Search

Background: Palliative systemic therapy alternated with electrostatic precipitation oxaliplatin-based pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (ePIPAC) has never been prospectively investigated in patients with unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). The CRC-PIPAC-II study aimed to assess safety, feasibility and efficacy of such bidirectional therapy., Methods: This two-center, single-arm, phase II trial enrolled chemotherapy-naïve patients to undergo three treatment cycles, consisting of systemic therapy (CAPOX, FOLFOX, FOLFIRI, or FOLFOXIRI, all with bevacizumab) and oxaliplatin-based ePIPAC (92 mg/m 2 ) with intravenous leucovorin (20 mg/m 2 ) and 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m 2 ). Primary outcome were major treatment-related adverse events. Secondary outcomes included minor events, tumor response, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)., Results: Twenty patients completed 52 treatment cycles. Fifteen major events occurred in 7 patients (35 %): 5 events (33 %) related to systemic therapy; 5 (33 %) related to ePIPAC; and 5 (33 %) were biochemical events. No treatment-related deaths occurred. All patients experienced minor events, mostly abdominal pain, nausea and peripheral sensory neuropathy. After treatment, radiological, pathological, cytological, and biochemical response was observed in 0 %, 88 %, 38 %, and 31 % of patients respectively. Curative surgery was achieved in one patient. Median PFS was 10.0 months (95 % confidence interval [CI] 8.0-13.0) and median OS was 17.5 months (95 % CI 13.0-not reached)., Conclusions: Combining palliative systemic therapy with oxaliplatin-based ePIPAC in patients with unresectable CPM was feasible and showed an acceptable safety profile. Treatment-induced response and survival are promising, yet further research is required to determine the additional value of ePIPAC to systemic therapy., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Pancreatic cancer is one of the five most common causes of cancer mortality in developed countries. In patients with metastatic disease, the most frequent treatment used is FOLFIRINOX, which is associated with moderate toxicity which could influence quality of life. The efficacy of FOLFIRINOX in a general population in the Netherlands has not been subject of research before, and therefore, this research has been set up in order to investigate what the real-life benefits of FOLFIRINOX are in a population with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) treated in three general hospitals in the Netherlands., Methods: The data used in this study was collected by patient records leading to a noninterventional retrospective cohort study. Eighty-six patients, over 18 years of age, diagnosed with mPC between the years 2015 and 2022 and treated with FOLFIRINOX at Maasstad Hospital in Rotterdam, Amphia Hospital in Breda, or Catharina Hospital in Eindhoven, were included in the study. Kaplan-Meier models were used in order to represent survival outcomes., Results: The results showed a median overall survival of 228 days (IQR 118-355). Only 14.0% (n = 12) completed the first-line treatment, and 51.2% (n = 44) of patients stopped treatment before or during cycle 6. Toxicity is highest, grade 3, after the first cycle but remains high for grade 1 and 2 during all treatment cycles., Conclusion: Survival rates for patient with metastatic pancreatic cancer treated with FOLFIRINOX were worse in our study population than in comparative studies., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: The RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK (MAPK) pathway plays a role in ovarian carcinogenesis. Low-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (LGSOC) frequently harbors activating MAPK mutations. MAPK inhibitors have been used in small subsets of ovarian carcinoma (OC) patients to control tumor growth. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of MAPK inhibitors in OC patients. We aimed to determine the clinical benefit rate (CBR), the subgroup of MAPK inhibitors with the best CBR and overall response rate (ORR), and the most common adverse events., Methods: We conducted a search in PubMed, Embase via Ovid, the Cochrane library and clinicaltrials.gov on studies evaluating the efficacy of single MAPK pathway inhibition with MAPK pathway inhibitors in OC patients. Our primary outcome included the CBR, defined by the proportion of patients with stable disease (SD), complete (CR) and partial response (PR). Secondary outcomes included the ORR (including PR and CR) and grade 3 and 4 adverse events. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model., Results: We included nine studies with a total of 319 OC patients, for which we determined a pooled CBR of 63% (95%-CI 39-84%, I 2  = 92%). Combined treatment with Raf- and MEK inhibitors in in BRAF v600 mutated LGSOC (n = 6) had the greatest efficacy with a CBR of 100% and ORR of 83%. MEK inhibitors had the best efficacy as a single agent. Subgroup analysis by tumor histology demonstrated a significantly higher CBR and ORR in patients with LGSOC, with a pooled CBR and ORR of 87% (95%-CI 81-92%, I 2  = 0%) and 27% (95%-CI 10-48%, I 2  = 77%) respectively. