (95% CI, 17.8-31.7 months). Neither arm's 2-year OS estimate was significantly higher than the a priori threshold of 40%. Median disease-free survival after resection was 10.9 months in arm 1 and 14.2 months in arm 2., Conclusions and Relevance: This phase 2 randomized clinical trial did not demonstrate an improved OS with perioperative chemotherapy, compared with historical data from adjuvant trials in resectable pancreatic cancer. Two-year OS was 47% with mFOLFIRINOX and 48% with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel for all eligible patients starting treatment for resectable PDA. The trial also demonstrated adequate safety and high resectability rates with perioperative chemotherapy, and challenges in quality control for resectability criteria., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02562716.

VEGF blockade does not uniformly result in clinical benefit. We evaluated safety, dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), recommended phase II dose (RP2D), antitumor efficacy, and exploratory biomarkers including pharmacogenomics and pharmacokinetics with sorafenib, bevacizumab, and paclitaxel in patients with refractory cancers. The study had a "3 + 3" design, using paclitaxel 80 mg/m 2 every week for 3 weeks, in every 4 week cycles, bevacizumab 5 mg/kg every 2 weeks, and sorafenib 200 or 400 mg twice a day, 5 or 7 days/week (5/7, 7/7). The MTD cohort was expanded. Twenty-seven patients enrolled in 3 cohorts: sorafenib 200 mg twice a day 5/7, 200 mg twice a day 7/7, and 400 mg twice a day 5/7. DLTs were grade 3 neutropenia >7 days (cohort 1, 1), grade 3 hypertension (cohort 2, 1), grade 3 hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR; cohort 3, 2). MTD was sorafenib 200 mg twice a day 7/7. Six DLTs occurred in cohort 2 expansion: grade 3 HFSR (2), grade 2 HFSR with sorafenib delay >7 days (2), grade 4 cerebrovascular accident (1), grade 3 neutropenia >7 days (1). RP2D was sorafenib 200 mg twice a day 5/7. Most patients (62%) dose reduced sorafenib to 200 mg daily 5/7 after a median 3 (range, 2-17) cycles. Response rates were 48% overall (27) and 64% for ovarian cancers (14). VEGF-A -1154AA and -7TT recessive homozygous genotypes conferred worse overall survival versus alternative genotypes (7 vs. 22 months). Intermittent, low-dose sorafenib (200 mg twice a day 5/7) combined with bevacizumab and paclitaxel was tolerable and had high antitumor efficacy in patients with refractory cancer (NCT00572078)., (©2020 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: Assess safety and efficacy of nivolumab plus nab -paclitaxel and gemcitabine in patients with locally advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer in a two-part, open-label, phase I trial., Patients and Methods: Fifty chemotherapy-naive patients received nab -paclitaxel 125 mg/m 2 plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m 2 (days 1, 8, and 15) and nivolumab 3 mg/kg (days 1 and 15) in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs; part 1) and grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) or treatment discontinuation due to TEAEs (parts 1/2). Secondary efficacy endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and response. Assessment of programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression was an exploratory endpoint; additional biomarkers were assessed post hoc ., Results: One DLT (hepatitis) was reported in part 1 among six DLT-evaluable patients; 48 of 50 patients experienced grade 3/4 TEAEs and 18 discontinued treatment due to TEAEs. One grade 5 TEAE (respiratory failure) was reported. Median [95% confidence interval (CI)] PFS/OS was 5.5 (3.25-7.20 months)/9.9 (6.74-12.16 months) months, respectively [median follow-up for OS, 13.6 months (95% CI, 12.06-23.49 months)]. Overall response rate (95% CI) was 18% (8.6%-31.4%). Median PFS/OS was 5.5/9.7 months (PD-L1 <5%) and 6.8/11.6 months (PD-L1 ≥5%), respectively. Proportion of peripheral Ki67 + CD8 + /CD4 + cells increased significantly from baseline to cycle 3; median peak on-treatment Ki67 + CD8 + T-cell values were higher in responders than in nonresponders., Conclusions: The safety profile of nivolumab plus nab -paclitaxel and gemcitabine at standard doses in advanced pancreatic cancer was manageable, with no unexpected safety signals. Overall, the clinical results of this study do not support further investigation., (©2020 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Objective: The optimal neoadjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) and the impact on surgical outcomes remains unclear., Methods: S1505 (NCT02562716) was a randomized phase II study of perioperative chemotherapy with mFOLFIRINOX (Arm 1) or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (Arm 2). Measured parameters included resection rate, margin positivity, pathologic response, and