Search

Aims: Many patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer have dysphagia from their primary tumor and de novo metastatic disease. The purpose of this study was to test the safety and efficacy of nivolumab given concurrently with hypofractionated chemoradiotherapy to patients with oligometastatic and obstructing esophageal tumors. Methods: Patients were enrolled in a planned single‐arm, phase 2 clinical trial. Eligible participants had previously untreated oligometastatic (≤5 metastases on fludeoxyglucose‐18 positron emission tomography scan outside the primary tumor radiotherapy field) esophageal or gastroesophageal carcinoma, dysphagia, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0–1. Treatment was with 2 weeks of concurrent hypofractionated radiotherapy (30 Gy/10#) to the primary tumor, weekly carboplatin AUC2, weekly paclitaxel 50 mg/m2, and q2weekly nivolumab 240 mg, followed by nivolumab 480 mg continuing q4weekly until disease progression or 24 months total. A single metastasis was treated with stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) (24 Gy/3#) in week 7. Results: Five patients were recruited before trial closure to new participants for logistical reasons. Existing participants continued treatment per protocol as a pilot study at one center. All five patients completed chemoradioimmunotherapy and SBRT. All patients derived an improvement in their dysphagia. Two patients completed 24 months of nivolumab without disease progression. Grade 3 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 3 patients, however, there were no grade 4 AEs, AEs due to SBRT, or AEs of special interest as defined by the protocol. Conclusion: Pilot results from five patients at one center found that treatment was well tolerated and effective for dysphagia relief. The efficacy of hypofractionated chemoradiotherapy with concurrent checkpoint inhibition should be tested in a multicentre study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Trial data support an absence of an exposure--survival relationship for pembrolizumab. As these relationships remain unexamined in a real-world setting, we determined them in metastatic melanoma prospectively in an observational study. Translational objectives included identifying biomarkers of progressive disease (PD). Checkpoint blockade naïve patients receiving 2 mg/kg Q3W pembrolizumab had pharmacokinetic and clinical outcome data collected. Trough, a valid surrogate for drug exposure, was assessed using ELISA. T-cell exhaustion and chemokine markers were determined using flow cytometry. Geometric means of exposures and biomarkers were tested against objective response groups using one-way ANOVA. The cohort was split by the median into high versus low pembrolizumab exposure groups. Kaplan--Meier progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) curves were estimated for high versus low exposure, compared using the log rank test. The high pembrolizumab exposure group (n = 14) experienced substantially longer median OS (not reached vs. 48 months, p = .014), than the low exposure group (n = 14). A similar positive exposure PFS relationship was found (median not reached vs. 48 months, p = .045). The frequency of TIM-3 expression on CD4+ T cells was significantly higher in PD (mean 27.8%) than complete response (CR) (13.38%, p = .01) and partial response (12.4%, p = .05). There was a near doubling of CXCR6 and TIM-3 co-expression on CD4+ T cells in PD (mean 23.3%) versus CR (mean 11.4, p = .003) and partial response (9.8%, p = .0001). We describe positive exposure-PFS and exposure-OS relationships for pembrolizumab in metastatic melanoma. TIM-3, alongside co-expression of CXCR6 and TIM-3 on circulating CD4+ T cells are potential bio markers of treatment failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Colorectal cancer is a very common malignancy and frequently manifests with liver metastases, often without other systemic disease. Margin-negative (R0) resection of limited metastatic disease, in conjunction with systemic antineoplastic agents, is the primary treatment strategy, leading to long survival times for appropriately selected patients. There is debate over whether the primary tumor and secondaries should be removed at the same time or in a staged manner. Chemotherapy is effective in converting some unresectable liver metastases into resectable disease, with a correspondingly better survival outcome. However, the ideal chemotherapy with or without biological agents and when it should be administered in the course of treatment are uncertain. The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in initially resectable liver metastases is controversial. Local delivery of chemotherapy, with and without surgery, can lead to longer disease-free survival times, but it is not routinely used with curative intent. This review focuses on methods to maximize the disease-free survival interval using chemotherapy, surgery, and local methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Phase 1-2 trials involving patients with resectable, macroscopic stage III melanoma have shown that neoadjuvant immunotherapy is more efficacious than adjuvant immunotherapy., Methods: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with resectable, macroscopic stage III melanoma, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive two cycles of neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab and then undergo surgery or to undergo surgery and then receive 12 cycles of adjuvant nivolumab. Only the patients