The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

AIM: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery. METHODS: This was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin. RESULTS: Overall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P < 0.001). After adjustment, delay was not associated with a lower rate of complete resection (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90-1.55, P = 0.224), which was consistent in elective patients only (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, P = 0.672). Longer delays were not associated with poorer outcomes. CONCLUSION: One in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease

WSES Jerusalem guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis

Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common cause of acute abdominal pain. Diagnosis of AA is challenging; a variable combination of clinical signs and symptoms has been used together with laboratory findings in several scoring systems proposed for suggesting the probability of AA and the possible subsequent management pathway. The role of imaging in the diagnosis of AA is still debated, with variable use of US, CT and MRI in different settings worldwide. Up to date, comprehensive clinical guidelines for diagnosis and management of AA have never been issued. In July 2015, during the 3rd World Congress of the WSES, held in Jerusalem (Israel), a panel of experts including an Organizational Committee and Scientific Committee and Scientific Secretariat, participated to a Consensus Conference where eight panelists presented a number of statements developed for each of the eight main questions about diagnosis and management of AA. The statements were then voted, eventually modified and finally approved by the participants to The Consensus Conference and lately by the board of co-authors. The current paper is reporting the definitive Guidelines Statements on each of the following topics: 1) Diagnostic efficiency of clinical scoring systems, 2) Role of Imaging, 3) Non-operative treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis, 4) Timing of appendectomy and in-hospital delay, 5) Surgical treatment 6) Scoring systems for intra-operative grading of appendicitis and their clinical usefulness 7) Non-surgical treatment for complicated appendicitis: abscess or phlegmon 8) Pre-operative and post-operative antibiotics.Peer reviewe

Evaluation of appendicitis risk prediction models in adults with suspected appendicitis

Background Appendicitis is the most common general surgical emergency worldwide, but its diagnosis remains challenging. The aim of this study was to determine whether existing risk prediction models can reliably identify patients presenting to hospital in the UK with acute right iliac fossa (RIF) pain who are at low risk of appendicitis. Methods A systematic search was completed to identify all existing appendicitis risk prediction models. Models were validated using UK data from an international prospective cohort study that captured consecutive patients aged 16–45 years presenting to hospital with acute RIF in March to June 2017. The main outcome was best achievable model specificity (proportion of patients who did not have appendicitis correctly classified as low risk) whilst maintaining a failure rate below 5 per cent (proportion of patients identified as low risk who actually had appendicitis). Results Some 5345 patients across 154 UK hospitals were identified, of which two‐thirds (3613 of 5345, 67·6 per cent) were women. Women were more than twice as likely to undergo surgery with removal of a histologically normal appendix (272 of 964, 28·2 per cent) than men (120 of 993, 12·1 per cent) (relative risk 2·33, 95 per cent c.i. 1·92 to 2·84; P < 0·001). Of 15 validated risk prediction models, the Adult Appendicitis Score performed best (cut‐off score 8 or less, specificity 63·1 per cent, failure rate 3·7 per cent). The Appendicitis Inflammatory Response Score performed best for men (cut‐off score 2 or less, specificity 24·7 per cent, failure rate 2·4 per cent). Conclusion Women in the UK had a disproportionate risk of admission without surgical intervention and had high rates of normal appendicectomy. Risk prediction models to support shared decision‐making by identifying adults in the UK at low risk of appendicitis were identified

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Phase I study of AG-120, an IDH1 mutant enzyme inhibitor: Results from the cholangiocarcinoma dose escalation and expansion cohorts