toxicity., Results: Between 2015 and 2018, 147 patients were randomized. Of these, 44 (30%) were deemed ineligible (43 by central review). Of the 103 eligible patients, 77 (76%) completed preoperative therapy and underwent surgery; reasons patients did not undergo surgery included toxicity related to preoperative therapy (n = 9), progression (n = 9), or other (n = 7). Of the 77, 73 (95%) underwent successful resection; 21 (29%) required vascular reconstruction, 62 (85%) had negative (R0) margins, and 24 (33%) had a complete or major pathologic response to therapy. The grade 3-5 postoperative complication rate was 16%. Of the 73 patients completing surgery, 57 (78%) started and 46 (63%) completed postoperative therapy. This study represents the first prospective trial evaluating modern systemic therapy delivered in a neoadjuvant/perioperative format for resectable PDA., Conclusions: We have demonstrated: (1) Based on the high percentage of enrolled, but ineligible patients, it is clear that adherence to strict definitions of resectable PDA is challenging; (2) Patients can tolerate modern systemic therapy and undergo successful surgical resection without prohibitive perioperative complications; (3) Completion of adjuvant therapy in the perioperative format is difficult; (4) Major pathologic response rate of 33% is encouraging., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This analysis investigated nomogram use to evaluate metastatic pancreatic cancer prognosis., Methods: Thirty-four baseline factors were examined in the Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Clinical Trial (MPACT) (nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine vs gemcitabine) data set. Factors significantly (P < 0.1) associated with overall survival (OS) in a univariable model or with known clinical relevance were tested further. In a multivariable model, factors associated with OS (P < 0.1) were selected to generate the primary nomogram, which was internally validated using bootstrapping, a concordance index, and calibration plots., Results: Using data from 861 patients, 6 factors were retained (multivariable analysis): neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, albumin level, Karnofsky performance status, sum of longest diameter of target lesions, presence of liver metastases, and previous Whipple procedure. The nomogram distinguished low-, medium-, and high-risk groups (concordance index, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-0.69; median OS, 11.7, 8.0, and 3.3 months, respectively)., Conclusions: This nomogram may guide estimates of the range of OS outcomes and contribute to patient stratification in future prospective metastatic pancreatic cancer trials; however, external validation is required to improve estimate reliability and applicability to a general patient population. Caution should be exercised in interpreting these results for treatment decisions: patient characteristics could differ from those included in the nomogram development.

Background: Management of metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDA) places a significant financial burden on the U.S. health care system because of such factors as treatment with multidrug chemotherapy regimens, management of chemotherapy-related adverse events, and disease- or treatment-related hospitalizations. Depending on functional status, first-line chemotherapy regimens that are guideline recommended include nab -paclitaxel with gemcitabine (AG) and FOLFIRINOX (FFX), the combination of fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin. However, few previous studies have examined overall health care costs associated with mPDA management., Objective: To describe health care costs following initiation of first-line treatment with AG or FFX among patients with mPDA., Methods: Retrospective cohorts of first-line AG and FFX initiators were constructed from the MarketScan database (2014-2017). The index date was the date of first-line AG or FFX initiation. Included patients had insurance enrollment for 6 months before the index date. Total cumulative health care costs and costs from outpatient services, inpatient admissions, emergency department visits, chemotherapy administrations, and pharmacy dispensing were assessed within 12 months after the index date (i.e., 0-1, 0-2, …, 0-12 months). Patient-level cost data began accruing from the first paid claim and continued accruing until the censoring date., Results: A total of 2,199 patients with mPDA initiated first-line AG (n = 1,352) or FFX (n = 847). Compared with AG initiators, FFX patients were younger (mean age 59 vs. 63 years) and had better baseline health status, with fewer having diabetes (43% vs. 57%) or coronary artery disease (12% vs. 22%). Median follow-up was 5.4 and 7.2 months for AG and FFX, respectively. Median first-line treatment duration was 2.1 