in the neoadjuvant group who had a partial response or nonresponse received subsequent adjuvant treatment. The primary end point was event-free survival., Results: A total of 423 patients underwent randomization. At a median follow-up of 9.9 months, the estimated 12-month event-free survival was 83.7% (99.9% confidence interval [CI], 73.8 to 94.8) in the neoadjuvant group and 57.2% (99.9% CI, 45.1 to 72.7) in the adjuvant group. The difference in restricted mean survival time was 8.00 months (99.9% CI, 4.94 to 11.05; P<0.001; hazard ratio for progression, recurrence, or death, 0.32; 99.9% CI, 0.15 to 0.66). In the neoadjuvant group, 59.0% of the patients had a major pathological response, 8.0% had a partial response, 26.4% had a nonresponse (>50% residual viable tumor), and 2.4% had progression; in 4.2%, surgery had not yet been performed or was omitted. The estimated 12-month recurrence-free survival was 95.1% among patients in the neoadjuvant group who had a major pathological response, 76.1% among those who had a partial response, and 57.0% among those who had a nonresponse. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher that were related to systemic treatment occurred in 29.7% of the patients in the neoadjuvant group and in 14.7% in the adjuvant group., Conclusions: Among patients with resectable, macroscopic stage III melanoma, neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab followed by surgery and response-driven adjuvant therapy resulted in longer event-free survival than surgery followed by adjuvant nivolumab. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and others; NADINA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04949113.)., (Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Aims: Many patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer have dysphagia from their primary tumor and de novo metastatic disease. The purpose of this study was to test the safety and efficacy of nivolumab given concurrently with hypofractionated chemoradiotherapy to patients with oligometastatic and obstructing esophageal tumors., Methods: Patients were enrolled in a planned single-arm, phase 2 clinical trial. Eligible participants had previously untreated oligometastatic (≤5 metastases on fludeoxyglucose-18 positron emission tomography scan outside the primary tumor radiotherapy field) esophageal or gastroesophageal carcinoma, dysphagia, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1. Treatment was with 2 weeks of concurrent hypofractionated radiotherapy (30 Gy/10#) to the primary tumor, weekly carboplatin AUC2, weekly paclitaxel 50 mg/m 2 , and q2weekly nivolumab 240 mg, followed by nivolumab 480 mg continuing q4weekly until disease progression or 24 months total. A single metastasis was treated with stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) (24 Gy/3#) in week 7., Results: Five patients were recruited before trial closure to new participants for logistical reasons. Existing participants continued treatment per protocol as a pilot study at one center. All five patients completed chemoradioimmunotherapy and SBRT. All patients derived an improvement in their dysphagia. Two patients completed 24 months of nivolumab without disease progression. Grade 3 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 3 patients, however, there were no grade 4 AEs, AEs due to SBRT, or AEs of special interest as defined by the protocol., Conclusion: Pilot results from five patients at one center found that treatment was well tolerated and effective for dysphagia relief. The efficacy of hypofractionated chemoradiotherapy with concurrent checkpoint inhibition should be tested in a multicentre study., (© 2024 The Authors. Asia‐Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged cancer care globally, introducing resource limitations and competing risks into clinical practice., Aims: To describe the COVID-19 impact on medical oncology care provision in an Australian setting., Methods: Calvary Mater Newcastle and Newcastle Private Hospital medical oncology data from 1 February to 31 April 2019 versus 2020 were retrospectively analysed., Results: Three hundred and sixty-four inpatient admissions occurred in 2020, 21% less than in 2019. Total inpatient days decreased by 22% (2842 vs 2203). April was most impacted (36% and 44% fewer admissions and inpatient days respectively). Mean length of stay remained unchanged (6.4 vs 6.2 days, P = 0.7). In all, 5072 outpatient consultations were conducted, including 417 new-patient consultations (4% and 6% increase on 2019 respectively). Telephone consultations (0 vs 1380) replaced one-quarter of face-to-face consultations (4859 vs 3623, -25%), with minimal telehealth use (6 vs 69). Day Treatment Centre encounters remained stable (3751 vs 3444, -8%). The proportion of new patients planned for palliative treatment decreased (35% vs 28%, P = 0.04), observation increased (16% vs 23%, P = 0.04) and curative intent treatment was unchanged (both 41%). Recruiting clinical trials decreased by one-third (45 vs 30), two trials were activated (vs 5 in 2019) and 45% fewer patients consented to trial participation (62 vs 34)., Conclusion: Our medical oncology teams adapted rapidly to COVID-19 with significant changes to care provision, including fewer hospital admissions, a notable transition to telephone-based outpatient clinics and reduced clinical trial activity. The continuum of care was largely defended despite pandemic considerations and growing service volumes., (© 2021 Royal Australasian College of Physicians.)