4015 Background: Mutations in the metabolic enzyme isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (mIDH1) occur in patients (pts) with cholangiocarcinoma (CC) and are detected in up to 25% of intrahepatic CC. mIDH1 produce the oncometabolite, D-2-hydroxyglutarate (2-HG), resulting in epigenetic and genetic dysregulation and oncogenesis. AG-120 is a first-in-class, potent, oral inhibitor of mIDH1 tested in this phase I study in mIDH1 solid tumors, including CC. Methods: AG-120 was escalated in a 3+3 design from 100 mg twice daily to 1200 mg once daily (QD) in 28-day cycles (N = 60, mIDH1 advanced solid tumors). Key eligibility for CC: recurrence of progressive mIDH1 CC following standard therapy (dose escalation) or at least a prior gemcitabine-based regimen (expansion cohort). Response (RECIST 1.1) was assessed every 8 weeks. Plasma and tumor tissue were collected for exploratory analyses. Results: Based on the safety, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic data from dose escalation, the 500 mg QD dose was selected for expansion in mIDH1 CC and other mIDH1 solid tumors. As of Dec 16, 2016, 73 pts with mIDH1 CC had been dosed in the dose escalation (n = 24) and expansion (n = 49) cohorts. Demographics: M/F = 24/49, median number of prior therapies = 2 (range 1–5), ECOG 0–1 = 26/47. There were no dose-limiting toxicities. Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) in ≥5% pts: fatigue (21%), nausea (18%), vomiting (12%), diarrhea (10%), decreased appetite (8%), dysgeusia (5%), QT prolongation (5%). Two (3%) pts experienced related grade 3 AEs: fatigue and low phosphorus. There were no AG-120-related AEs leading to discontinuation. Among the 72 efficacy evaluable (≥1 post baseline response assessment or discontinued prematurely) mIDH1 CC pts (24 in escalation and 48 in expansion cohort), 6% (n = 4) had a confirmed partial response and 56% (n = 40) experienced stable disease. The progression-free survival rate at 6 months was 40%, and 8 pts have been treated with AG-120 for ≥1 year. Conclusions: In this pretreated mIDH1 CC population, AG-120 was associated with a favorable safety profile and prolonged stable disease. A global, phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled study of AG-120 in mIDH1 CC has been initiated (ClarIDHy). Clinical trial information: NCT02073994

Enasidenib in mutant- IDH2 relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (R/R AML): Results of a phase I dose-escalation and expansion study

7004 Background: Recurrent mutations in isocitrate dehydrogenase 2 (m IDH2) occur in 8-15% of AML pts. mIDH2 proteins synthesize an oncometabolite, 2-hydroxyglutarate (2HG), causing DNA and histone hypermethylation and blocked myeloid differentiation. Enasidenib (AG-221) is an oral, selective, small-molecule inhibitor of mIDH2 protein. Methods: This phase 1/2 study assessed the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles, safety, and clinical activity of enasidenib in pts with m IDH2 myeloid malignancies. Safety for all pts and efficacy outcomes for R/R AML pts from the phase 1 dose-escalation and expansion phases are reported. Results: In all, 239 pts received enasidenib. In the dose-escalation (n=113), the MTD was not reached at doses up to 650 mg daily. Median 2HG reductions from baseline were 92%, 90%, and 93% for pts receiving 100 mg daily, respectively. Enasidenib 100 mg QD was chosen for the expansion phase (n=126) based on PK/PD profiles and demonstrated efficacy. Median number of enasidenib cycles was 5 (range 1–25). Grade 3-4 drug-related investigator reported AEs included indirect hyperbilirubinemia (12%) and IDH-inhibitor-associated differentiation syndrome (ie, retinoic acid syndrome; 7%). For R/R AML pts, overall response rate (ORR) was 40.3%, including 34 (19.3%) complete remissions (CR; Table). Response was associated with cellular differentiation, typically with no evidence of aplasia. Median overall survival (OS) for R/R AML pts was 9.3 months (mos). For pts who attained CR, OS was 19.7 mos. Pts who had received ≥2 prior AML regimens (n=94; 53%) had median OS of 8.0 mos. Conclusions: Enasidenib was well tolerated, induced CRs, and was associated with OS of >9 mos in pts who had failed prior AML therapies. Differentiation of myeloblasts, not cytotoxicity, appears to drive the clinical efficacy of enasidenib. Clinical trial information: NCT01915498. [Table: see text

Safety and activity of ivosidenib in patients with IDH1-mutant advanced cholangiocarcinoma: a phase 1 study