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were reported frequently: 123 in 167 patients., Conclusions: MEK inhibitors are the most promising single agents in (LGS)OC. However, dual MAPK pathway inhibition should be considered in patients with a BRAF v600 mutation, or non-mutated OC with depleted treatment options due indications of higher efficacy and tolerable toxicity profiles., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest CSEH and PvdP are employed by the Catharina Hospital. The other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Clinical efficacy of cytostatic anticancer agents can be determined with the progression-free survival (PFS) ratio. This outcome measure compares PFS achieved by a new treatment (PFS2) to the PFS of the most recent treatment on which the patient has experienced progression (PFS1). Clinical benefit has been defined as a PFS-ratio (PFS2/PFS1) > 1.3. However, in order to demonstrate significant benefit, trial designs require an assumption on the proportion of patients who reach this ratio during palliative options. For ovarian carcinoma, data is lacking to support this assumption. Therefore in this study, we assess the PFS-ratio in recurrent ovarian carcinoma patients treated with current palliative options., Methods: We included 67 patients with recurrent high-grade serous (HGSC, 73.1%) or low-grade (LGOC, 26.9%) ovarian carcinoma. We determined the median PFS-ratio and investigated the association with clinicopathological characteristics., Results: Overall, we observed a median PFS-ratio of 0.69. The proportion of patients with a PFS-ratio > 1.3 was 22.4%. For HGSC patients, the median PFS-ratio was significantly lower than for LGOC patients (respectively, 0.58 and 1.26, p  = 0.007). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the LGOC subtype and CA125 tumor marker concentration were independent factors related to a PFS-ratio > 1.3., Conclusions: Although the PFS-ratio represents a meaningful outcome measure in studies investigating cytostatic anticancer agents, we conclude that it is influenced by tumor histology and biological behavior. In future research, these factors should be taken into account when determining thresholds for clinical benefit in trial designs., Competing Interests: 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., (© 2022 Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Aim: To determine the safety, feasibility, pharmacokinetics, and cost of UGT1A1 genotype-guided dosing of irinotecan., Patients and Methods: In this prospective, multicentre, non-randomised study, patients intended for treatment with irinotecan were pre-therapeutically genotyped for UGT1A1∗28 and UGT1A1∗93. Homozygous variant carriers (UGT1A1 poor metabolisers; PMs) received an initial 30% dose reduction. The primary endpoint was incidence of febrile neutropenia in the first two cycles of treatment. Toxicity in UGT1A1 PMs was compared to a historical cohort of UGT1A1 PMs treated with full dose therapy, and to UGT1A1 non-PMs treated with full dose therapy in the current study. Secondary endpoints were pharmacokinetics, feasibility, and costs., Results: Of the 350 evaluable patients, 31 (8.9%) patients were UGT1A1 PM and received a median 30% dose reduction. The incidence of febrile neutropenia in this group was 6.5% compared to 24% in historical UGT1A1 PMs (P = 0.04) and was comparable to the incidence in UGT1A1 non-PMs treated with full dose therapy. Systemic exposure of SN-38 of reduced dosing in UGT1A1 PMs was still slightly higher compared to a standard-dosed irinotecan patient cohort (difference: +32%). Cost analysis showed that genotype-guided dosing was cost-saving with a cost reduction of €183 per patient., Conclusion: UGT1A1 genotype-guided dosing significantly reduces the incidence of febrile neutropenia in UGT1A1 PM patients treated with irinotecan, results in a therapeutically effective systemic drug exposure, and is cost-saving. Therefore, UGT1A1 genotype-guided dosing of irinotecan should be considered standard of care in order to improve individual patient safety., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: HLMcL declares the following potential conflicts of interest: Board of Directors: Vyant Bio; Co-Founder: Clariifi LLC; Advisor: EviCore, Total Dx Connect, and Viecure. All remaining authors declare no potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To determine the clinical benefit of monotherapy with PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors in patients diagnosed with advanced or recurrent ovarian cancer and to investigate the predictive value of current PI3K/AKT/mTOR biomarkers on therapy response., Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library for articles reporting on treatment with PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors in ovarian cancer. The primary endpoint was defined