months with AG and 2.3 months with FFX. Six months following first-line treatment initiation, total cumulative health care costs (median) were $85,714 (95% CI = $79,683-$91,788) and $114,116 (95% CI = $105,816-$119,591) for AG and FFX initiators, respectively. Outpatient services contributed the largest fractional cost for both groups., Conclusions: Total health care costs for patients with mPDA who initiated FFX or AG are driven mostly by outpatient rather than inpatient costs. Further research, using comparative methodology, is warranted to fully understand cost drivers and whether higher costs for FFX patients relate primarily to use of FFX or higher underlying use of outpatient care among FFX patients., Disclosures: This study was funded by Halozyme Therapeutics. Oestreicher and Yeganegi were employees of Halozyme Therapeutics at the time of the study and were involved in study design, data interpretation, and the decision to submit the data for publication. Bullock reports advisory board fees from Eisai, Exelixis, Bayer, and Taiho and consulting fees from Halozyme Therapeutics, outside the submitted work. Rowan reports consulting fees from Halozyme Therapeutics, during the conduct of the study. Chiorean reports grants and consulting fees from Celgene and Halozyme Therapeutics; grants from Lilly, Stemline, Ignyta, Roche, Merck, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol Meyer Squibb, Incyte, Macrogenics, Rafael, and AADi; and consulting fees from Astra Zeneca, Array, Eisai, Ipsen, Five Prime Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Vicus, and Legend, outside the submitted work.

Purpose: To provide expert guidance to clinicians and policymakers in resource-constrained settings on the management of patients with late-stage colorectal cancer., Methods: ASCO convened a multidisciplinary, multinational Expert Panel that reviewed existing guidelines, conducted a modified ADAPTE process, and used a formal consensus process with additional experts for two rounds of formal ratings., Results: Existing sets of guidelines from four guideline developers were identified and reviewed; adapted recommendations from five guidelines form the evidence base and provided evidence to inform the formal consensus process, which resulted in agreement of ≥ 75% on all recommendations., Recommendations: Common elements of symptom management include addressing clinically acute situations. Diagnosis should involve the primary tumor and, in some cases, endoscopy, and staging should involve digital rectal exam and/or imaging, depending on resources available. Most patients receive treatment with chemotherapy, where chemotherapy is available. If, after a period of chemotherapy, patients become candidates for surgical resection with curative intent of both primary tumor and liver or lung metastatic lesions on the basis of evaluation in multidisciplinary tumor boards, the guidelines recommend patients undergo surgery in centers of expertise if possible. On-treatment surveillance includes a combination of taking medical history, performing physical examinations, blood work, and imaging; specifics, including frequency, depend on resource-based setting.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/resource-stratified-guidelines.

Background: Geranylgeranyltransferase I (GGTase I) catalyzes geranylgeranylation, a modification required for the function of many oncogenic RAS-related proteins. GGTI-2418 is a peptidomimetic small molecule inhibitor of GGTase I., Objective: The aim of this study was to establish the maximum tolerated dose of GGTI-2418 in patients with advanced solid tumors., Patients and Methods: This was a phase I, open-label, dose-escalation study conducted in two US centers (University of Pennsylvania and Indiana University) in adults with treatment-refractory advanced solid tumors. An accelerated dose-escalation schema was used across eight dose levels, from 120 to 2060 mg/m 2 , administered on days 1-5 of each 21-day cycle., Results: Fourteen patients were enrolled in the dose-escalation cohort. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed, and 2060 mg/m 2 was determined to be the maximum tolerated dose. The only potential drug-related grade 3 or 4 toxicities were elevated bilirubin and alkaline phosphatase in a single patient with concurrent malignant biliary obstruction. No objective responses were observed. Four of thirteen evaluable patients had stable disease for up to 6.7 months. The study was terminated prior to dose expansion based on a sponsor decision. Pharmacokinetic analysis demonstrated a mean terminal half-life of 1.1 h., Conclusions: GGTI2418 was safe and tolerable at all tested dose levels with some evidence of disease stability. Due to rapid elimination, dosing of GGTI2418 in this study may have been inadequate to achieve optimal inhibition of its target, GGTase I.

