Current therapeutic strategies for advanced pancreatic cancer: A review for clinicians

Pancreatic cancer (PC) would become the second leading cause of cancer death in the near future, despite representing only 3% of new cancer diagnosis. Survival improvement will come from a better knowledge of risk factors, earlier diagnosis, better integration of locoregional and systemic therapies, as well as the development of more efficacious drugs rising from a deeper understanding of disease biology. For patients with unresectable, non-metastatic disease, combined strategies encompassing primary chemotherapy and radiation seems to be promising. In fit patients, new polychemotherapy regimens can lead to better outcomes in terms of slight but significant survival improvement associated with a positive impact on quality of life. The upfront use of these regimes can also increase the rate of radical resections in borderline resectable and locally advanced PC. Second line treatments showed to positively affect both overall survival and quality of life in fit patients affected by metastatic disease. At present, oxaliplatin-based regimens are the most extensively studied. Nonetheless, other promising drugs are currently under evaluation. Presently, in addition to surgery and conventional radiation therapy, new locoregional treatment techniques are emerging as alternative options in the multimodal approach to patients or diseases not suitable for radical surgery. As of today, in contrast with other types of cancer, targeted therapies failed to show relevant activity either alone or in combination with chemotherapy and, thus, current clinical practice does not include them. Up to now, despite the fact of extremely promising results in different tumors, also immunotherapy is not in the actual therapeutic armamentarium for PC. In the present paper, we provide a comprehensive review of the current state of the art of clinical practice and research in PC aiming to offer a guide for clinicians on the most relevant topics in the management of this disease

Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19: a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Funder: laura and john arnold foundationBACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GEHFX ). METHODS: In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. RESULTS: A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care

Expression Analysis of Genes Involved in DNA Repair or Synthesis in mixed Neuroendocrine/Non-Neuroendocrine Carcinomas

Background: Mixed Neuroendocrine/non-neuroendocrine carcinomas are heterogeneous tumors having poorly defined diagnostic and clinical features and lacking pathological or molecular markers of prognosis or predictive of response to therapy. We aimed at analyzing the pathological features and the expression of genes involved in DNA repair or synthesis in a cohort of mixed carcinomas from different sites, as compared to patients' outcome. Methods: Relative cDNA quantification of ribonucleotide reductase large subunit 1, excision repair cross-complementation group 1, thymidylate synthase and topoisomerase IIa genes was tested using real-time PCR in micro-dissected neuroendocrine and non-neuroendocrine tumor components of mixed cases (42 cases enrolled, from lung, gastrointestinal and genitourinary tract) and in 45 control cases of pure neuroendocrine and non-neuroendocrine carcinomas. Results: Expression levels of all genes were stable comparing non-neuroendocrine and neuroendocrine components of mixed cases (except for topoisomerase IIa in lung samples), but significantly different as compared to control non-neuroendocrine and neuroendocrine tumors. At multivariate analysis, including all available clinical and pathological parameters and gene expression levels, predominant non-neuroendocrine component, administration of additional therapy other than surgery and high thymidylate synthase expression in non-NE tumor tissue were significantly associated to a lower risk of patient's death. Conclusions: Our data show that mixed neuroendocrine/non-neuroendocrine carcinomas are different at the molecular level from their corresponding pure neuroendocrine and non- neuroendocrine counterparts, and detailed analysis of clinical, pathological and molecular features may improve the clinical strategies in these rare and underestimated tumor

Bevacizumab plus octreotide and metronomic capecitabine in patients with metastatic well-to-moderately differentiated neuroendocrine tumors: the xelbevoct study.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the activity and toxicity of the XELBEVOCT regimen in patients with metastatic well-to-moderately differentiated neuroendocrine neoplasms (WMD-NEN). Ancillary studies evaluated hypertension, proteinuria, and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) polymorphisms in predicting progression-free survival (PFS) and the predictive role of serum vitamin D in progression-free survival and proteinuria onset. METHODS: This prospective phase 2 study included 45 patients with WMD-NEN arising from various primary sites. The treatment regimen was octreotide long-acting release (LAR), 20 mg monthly, metronomic capecitabine, 2000 mg/daily, and intravenous bevacizumab, 5 mg/kg every 2 weeks, without interruption for 9 months. Bevacizumab was continued until disease progression. RESULTS: Partial response was obtained in 8 patients (17.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.4%-28.2%); tumor response was more frequent in pancreatic than in non-pancreatic malignancies. The median PFS was 14.9 months; median overall survival was not attained. Biochemical and symptomatic responses were observed in 52.9% and 82.3% of cases, respectively. The treatment was well tolerated. Grade 3 toxicities included hand and foot syndrome (11.1%), proteinuria (4.4%), and renal toxicity (2.2%). Proteinuria (all grades) was correlated with longer PFS (p\u2009=\u20090.017). There was an inverse relationship between proteinuria and vitamin D levels. VEGF polymorphisms were not associated with patient outcome. CONCLUSION: The XELBEVOCT regimen is active and well tolerated in patients with metastatic WMD-NEN. Proteinuria correlated with hypovitaminosis D status and was the best predictive factor of treatment efficac