as the clinical benefit rate (CBR), including the proportion of patients with complete (CR) and partial response (PR) and stable disease (SD). Secondary endpoints included the overall response rate (ORR, including CR and PR) and drug-related grade 3 and 4 adverse events., Results: We included 233 patients from 19 studies and observed a pooled CBR of 32% (95% CI 20-44%) and ORR of 3% (95% CI 0-6%) in advanced or recurrent ovarian cancer patients treated with PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors. Subgroup analysis tended to favor the studies who selected patients based on current PI3K/AKT/mTOR biomarker criteria (e.g. genomic alterations or loss of PTEN protein expression), but the difference in CBR was not statistically significant from studies with unselected populations (respectively, CBR of 42% (95% CI 23-62%) and 27% (95% CI 14-42%), P = 0.217). To better reflect true patient benefit, we excluded SD <6 months as a beneficial outcome which resulted in a pooled CBR of 7% (95% CI 2-13%). The overall proportion of patients with drug-related grade 3 and 4 adverse events was 36%., Conclusions: The efficacy of monotherapy with PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors in advanced recurrent ovarian cancer patients is limited to a small subgroup and selection of patients with the use of current biomarkers did not improved the CBR significantly. Given the toxicity profile, we suggest that current treatment with PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors should not be initiated unless in clinical trials. Furthermore, improved biomarkers to measure functional PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway activity are needed to optimize patient selection., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest PvdP is employed by Catharina Hospital, where her research work is co-funded by the Catharina research fund, and Molecular Pathway Dx, Philips. AvdS is employed by Molecular Pathway Dx, Philips. The other authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: To date, no randomized clinical trials have investigated perioperative systemic therapy relative to cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) alone for resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM)., Objective: To assess the feasibility and safety of perioperative systemic therapy in patients with resectable CPM and the response of CPM to neoadjuvant treatment., Design, Setting, and Participants: An open-label, parallel-group phase 2 randomized clinical trial in all 9 Dutch tertiary centers for the surgical treatment of CPM enrolled participants between June 15, 2017, and January 9, 2019. Participants were patients with pathologically proven isolated resectable CPM who did not receive systemic therapy within 6 months before enrollment., Interventions: Randomization to perioperative systemic therapy or CRS-HIPEC alone. Perioperative systemic therapy comprised either four 3-week neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of CAPOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin), six 2-week neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of FOLFOX (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin), or six 2-week neoadjuvant cycles of FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan) and either four 3-week adjuvant cycles of capecitabine or six 2-week adjuvant cycles of fluorouracil with leucovorin. Bevacizumab was added to the first 3 (CAPOX) or 4 (FOLFOX/FOLFIRI) neoadjuvant cycles., Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportions of macroscopic complete CRS-HIPEC and Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher postoperative morbidity. Key secondary outcomes were centrally assessed rates of objective radiologic and major pathologic response of CPM to neoadjuvant treatment. Analyses were done modified intention-to-treat in patients starting neoadjuvant treatment (experimental arm) or undergoing upfront surgery (control arm)., Results: In 79 patients included in the analysis (43 [54%] men; mean [SD] age, 62 [10] years), experimental (n = 37) and control (n = 42) arms did not differ significantly regarding the proportions of macroscopic complete CRS-HIPEC (33 of 37 [89%] vs 36 of 42 [86%] patients; risk ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.88-1.23; P = .74) and Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher postoperative morbidity (8 of 37 [22%] vs 14 of 42 [33%] patients; risk ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.31-1.37; P = .25). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Objective radiologic and major pathologic response rates of CPM to neoadjuvant treatment were 28% (9 of 32 evaluable patients) and 38% (13 of 34 evaluable patients), respectively., Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized phase 2 trial in patients diagnosed with resectable CPM, perioperative systemic therapy seemed feasible, safe, and able to induce response of CPM, justifying a phase 3 trial., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02758951.