Background: Regorafenib confers an overall survival benefit in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer; however, the adverse event profile of regorafenib has limited its use. Despite no supportive evidence, various dosing schedules are used clinically to alleviate toxicities. This study evaluated the safety and activity of two regorafenib dosing schedules., Methods: In this randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study done in 39 outpatient cancer centres in the USA, adults aged 18 years or older with histologically or cytologically confirmed advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum that was refractory to previous standard therapy, including EGFR inhibitors if KRAS wild-type, were enrolled. Eligible patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 and had no previous treatment with regorafenib. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) into four groups with two distinct regorafenib dosing strategies and two clobetasol usage plans, stratified by hospital. Regorafenib dosing strategies were a dose-escalation strategy (starting dose 80 mg/day orally with weekly escalation, per 40 mg increment, to 160 mg/day regorafenib) if no significant drug-related adverse events occurred and a standard-dose strategy (160 mg/day orally) for 21 days of a 28-day cycle. Clobetasol usage plans (0·05% clobetasol cream twice daily applied to palms and soles) were either pre-emptive or reactive. After randomisation to the four preplanned groups, using the Pocock and Simon dynamic allocation procedures stratified by the treating hospitals, we formally tested the interaction between the two interventions, dosing strategy and clobetasol usage. Given the absence of a significant interaction (p=0·74), we decided to pool the data for the pre-emptive and reactive treatment with clobetasol and compared the two dosing strategies (dose escalation vs standard dose). The primary endpoint was the proportion of evaluable patients (defined as those who were eligible, consented, and received any protocol treatment) initiating cycle 3 and was analysed per protocol. Superiority for dose escalation was declared if the one-sided p value with Fisher's exact test was less than 0·2. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02368886. This study is fully accrued but remains active., Findings: Between June 2, 2015, and June 22, 2017, 123 patients were randomly assigned to treatment, of whom 116 (94%) were evaluable. The per-protocol population consisted of 54 patients in the dose-escalation group and 62 in the standard-dose group. At data cutoff on July 24, 2018, median follow-up was 1·18 years (IQR 0·98-1·57). The primary endpoint was met: 23 (43%, 95% CI 29-56) of 54 patients in the dose-escalation group initiated cycle 3 versus 16 (26%, 15-37) of 62 patients in the standard-dose group (one-sided p=0·043). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were fatigue (seven [13%] patients in the dose-escalation group vs 11 [18%] in the standard-dose group), hand-foot skin reaction (eight [15%] patients vs ten [16%] patients), abdominal pain (nine [17%] patients vs four [6%] patients), and hypertension (four [7%] patients vs nine [15%] patients). 14 patients had at least one drug-related serious adverse event: six patients in the dose-escalation group and eight patients in the standard-dose group. There was one probable treatment-related death in the standard-dose group (myocardial infarction)., Interpretation: The dose-escalation dosing strategy represents an alternative approach for optimising regorafenib dosing with comparable activity and lower incidence of adverse events and could be implemented in clinical practice on the basis of these data., Funding: Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: No clinical trial has directly compared nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine (nab-P/G) with FOLFIRINOX (fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin/irinotecan) in metastatic or advanced pancreatic cancer (mPC or aPC). We conducted a systematic review of real-world studies comparing these regimens in the first-line setting., Methods: Embase and MEDLINE databases through 22 January 2019, and Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium 2019 abstracts were searched for real-world, retrospective studies comparing first-line nab-P/G versus FOLFIRINOX in mPC or aPC that met specific parameters. Studies with radiotherapy were excluded. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale., Results: Of 818 records initially identified, 35 were duplicates and 749 did not meet the eligibility criteria, mostly because they were either not comparative ( n = 356) or not first line ( n = 245). The remaining 34 studies (21 mPC; 13 aPC) assessed >6915 patients who received nab-P/G or FOLFIRINOX. In the studies identified, the median overall survival (OS) reached 14.4 and 15.9 months with nab-P/G and FOLFIRINOX, respectively, and median progression-free survival reached 8.5 and 11.7 months, respectively. Safety data were reported in 14 studies (2205 patients), including 8 single-institutional studies. In most single-institutional studies that reported safety data, rates were higher with FOLFIRINOX versus nab-P/G for grade 3/4 neutropenia (five of six studies) and febrile neutropenia (all three studies), while rates of grade 3/4 peripheral neuropathy were higher with nab-P/G in four of seven studies., Conclusions: Although FOLFIRINOX was associated with slightly longer median OS in more studies, the differences, when available, were not statistically significant. Therefore, a randomized, controlled trial is warranted. Toxicity profile differences represent key considerations for treatment decisions., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: EGC has served in an advisory role for Pfizer, Novocure, Genentech/Roche, Celgene, AstraZeneca, Eisai, Five Prime, Vicus, Halozyme, Seattle Genetics, Ipsen, and Array; she has received travel, accommodations, expenses from AstraZeneca; and her institution has received research funding from Celgene, Incyte, Stemline Therapeutics, Ignyta, Merck, Lilly, and Boehringer Ingelheim. WYC declares no conflict of interest. GG has received honoraria from Celgene and Sanofi; consulting or advisory role for Celgene; and he has received travel, accommodations, expenses from Celgene. GK has been a consultant and speaker for Celgene and Ipsen. SEAB has been in a consulting or advisory role for Merck, Roche, Celgene, Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and SERVIER; he has been on the speakers’ bureau for Lilly, Roche, Celgene, and Nordic Bioscience; he has received funding from Celgene, Roche Pharma AG, Lilly, Novartis, Vifor Pharma, Medac, and Hospira.