Background: Bevacizumab, a VEGF-A inhibitor, in combination with chemotherapy, has proven to increase progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival in multiple lines of therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The angiogenic factor angiopoetin-2 (Ang-2) is associated with poor prognosis in many cancers, including mCRC. Preclinical models demonstrate improved activity when inhibiting both VEGF-A and Ang-2, suggesting that the dual VEGF-A and Ang-2 blocker vanucizumab (RO5520985 or RG-7221) may improve clinical outcomes. This phase II trial evaluated the efficacy of vanucizumab plus modified (m)FOLFOX-6 (folinic acid (leucovorin), fluorouracil (5-FU) and oxaliplatin) versus bevacizumab/mFOLFOX-6 for first-line mCRC., Patients and Methods: All patients received mFOLFOX-6 and were randomized 1:1 to also receive vanucizumab 2,000 mg or bevacizumab 5 mg/kg every other week. Oxaliplatin was given for eight cycles; other agents were continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity for a maximum of 24 months. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS., Results: One hundred eighty-nine patients were randomized (vanucizumab, n = 94; bevacizumab, n = 95). The number of PFS events was comparable (vanucizumab, n = 39; bevacizumab, n = 43). The hazard ratio was 1.00 (95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.58; p = .98) in a stratified analysis based on number of metastatic sites and region. Objective response rate was 52.1% and 57.9% in the vanucizumab and bevacizumab arm, respectively. Baseline plasma Ang-2 levels were prognostic in both arms but not predictive for treatment effects on PFS of vanucizumab. The incidence of adverse events of grade ≥3 was similar between treatment arms (83.9% vs. 82.1%); gastrointestinal perforations (10.8% vs. 8.4%) exceeded previously reported rates in this setting. Hypertension and peripheral edema were more frequent in the vanucizumab arm., Conclusion: Vanucizumab/mFOLFOX-6 did not improve PFS and was associated with increased rates of antiangiogenic toxicity compared with bevacizumab/mFOLFOX-6. Our results suggest that Ang-2 is not a relevant therapeutic target in first-line mCRC., Implications for Practice: This randomized phase II study demonstrates that additional angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) inhibition does not result in superior benefit over anti-VEGF-A blockade alone when each added to standard chemotherapy. Moreover, the performed pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis revealed that vanucizumab was bioavailable and affected its intended target, thereby strongly suggesting that Ang-2 is not a relevant therapeutic target in the clinical setting of treatment-naïve metastatic colorectal cancer. As a result, the further clinical development of the dual VEGF-A and Ang-2 inhibitor vanucizumab was discontinued., (© 2019 The Authors. The Oncologist published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of AlphaMed Press.)

Metastatic melanoma is an aggressive form of cancer characterised by poor prognosis and a complex etiology. Until 2010, the treatment options for metastatic melanoma were very limited. Largely ineffective dacarbazine, temozolamide or fotemustine were the only agents in use for 35 years. In recent years, the development of molecularly targeted inhibitors in parallel with the development of checkpoint inhibition immunotherapies has rapidly improved the outcomes for metastatic melanoma patients. Despite these new therapies showing initial promise; resistance and poor duration of response have limited their effectiveness as monotherapies. Here we provide an overview of the history of melanoma treatment, as well as the current treatments in development. We also discuss the future of melanoma treatment as we go beyond monotherapies to a combinatorial approach. Combining older therapies with the new molecular and immunotherapies will be the most promising way forward for treatment of metastatic melanoma., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)