Introduction: Despite its increasing use, first-line palliative systemic therapy alternated with electrostatic pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy with oxaliplatin (ePIPAC-OX), hereinafter referred to as first-line bidirectional therapy, has never been prospectively investigated in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). As a first step to address this evidence gap, the present study aims to assess the safety, feasibility, antitumour activity, patient-reported outcomes, costs and systemic pharmacokinetics of first-line bidirectional therapy in patients with isolated unresectable CPM., Methods and Analysis: In this single-arm, phase II study in two Dutch tertiary referral centres, 20 patients are enrolled. Key eligibility criteria are a good performance status, pathologically proven isolated unresectable CPM, no previous palliative systemic therapy for colorectal cancer, no (neo)adjuvant systemic therapy ≤6 months prior to enrolment and no previous pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Patients receive three cycles of bidirectional therapy. Each cycle consists of 6 weeks first-line palliative systemic therapy at the medical oncologists' decision (CAPOX-bevacizumab, FOLFOX-bevacizumab, FOLFIRI-bevacizumab or FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab) followed by ePIPAC-OX (92 mg/m 2 ) with an intraoperative bolus of intravenous leucovorin (20 mg/m2) and 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m 2 ). Study treatment ends after the third ePIPAC-OX. The primary outcome is the number of patients with-and procedures leading to-grade ≥3 adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events V.5.0) up to 4 weeks after the last procedure. Key secondary outcomes include the number of bidirectional cycles in each patient, treatment-related characteristics, grade ≤2 adverse events, tumour response (histopathological, cytological, radiological, biochemical, macroscopic and ascites), patient-reported outcomes, systemic pharmacokinetics of oxaliplatin, costs, progression-free survival and overall survival., Ethics and Dissemination: This study is approved by the Dutch competent authority, a medical ethics committee and the institutional review boards of both study centres. Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed medical journals and presented to patients and healthcare professionals., Trial Registration Number: NL8303., Competing Interests: Competing interests: IHJTH received grants, paid to the institute, from Roche, QP&S and RanD Biotech outside the submitted work. This manuscript is based on the study protocol version 4.0, 15 June 2020., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Upfront cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC (CRS-HIPEC) is the standard treatment for isolated resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM) in the Netherlands. This study investigates whether addition of perioperative systemic therapy to CRS-HIPEC improves oncological outcomes., Methods: This open-label, parallel-group, phase II-III, randomised, superiority study is performed in nine Dutch tertiary referral centres. Eligible patients are adults who have a good performance status, histologically or cytologically proven resectable PM of a colorectal adenocarcinoma, no systemic colorectal metastases, no systemic therapy for colorectal cancer within six months prior to enrolment, and no previous CRS-HIPEC. Eligible patients are randomised (1:1) to perioperative systemic therapy and CRS-HIPEC (experimental arm) or upfront CRS-HIPEC alone (control arm) by using central randomisation software with minimisation stratified by a peritoneal cancer index of 0-10 or 11-20, metachronous or synchronous PM, previous systemic therapy for colorectal cancer, and HIPEC with oxaliplatin or mitomycin C. At the treating physician's discretion, perioperative systemic therapy consists of either four 3-weekly neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of capecitabine with oxaliplatin (CAPOX), six 2-weekly neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin with oxaliplatin (FOLFOX), or six 2-weekly neoadjuvant cycles of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin with irinotecan (FOLFIRI) followed by four 3-weekly (capecitabine) or six 2-weekly (5-fluorouracil/leucovorin) adjuvant cycles of fluoropyrimidine monotherapy. Bevacizumab is added to the first three (CAPOX) or four (FOLFOX/FOLFIRI) neoadjuvant cycles. The first 80 patients are enrolled in a phase II study to explore the feasibility of accrual and the feasibility, safety, and tolerance of perioperative systemic therapy. If predefined criteria of feasibility and safety are met, the study continues as a phase III study with 3-year overall survival as primary endpoint. A total of 358 patients is needed to detect the hypothesised 15% increase in 3-year overall survival (control arm 50%; experimental arm 65%). Secondary endpoints are surgical characteristics, major postoperative morbidity, progression-free survival, disease-free survival, health-related quality of life, costs, major systemic therapy related toxicity, and objective radiological and histopathological response rates., Discussion: This is the first randomised study that prospectively compares oncological outcomes of perioperative systemic therapy and CRS-HIPEC with upfront CRS-HIPEC alone for isolated resectable colorectal PM., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov/ NCT02758951 , NTR/ NTR6301 , ISRCTN/ ISRCTN15977568 , EudraCT/ 2016-001865-99 .