Purpose: Pegylated recombinant human hyaluronidase (PEGPH20) degrades hyaluronan (HA) and, in combination with chemotherapy, prolongs survival in preclinical models. The activity of PEGPH20 with modified fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFIRINOX) was evaluated in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC)., Materials and Methods: Patients had untreated mPC, a performance status of 0 to 1, and adequate organ function. Tumor HA status was not required for eligibility. After a phase Ib dose-finding study of mFOLFIRINOX plus PEGPH20, the phase II open-label study randomly assigned patients (1:1) to the combination arm or to mFOLFIRINOX alone (n = 138). The primary end point was overall survival (OS)., Results: PEGPH20 dosages of 3 µg/kg every 2 weeks were more tolerable than twice-weekly dosages used in the phase I study, so 3 µg/kg every 2 weeks was the phase II dosage. An amendment instituted enoxaparin prophylaxis in the PEGPH20 combination arm as a result of increased thromboembolic (TE) events. The planned interim futility analysis when 35 deaths (of 103 analyzable patients) occurred resulted in an OS hazard ratio (HR) of 2.07 that favored the control arm, and the study was closed to accrual. The treatment-related grade 3 to 4 toxicity was significantly increased in the PEGPH20 combination arm relative to control (odds ratio, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.1 to 7.1). The median OS in the mFOLFIRINOX arm was 14.4 months (95% CI, 10.1 to 15.7 months) versus 7.7 months (95% CI, 4.6 to 9.3 months) in the PEGPH20 combination arm., Conclusion: Addition of PEGPH20 to mFOLFIRINOX seems to be detrimental in patients unselected for tumor HA status. This combination caused increased toxicity (mostly GI and TE events) and resulted in decreased treatment duration compared with mFOLFIRINOX alone. The median OS in the mFOLFIRINOX control arm (14.4 months) is, to our knowledge, the longest yet reported and can be considered for patients with good PS.

Pancreatic cancer, mostly pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDAC), is one of the most lethal cancers, with a dismal median survival around 8 months. PDAC is notoriously resistant to chemotherapy. Thus far, numerous attempts using novel targeted therapies and immunotherapies yielded limited clinical benefits for pancreatic cancer patients. It is hoped that delineating the molecular mechanisms underlying drug resistance in pancreatic cancer may provide novel therapeutic options. Using acquired gemcitabine resistant pancreatic cell lines, we revealed an important role of the GLI-SOX2 signaling axis for regulation of gemcitabine sensitivity in vitro and in animal models. Down-regulation of GLI transcriptional factors (GLI1 or GLI2), but not SMO signaling inhibition, reduces tumor sphere formation, a characteristics of tumor initiating cell (TIC). Down-regulation of GLI transcription factors also decreased expression of TIC marker CD24. Similarly, high SOX2 expression is associated with gemcitabine resistance whereas down-regulation of SOX2 sensitizes pancreatic cancer cells to gemcitabine treatment. We further revealed that elevated SOX2 expression is associated with an increase in GLI1 or GLI2 expression. Our ChIP assay revealed that GLI proteins are associated with a putative Gli binding site within the SOX2 promoter, suggesting a more direct regulation of SOX2 by GLI transcription factors. The relevance of our findings to human disease was revealed in human cancer specimens. We found that high SOX2 protein expression is associated with frequent tumor relapse and poor survival in stage II PDAC patients (all of them underwent gemcitabine treatment), indicating that reduced SOX2 expression or down-regulation of GLI transcription factors may be effective in sensitizing pancreatic cancer cells to gemcitabine treatment.