Isocitrate dehydrogenase-1 (IDH1) is mutated in up to 25% of cholangiocarcinomas, especially intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Ivosidenib is an oral, targeted inhibitor of mutant IDH1 (mIDH1) approved in the USA for the treatment of mIDH1 acute myeloid leukaemia in newly diagnosed patients ineligible for intensive chemotherapy and patients with relapsed or refractory disease. Ivosidenib is under clinical evaluation in a phase 1 study that aims to assess its safety and tolerability in patients with mIDH1 solid tumours. Here we report data for the mIDH1-cholangiocarcinoma cohort. We did a phase 1 dose-escalation and expansion study of ivosidenib monotherapy in mIDH1 solid tumours at 12 clinical sites in the USA and one in France. The primary outcomes were safety, tolerability, maximum tolerated dose, and recommended phase 2 dose. Eligible patients had a documented mIDH1 tumour based on local testing, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, one or more previous lines of therapy, and evaluable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. During dose escalation, ivosidenib was administered orally at 200-1200 mg daily in 28-day cycles in a standard 3 + 3 design; during expansion, patients received the selected dose on the basis of pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, safety, and activity data from dose escalation. Safety and clinical activity analyses were reported for all patients with mIDH1-cholangiocarcinoma who were enrolled and received at least one dose of study treatment. Enrolment is complete, and the study is ongoing. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02073994. Between March 14, 2014 and May 12, 2017, 73 patients with mIDH1-cholangiocarcinoma were enrolled and received ivosidenib. No dose-limiting toxicities were reported and maximum tolerated dose was not reached; 500 mg daily was selected for expansion. Common (≥20%) adverse events, regardless of cause, were fatigue (31 [42%]; two [3%] grade ≥3), nausea (25 [34%]; one [1%] grade ≥3), diarrhoea (23 [32%]), abdominal pain (20 [27%]; two [3%] grade ≥3), decreased appetite (20 [27%]; one [1%] grade ≥3), and vomiting (17 [23%]). Common grade 3 or worse adverse events were ascites (four [5%]) and anaemia (three [4%]); the only treatment-related grade 3 or worse adverse event in more than one patient was fatigue (two [3%]). Two (3%) patients had serious adverse events leading to on-treatment death (Clostridioides difficile infection and procedural haemorrhage); neither was assessed by the investigator as related to treatment. 46 (63%) patients had adverse events deemed related to ivosidenib, of which four (5%) were grade 3 or higher (two [3%] for fatigue; one [1%] each for decreased blood phosphorus and increased blood alkaline phosphatase). One serious adverse event was considered possibly related to treatment (grade 2 supraventricular extrasystoles). Four (5%; 95% CI 1·5-13·4) patients had a partial response. Median progression-free survival was 3·8 months (95% CI 3·6-7·3), 6-month progression-free survival was 40·1% (28·4-51·6), and 12-month progression-free survival was 21·8% (12·3-33·0). Median overall survival was 13·8 months (95% CI 11·1-29·3); however, data were censored for 48 patients (66%). Ivosidenib might offer a well tolerated option for patients with mIDH1-cholangiocarcinoma. An ongoing, global phase 3 study is evaluating ivosidenib versus placebo in patients with previously treated nonresectable or metastatic mIDH1-cholangiocarcinoma. Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc

Ivosidenib (AG-120) in Patients with IDH1-Mutant Relapsed/Refractory Myelodysplastic Syndrome: Updated Enrollment of a Phase 1 Dose Escalation and Expansion Study

Background: Mutations in isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) occur in ~3% of individuals with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and have been associated with increased transformation to acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Ivosidenib (AG-120) is an oral, potent, targeted inhibitor of the mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 enzyme (mIDH1) and is approved in the US for the treatment of newly diagnosed AML with a susceptible IDH1 mutation in patients ≥75 years of age or who have comorbidities that preclude the use of intensive induction chemotherapy, and in adult patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) AML. The first-in-human, phase 1 dose escalation and expansion study of ivosidenib (NCT02074839) enrolled adults with mIDH1 advanced hematologic malignancies, including R/R MDS, and the study is ongoing. In the initial phase of the study (DiNardo et al. N Engl J Med 2018), the 12 patients with R/R MDS received 500 mg ivosidenib once daily and were characterized as follows: 75% were male, median age was 72.5 years (range 52-78), and 42% were ≥75 years of age; median number of prior therapies was 1 (range 1-3). Adverse events (AEs) of any grade, irrespective of causality, occurring in ≥20% of the 12 patients were diarrhea, fatigue, back pain, rash (n=4 each, 33.3%), anemia, urinary tract infection, decreased appetite, hypokalemia, arthralgia, dyspnea, pruritus, and hypotension (n=3 each, 25.0%). No AEs led to permanent discontinuation of treatment. Response was assessed according to International Working Group 2006 criteria for MDS. According to investigators, five of 12 patients achieved complete remission (CR) (41.7%; 95% CI 15.2%, 72.3%); median duration of CR was not estimable for these patients (95% CI 2.8 months, not estimable). Nine of 12 patients were transfusion independent for at least 56 days during study treatment. Mutation clearance was observed in one of the 5 CR patients. Here we report the design of a new sub-study of this trial, which is being undertaken to further assess the safety, tolerability, and clinical activity of treatment with ivosidenib in patients with R/R MDS. Methods: This sub-study is evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and clinical activity of ivosidenib. Adults with R/R MDS with an IDH1 mutation will be enrolled in the MDS sub-study. These individuals must have R/R disease after treatment with standard agents indicated for MDS. Eligible patients must have a platelet count of ≥20,000/μL, and adequate hepatic function (total bilirubin ≤1.5 × upper limit of normal [ULN]; aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, and alkaline phosphatase ≤3.0 × ULN) and renal function (serum creatinine ≤2.0 × ULN or creatinine clearance >40 mL/min). Additional key inclusion criteria are bone marrow blasts >5% and/or transfusion dependence. Ivosidenib is to be administered at a dose of 500 mg once daily orally on Days 1 to 28 of 28-day cycles. The addition of the MDS sub-study to this phase 1 clinical study in patients with hematological malignancies will provide additional insights into the use of ivosidenib for the treatment of mIDH1 R/R MDS. Disclosures Foran: Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. DiNardo:notable labs: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; medimmune: Honoraria; daiichi sankyo: Honoraria; abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; agios: Consultancy, Honoraria; jazz: Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; syros: Honoraria. Watts:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Stein:Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas Pharma US, Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bioline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PTC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. De Botton:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Syros: Consultancy; Forma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy; Pierre Fabre: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding. Fathi:Amphivena, Kite, Jazz, NewLink Genetics,: Honoraria; Agios, Astellas, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Novartis, Takeda, Amphivena, Kite, Forty Seven,Trovagene, NewLink genetics, Jazz, Abbvie, and PTC Therapeutics: Consultancy. Stein:Stemline: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Stone:AbbVie, Actinium, Agios, Argenx, Arog, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Biolinerx, Celgene, Cornerstone Biopharma, Fujifilm, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Ono, Orsenix, Otsuka, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sumitomo, Trovagene: Consultancy; Argenx, Celgene, Takeda Oncology: Other: Data and Safety Monitoring Board/Committee: ; Novartis, Agios, Arog: Research Funding. Patel:France Foundation: Honoraria; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Dava Oncology: Honoraria. Tallman:UpToDate: Patents & Royalties; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BioLineRx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Rigel: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cellerant: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Delta Fly Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nohla: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Tetraphase: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Orsenix: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Biosight: Research Funding; Oncolyze: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KAHR: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Choe:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership; Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wang:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership; Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fan:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yen:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Oluyadi:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Winkler:Agios: Employment. Hickman:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Agresta:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liu:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wu:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Attar:Aprea Therapeutics: Employment; Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kantarjian:Astex: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Actinium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Immunogen: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz Pharma: Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Cyclacel: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Ivosidenib (AG-120) is an IDH1 inhibitor indicated for the treatment of AML with a susceptible IDH1 mutation as detected by an FDA-approved test in: 1) adult patients with newly-diagnosed AML who are more than 75 years old or who have comorbidities that preclude use of intensive induction chemotherapy and 2) adult patients with relapsed or refractory AML. It is being evaluated in clinical trials for mutant IDH1 advanced hematologic malignancies