The NCCN Guidelines for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma discuss the diagnosis and management of adenocarcinomas of the exocrine pancreas and are intended to assist with clinical decision-making. These NCCN Guidelines Insights discuss important updates to the 2019 version of the guidelines, focusing on postoperative adjuvant treatment of patients with pancreatic cancers.

Introduction: Thymoma and thymic carcinoma (TC) are neoplastic diseases with reported chemosensitivity to a broad range of agents. However, because of the rarity of these diseases, few prospective trials have been conducted in patients with advanced thymic malignancies. We conducted a prospective phase II trial to evaluate the clinical activity of pemetrexed, a multitargeted antifolate agent, in previously treated patients with thymoma and TC., Methods: A total of 27 previously treated patients (16 with thymoma and 11 with TC) with advanced, unresectable disease were treated with pemetrexed, 500 mg/m 2 , intravenously every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles or until undue toxicity or progressive disease. All patients received folic acid, vitamin B 12 , and steroid prophylaxis., Results: The median number of cycles administered was 6 (range 1-6). Nine patients with a total of 14 events had grade 3 toxicities; no grade 4 toxicities were noted. In 26 fully evaluable patients, two complete and three partial responses (according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) were documented (all in patients with stage IVA thymoma, except for one partial response with stage IVA TC). A total of 14 patients completed the full six cycles of treatment, 7 patients progressed while undergoing therapy, 5 patients discontinued therapy because of intolerance, and 1 patient discontinued therapy because of progressive Morvan syndrome. The median progression-free survival time for all patients was 10.6 months (12.1 months for those with thymoma versus 2.9 months for those with TC). With 23 deaths at data cutoff, the median overall survival time was 28.7 months (46.4 months for those with thymoma versus 9.8 months for those with TC)., Conclusions: Pemetrexed is an active agent in this heavily pretreated population of patients with recurrent thymic malignancies, especially thymoma., (Copyright © 2018 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Evofosfamide (TH-302) is a clinical-stage hypoxia-activated prodrug of a DNA-crosslinking nitrogen mustard that has potential utility for human papillomavirus (HPV) negative head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), in which tumor hypoxia limits treatment outcome. We report the preclinical efficacy, target engagement, preliminary predictive biomarkers and initial clinical activity of evofosfamide for HPV-negative HNSCC. Evofosfamide was assessed in 22 genomically characterized cell lines and 7 cell line-derived xenograft (CDX), patient-derived xenograft (PDX), orthotopic, and syngeneic tumor models. Biomarker analysis used RNA sequencing, whole-exome sequencing, and whole-genome CRISPR knockout screens. Five advanced/metastatic HNSCC patients received evofosfamide monotherapy (480 mg/m2 qw × 3 each month) in a phase 2 study. Evofosfamide was potent and highly selective for hypoxic HNSCC cells. Proliferative rate was a predominant evofosfamide sensitivity determinant and a proliferation metagene correlated with activity in CDX models. Evofosfamide showed efficacy as monotherapy and with radiotherapy in PDX models, augmented CTLA-4 blockade in syngeneic tumors, and reduced hypoxia in nodes disseminated from an orthotopic model. Of 5 advanced HNSCC patients treated with evofosfamide, 2 showed partial responses while 3 had stable disease. In conclusion, evofosfamide shows promising efficacy in aggressive HPV-negative HNSCC, with predictive biomarkers in development to support further clinical evaluation in this indication.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains a deadly disease with few effective treatment options. Our knowledge of molecular alterations in PDAC has significantly grown and helped identify new therapeutic targets. The success of immune checkpoint inhibition in mismatch repair deficient tumors, PARP inhibitors for tumors with DNA repair defects, and targeting hyaluronan with PEGPH20 in patients with high expressing (hyaluronan-high) tumors are examples of promising biomarker-driven therapies. We review the major biological mechanisms in PDAC and discuss current and future directions for molecularly targeted therapies in this disease., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)